Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

Adidas Pulls iAd Due to Approval Process?

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
51,032
12,576
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png




It seems Apple's strict approval process is not limited to developer's app submissions alone. According to BusinessInsider sources, Adidas has pulled its $10 million dollar ad campaign from iAds due to repeated rejections:
Adidas supposedly pulled its $10+ million ad campaign from the iAd program because Apple CEO Steve Jobs was being too much of a control freak. According to one industry exec, Adidas decided to cancel its iAds after Apple rejected its creative concept for the third time.
BusinessInsider admits they don't know the exact reasons for the rejections ("to be sure, perhaps Adidas had really lame ideas, and Apple was right to reject them.")

Apple has been reported to be taking a much more active involvement in iAd content than most ad networks. This has slowed the uptake of iAds, though Apple is still predicted to match Google's mobile ad marketshare by year's end.

Article Link: Adidas Pulls iAd Due to Approval Process?
 

Stella

macrumors G3
Apr 21, 2003
8,515
5,406
Canada
Apple will soon be relaxing their approval process. Its that, or iAds is dead in the water.

Stories of Apple losing high profile companies will ensure confidence is lost in iAds generally and others will bail before giving it a go.

BusinessInsider admits they don't know the exact reasons for the rejections ("to be sure, perhaps Adidas had really lame ideas, and Apple was right to reject them.")
This is pure speculation

I'm sure Apple given time will get things right but people generally don't like control freaks.
 
Comment

iStudentUK

macrumors 65816
Mar 8, 2009
1,439
4
London
Sounds like Apple, they are very controlling of all aspects of their iOS devices. Given the recent relaxing of app store rules perhaps a similar change in iAds is on the horizon.

I'll award several internet points to Adidas for sticking to their guns.
 
Comment

Kieranic

Guest
Apr 23, 2010
179
0
I'll wait for Apple's side of the story before I comment fully, but wow, Apple just f'd up big time. $10,000,000+ is a lot for any company.
 
Comment

markcres

macrumors 6502
Mar 30, 2006
304
218
UK
Steve Jobs is a control freak?
I cannot believe that...

Next, someone will say the Pope is a Catholic, and Bears use woodland for their toilet activities...ludicrous !
 
Comment

PinkyMacGodess

macrumors 603
Mar 7, 2007
5,453
2,222
Midwest America.
Adidas is pushing a new shoe. I got the message in a mailer from Dick's Sports.

It sounds like a whole bunch of hokum and will probably be the 'gotta have' item for a month or so and then will die down.

Actually Reebok came out with a new shoe too and it looks so stupid... Like that crappy ribbon x-mas candy...

I'll stick to my three year old Nike Bowerman series Zoom Elites... Well, until they self destruct through overuse.

I sure hope that Apple doesn't try to put 'quality control' on the ads they carry. If they do then there won't be many, if any... But the GEICO and DirecTV ads are making me want to gouge my eyes out and pierce my tympanic membranes!

EDIT: Actually in fairness, most if not all of the new shoe ads seem to be touting some ethereal benefit of some 'new technology' that will just make life so much better (and not improve the shoe's recycling prospects at all) and here I thought that there was only one way to make foam rubber and vinyl...

Adidas is probably pissed because their iAds now won't be combining with the rest of their advertising campaign to carpet bomb us with the message that we are lesser beings without their new product, and their poor shareholders need their profit... It's getting to the point where I hate shopping for two things: Cars and shoes. Both I hope last for many years longer to save me from the exposure to the BS and HS of the process... The sales people are almost the same too... (Clueless and absolutely convinced that the (shoe you are holding or the car you are looking at) is 'you' and that you can't be a real human being without it...
 
Comment

johnnyrb

macrumors regular
Jul 2, 2009
119
28
Rejecting a free or 99 cent application is one thing,

but loosing a 10 million ad account is another story all-together. If this keeps up, someone will have to explain to the board of directors and stockholders. Perhaps, if Apple can do better they need to start an advertising company!
 
Comment

arn

macrumors god
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
15,594
4,263
I'll wait for Apple's side of the story before I comment fully, but wow, Apple just f'd up big time. $10,000,000+ is a lot for any company.

Stories of Apple losing high profile companies will ensure confidence is lost in iAds generally and others will bail before giving it a go.

It goes both ways. Apple is promising a better ad-experience with iAds. So you would be ok if they accepted flashing "punch this monkey" ads as long as they were paid enough money?

arn
 
Comment

DomC

macrumors 6502
Jul 28, 2010
404
128
It's an advertiser's prerogative (unfortunately) to produce any kind of ads they want, lame or not sine they're paying for placement. I wonder how Apple would respond if a TV network decided one of their iPad ads was not "good enough".
 
Comment

Torrijos

macrumors 6502
Jan 10, 2006
383
21
And of course nobody questions the quality of the adds Adidas presented?

Apple is trying to change radically the way adds on the Internet are presented, they don't need the money (they still have more than $40 billions in cash reserves), what they need is adds good and revolutionary enough so they serve as proof of concept, in order to motivate others companies to pursue the same kind of technologies.
 
Comment

arn

macrumors god
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
15,594
4,263
It's an advertiser's prerogative (unfortunately) to produce any kind of ads they want, lame or not sine they're paying for placement. I wonder how Apple would respond if a TV network decided one of their iPad ads was not "good enough".

