Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adidas Pulls iAd Due to Approval Process?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As as much as they can on the Mac. This is Apple's achilles' heel. Jobs has no tolerance for anything but his own preferences.
Apparently, it was "creative differences." Just skimming around the net suggest that Adidas had to change up their ad multiple times and Apple wanted what Adidas thought was an inordinate amount control over the ad.
Those who accepted Apple's style, however, have profited immensely - i.e., Nissan, Unilever, etc. Seems Apple knows ads better than even the ad producers themselves! I wouldn't be surprised if they did. I'm totally for Apple taking a leading role in any organization's ad development if it means a better experience on my device. I've seem some of the ad trash around the net, and my first reaction is to cringe. Seems Apple aims to out folks to school when it comes to their ads. Might be better for all of us in the long run.
What Achilles' heel?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Apple-Reports-Third-Quarter-prnews-1588672529.html?x=0&.v=1
http://www.cultofmac.com/apple-q3-is-another-record-quarter-may-surpass-ms-this-year/51788
The top five U.S. publicly-traded companies, based on full market values, are:
1. Exxon Mobil (XOM) - $314.29B
2. Apple (AAPL) - $266.64B
3. Microsoft (MSFT) - $214.31B
4. Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA) - 206.26B
4. Wal-Mart (WMT) - $196.57B
Selected companies' current market values:
• IBM (IBM) - $169.20B
• Google (GOOG) - $168.05B
• Cisco (CSCO) - $126.65B
• Intel (INTC) - $108.14B
• Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) - $92.93B
• Amazon (AMZN) - $71.98B
• Disney (DIS) - $64.23B
• Nokia (NOK) - $37.31B
• Sony (SNE) - $31.10B
• Research In Motion (RIMM) - $25.63B
• Dell (DELL) - $24.60B
• Motorola (MOT) - $20.26B
• Yahoo! (YHOO) - $19.55B
• Adobe (ADBE) - $14.12B
• Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) - $4.61B
• RealNetworks (RNWK) - $421.69M
Looks like a lot of people share SJ's preferences.
To me, the interesting and unexpected part of the story is that Steve Jobs is allegedly paying extremely close attention to this content, instead of delegating to others. By the CEO getting involved in such a hands-on way, they must see iAds as potentially something tremendously important, something with which to knock Google/Android a peg down or two.
Apple can easily afford tossing a $10million account under the bus. It makes them seem even more mavericky from an agency point of view. If iPad and iPhone takeup soars, I would wager that Adidas will still come back to them at some point in the future with a different campaign.
Apple can easily afford tossing a $10million account under the bus. It makes them seem even more mavericky from an agency point of view. If iPad and iPhone takeup soars, I would wager that Adidas will still come back to them at some point in the future with a different campaign.
Apple never said no to Adidas advertising at all, they said no to the ad. The assumption is that they thought Adidas would retool it again and not pull out of iAds. I don't think pushing multi-national companies out of their advertising program is what is keeping the stock price up at all. If anything, their extreme control of the app store process has cost them money with all the investigations they've had recently.
Good. Apple stands for quality products. Cheap ugly looking stuff you can get anywhere else. I have seen many ugly distracting mobile ads and it is good to know that apple takes care of good quality even for ads. If you want a cheap ugly phone with cheap ugly software and ugly distracting advertisement, you shouldn't get an iPhone.
Apple: please keep the standard high.
Apple: please keep the standard high.
BINGO!
People want to play in the Apple sandbox because they are successful! They make the money most companies would kill to get.
so BusinessInsider is effectively calling the $10mn ad campaign a lame idea...
...or is Apple being a bit picky because they've got the Nike+ products working on their iDevices?
...or is Apple being a bit picky because they've got the Nike+ products working on their iDevices?
I work for an advertising agency doing development and I've seen some pretty horrible ad concepts. But if its want the client wants we do it.
That being said, were the disapprovals because of developer issues? K size, functionality etc. Did Adidas want something that would function like a flash banner ad? Were Apples guidelines as vague as everything else they do?
Apple may have lost 10 million but the Adidas also lost a tons of money in design and development. In my experience the back and forth probably put the account way over budget thus causing Adidas to cancel it.
Expect to see a flash banner Adidas blitz soon
That being said, were the disapprovals because of developer issues? K size, functionality etc. Did Adidas want something that would function like a flash banner ad? Were Apples guidelines as vague as everything else they do?
Apple may have lost 10 million but the Adidas also lost a tons of money in design and development. In my experience the back and forth probably put the account way over budget thus causing Adidas to cancel it.
Expect to see a flash banner Adidas blitz soon
Is this level of megalomania common with people who sell space for ads or is this another power trip from Apple Consumer Electronics?
Apple is legit in rejecting or requesting changes if the ad is "offensive" or doesn't comply with the technical requirements for the platform.