This is absurd. The TV network can absolutely reject ads for any reason. So can Apple. We reject ads here all the time for inappropriate or annoying content.

arn
 
Comment

OllyW

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 11, 2005
17,113
6,496
The Black Country, England
It goes both ways. Apple is promising a better ad-experience with iAds. So you would be ok if they accepted flashing "punch this monkey" ads as long as they were paid enough money?

arn

We are talking about Adidas and their advertisements are usually decent quality and well produced. They don't seem to be the sort of company who would want to have flashing "punch this monkey" ads associated with their name.
 
Comment

Stella

macrumors G3
Apr 21, 2003
8,515
5,406
Canada
It goes both ways. Apple is promising a better ad-experience with iAds. So you would be ok if they accepted flashing "punch this monkey" ads as long as they were paid enough money?

arn

True. However, companies have only so much patience, time is money - re-work is money. If iAds consumes too much resources then its not in the best interest of a company to keep pursuing.

Apple need to find a balance - at the moment it appears Apple are exerting too much control for the likes of its customers.
 
Comment

arn

macrumors god
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
15,594
4,263
We are talking about Adidas and their advertisements are usually decent quality and well produced. They don't seem to be the sort of company who would want to have flashing "punch this monkey" ads associated with their name.

obviously an extreme example, but I'm pointing out that people seem to be arguing for lower standards in ad approval.

arn
 
Comment

bjn

macrumors newbie
Jun 23, 2010
1
0
It's an advertiser's prerogative (unfortunately) to produce any kind of ads they want, lame or not sine they're paying for placement. I wonder how Apple would respond if a TV network decided one of their iPad ads was not "good enough".

And it's the medium's owner's prerogative to decide whether to accept any given ad. TV networks reject ads all the time.
 
Comment

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
iAds is user-centric, and purports to maintain a high-quality experience. That's the point of iAds. That's what differentiates it from the other lameness that infests the internet.

There is an approval process, and no, companies can't post whatever ads they like and require Apple to accept them. That defeats the entire purpose of iAds. You want to reach the top-tier of users? You want to give your ad exposure to the highest income-earning bracket(s) (people with with most disposable income to spend on tech)? Then ensure your ad is up to Apple's standards, ergo, up to my standards. Apple users are a cut above. We kinda expect the whole ad experience to stay in line with that, thankyouverymuch.

For now, we don't know *why* Apple pulled the ad. Let's wait and see.

Someone here commented that SJ is a "control freak." Thank God for that. I don't want to be using the kind of garbage the "competition" shoves out and calls "new and improved." We've got Windows and Android for that and the rest of the also-rans. SJ's nature is the very reason Apple leads this industry, and part of that is the ability to say "no."
 
Comment

nelmat

macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2008
798
58
oh well, sometimes customers don't like to go through the required standards of development and quality control - sometimes they just want results in a hurry. I have clients like this. Those who get on board and work with our team to develop and improve get a better product. The impatient ones end up with nothing, or with hurried, slip-shod work. Good on Apple for continuing to adhere to processes that were laid out for a reason. iAds have to be amazing to make their mark, letting average or uninspiring releases into the wild will damage the product before it's off the ground.

Guidelines and submission restrictions are good for quality and for consumer experience, safety and product stability. I just hope that the relaxing of restrictions on the App store isn't going to be a victory for lazy, cheap designers over quality, vetted products. We've got the Android Market Place for that.
 
Comment

zorinlynx

macrumors 603
May 31, 2007
6,335
9,919
Florida, USA
Normally I'd be upset when Apple does its control freak thing. But for all we know, these were annoying, obnoxious ads, and Apple probably doesn't want these on their platform.

If that's the case, then go Apple. I have to run adblock because so many ads on the general web are annoying as hell. Apple probably realizes this, and put in measured to keep iAds from being that obnoxious as well.
 
Comment

MadCow42

macrumors member
Jan 16, 2008
46
0
This is the whole essence of Steve's success with Apple, fanboys... like it or not!

Steve has the balls to say "no". He puts user experience, simplicity, and reliability ahead of corporate pressures and glitzy eye-candy.

The simple, reliable, stable, and slick computer you're using is only possible with that kind of leadership. Otherwise, you'll get feature bloat, complication, the addition of tons of crapware installs by default (because it makes money for them), and.... basically, you'll get Windows.

The fact that he can say NO to a large corporation like Addidas and their $10M campaign says that he's willing to stick to his ideals at any cost. That's HUGE in the long term, and is what's propping up the stock value.

If he caved and started letting crap onto iAd, it wouldn't be any different than DoubleClick, and Apple would get sucked into the mire with everyone else. They charge a premium, but deliver a premium service/good.

/rant. :)

MadCow.
 
Comment

Stridder44

macrumors 68040
Mar 24, 2003
3,971
170
California
Yikes, this could get out of hand fast. I hope you made the right call on this Apple/Steve.

That said, it's not like they need the money, so I'm sure they can take a risk like this. I'm going to be positive on this one and say Apple probably had good reasoning behind this move.
 
Comment

JeffDM

macrumors 6502a
Sep 16, 2006
709
9
This is absurd. The TV network can absolutely reject ads for any reason. So can Apple. We reject ads here all the time for inappropriate or annoying content.

TV networks and stations can and do reject ads, though it's usually because of controversial nature. It seems like it's OK to shovel garbage or sell pseudoscience snake oil, but offending a highly vocal group won't do.

I have zero experience with an iAd, but Google's ad system is irritating to deal with. They don't make it easy to blacklist specific sites, it may be there, but finding the correct page was too annoying so I just stopped everything rather than waste money on a clunky system.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.