And Apple can technically do whatever they want (not run ads) it's their prerogative. But this is extremely poor business practice and will lead them on a road to ruin in with iAds. And it's very big brother (ironically) for Apple to want to control messaging and/or what ads THEY think are "worthy" of iAds.
Agencies have enough difficulty making clients happy without having to concern themselves with making the MEDIUM happy.
This isn't the first time we've heard this story re: iAds - and it's definitely an issue given that Apple is reporting a huge sales figure for iAds and yet very few actual ads are appearing to date.
And Apple can technically do whatever they want (not run ads) it's their prerogative. But this is extremely poor business practice and will lead them on a road to ruin in with iAds. And it's very big brother (ironically) for Apple to want to control messaging and/or what ads THEY think are "worthy" of iAds.
Agencies have enough difficulty making clients happy without having to concern themselves with making the MEDIUM happy.
This isn't the first time we've heard this story re: iAds - and it's definitely an issue given that Apple is reporting a huge sales figure for iAds and yet very few actual ads are appearing to date.
That's actually part of the reason you bought the Apple products in your sig (you actually have more than I do.)
SJ was always this way.
...
I don't want any ads but if it makes good apps free I will deal with it, that said I am glad that apple is keeping the caliber of the ads high, that is the only way they can keep the value of the ads up, if the iad strts getting punch the monkey type ads then it will basically make people not click any of them ever
I don't want any ads but if it makes good apps free I will deal with it, that said I am glad that apple is keeping the caliber of the ads high, that is the only way they can keep the value of the ads up, if the iad strts getting punch the monkey type ads then it will basically make people not click any of them ever
You guys passing judgment on Jobs/Apple -- do you know WHY the ads were rejected? I do not, but obviously you do, so please let the rest of us know why it was so outrageous.
If Jobs/Apple was arbitrary and capricious or nitpicky, OK then. Apple should be bashed. But if the ads were on the racy or offensive side, then Apple has a right to protect it's brand. These ads are pushed out to kids and adults alike.
No such thing in the private sector. Ones right to free speech is only protected from gov't censorship, and even then the gov't can restrict speech under certain conditions.
If Jobs/Apple was arbitrary and capricious or nitpicky, OK then. Apple should be bashed. But if the ads were on the racy or offensive side, then Apple has a right to protect it's brand. These ads are pushed out to kids and adults alike.
No such thing in the private sector. Ones right to free speech is only protected from gov't censorship, and even then the gov't can restrict speech under certain conditions.
No. I, as the owner of the iDevice, have paid a lot to own the device and still pay on a monthly basis in order to use it. I also pay for apps. So for me it's very simple: I don't want to see any ads on this device at all.
Now if I were somebody who's putting 10 million bucks on the table in order to push my ad through that service, I wouldn't want to be told what I can or can not do with my campaign -- certainly not for THAT price.
And all those freebies will just have to live with what people paying for ads will throw at them - after all, consuming ads is the price that they pay for "free" services and apps.
So why Apple is once again playing the Disney Thought Police card is beyond me. But hey, they're free to shoot their own foot as much as they like.
I would call it arrogance. And that usually comes before the downfall.
It's interesting that it is normal, and widely accepted, that apple employs this strange system of "send us your ad and we'll say yes/no, maybe even offer a canned comment or two".
A $10M account? If I were Apple I would be on the phone with Adobe personally explaining what sort of things we will reject, BEFORE formally rejecting their ad concepts three times over.
Apple is starting to sound like a trip to a government licensing office (for us in Cali, the DMV)... Withsomuch as a single punctuation mark out of place in a ten form packet, back to the end of the line without a thank you or apology.
A $10M account? If I were Apple I would be on the phone with Adobe personally explaining what sort of things we will reject, BEFORE formally rejecting their ad concepts three times over.
Apple is starting to sound like a trip to a government licensing office (for us in Cali, the DMV)... Withsomuch as a single punctuation mark out of place in a ten form packet, back to the end of the line without a thank you or apology.
Honestly if you aren't being paid by apple for your posts you should really apply for a job doing so.
Too Many Dumb Ads
I would really like to know what Adidas ideas were rejected by Apple. Given the large number of bad ads out there, anything that encourages interesting and intelligent ads is welcome.
Given Apple's emphasis on quality over quantity, I give Apple the benefit of the doubt. The profit on even $10M is likely not enough to warrant getting a bad reputation for allowing crap ads.
I would really like to know what Adidas ideas were rejected by Apple. Given the large number of bad ads out there, anything that encourages interesting and intelligent ads is welcome.
Given Apple's emphasis on quality over quantity, I give Apple the benefit of the doubt. The profit on even $10M is likely not enough to warrant getting a bad reputation for allowing crap ads.