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
You guys passing judgment on Adidas/their ad -- 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 Adidas/their ads were bloated and lame or badly designed, OK then. Adidas should be bashed. But if the ads were fine or just not something Apple liked, then Adidas has a right to protect it's brand. These ads are pushed out to kids and adults alike.
Kinda works both ways. Like every story where another company doesn't agree with Apple, some people are quick to brand that company "evil, lame, poor" in order to defend Steve/Apple.Adidas Pulls iAd Due to Approval Process?
Apple already had an agreement with Nike. I can't but wonder if Apple would do the same thing with Nike that they are with Adidas.
Apple already had an agreement with Nike. I can't but wonder if Apple would do the same thing with Nike that they are with Adidas.
Just Thinking Outside the Shoe
Maybe it's part of Adidas' strategy to get some $ amount of cheap advertisement.
1. Come up with crappy iAd product for new product.
2. Submit it to Apple enough times to get it rejected.
3. Complain that Steve Jobs is a mean guy and that Apple have lost the chance to earn $10m.
4. Get cheap advertisement and some person or persons in Adidas get a nice bonus.
Maybe it's part of Adidas' strategy to get some $ amount of cheap advertisement.
1. Come up with crappy iAd product for new product.
2. Submit it to Apple enough times to get it rejected.
3. Complain that Steve Jobs is a mean guy and that Apple have lost the chance to earn $10m.
4. Get cheap advertisement and some person or persons in Adidas get a nice bonus.
The difference is that Apple does not explain why they reject things half the time. They just keep rejecting it. You'd think that a high profile client like Adidas could make a phone call (or more to the point Apple should be calling them if they want their money) and sort the problem out CLEARLY. This article makes it pretty clear that Adidas has been unable to grasp WTF Apple's problem is. And I don't find that hard to believe given the ABSURD rejections we saw for iOS Apps over the past couple of years.
Steve lives in his own little Universe, apart from the rest of us. He's getting further and further away from our Universe all the time. If people don't think this will eventually backfire on Apple, they should reconsider.
Not that this is the reason, but here's something to ponder: Apple's relationship with Nike (think the Nike+ integration with iPods)
It is short sighted if this were indeed the case, but it would not surprise me at all if this were the real reason for the Adidas snub
EDIT: Mad City beat me to it.
It is short sighted if this were indeed the case, but it would not surprise me at all if this were the real reason for the Adidas snub
EDIT: Mad City beat me to it.
Maybe it's part of Adidas' strategy to get some $ amount of cheap advertisement.
1. Come up with crappy iAd product for new product.
2. Submit it to Apple enough times to get it rejected.
3. Complain that Steve Jobs is a mean guy and that Apple have lost the chance to earn $10m.
4. Get cheap advertisement and some person or persons in Adidas get a nice bonus.
This is what happens when you drink apple flavored kool-aid.
Adidas
Adidas has a HUGE business for the Sports market:
Apparel
Footwear
Accessories
and now a formidable competitor to Nike+ in the iPhone & iPod Touch. IF Apple is not careful - they could loose a warm and very rewarding partner. "Coach" I think its called has already begun to tap into the web/cloud and the vast resources for Trainers around the world and has a HUGE European market (target market and brand-name recognition).
Adidas has a HUGE business for the Sports market:
Apparel
Footwear
Accessories
and now a formidable competitor to Nike+ in the iPhone & iPod Touch. IF Apple is not careful - they could loose a warm and very rewarding partner. "Coach" I think its called has already begun to tap into the web/cloud and the vast resources for Trainers around the world and has a HUGE European market (target market and brand-name recognition).
Let's assume this rumour is true. An advertising agency's core business is well, eh, making and producing or having produced advertising campaigns for customers.
iAd is not Apple's core business (yet) and thus Apple is not dependent on those kind of accounts. So my guess is this is why Apple's approach differs from that of advertising agencies. And perhaps they can afford to turn down those amounts. Wasn't the last count in the vicinity of US$ 40 billion cash? I can think of little advertising agencies with a financial backbone that strong.
And the ad was showing a bare ankle
iAd is not Apple's core business (yet) and thus Apple is not dependent on those kind of accounts. So my guess is this is why Apple's approach differs from that of advertising agencies. And perhaps they can afford to turn down those amounts. Wasn't the last count in the vicinity of US$ 40 billion cash? I can think of little advertising agencies with a financial backbone that strong.
And the ad was showing a bare ankle
If I were a big ad agency used to sole control, I can see voting this negative. As a user I find it hard to be upset over whatever advertisement we’ll be missing! We users never controlled that in the first place, and companies who have controlled digital ads never did a particularly good job of making me happy about them! Maybe Apple’s influence will make ads better, but they probably won’t make them worse (to me as a user).
Adidas has plenty of other options for getting that same ad concept onto iOS devices, both in apps and on the web. Nothing forces them to collaborate with Apple if some other route is a better fit that iAds.
Adidas has plenty of other options for getting that same ad concept onto iOS devices, both in apps and on the web. Nothing forces them to collaborate with Apple if some other route is a better fit that iAds.
Unless we have more info it's impossible to make a judgment. Was it offensive, poorly coded, or have non-approved functionality? If so then good for Apple for sticking to their requirements.
If it was something random and obnoxious, like many App rejection stories, then shame on Apple.
So when can we find out which scenario it was?
If it was something random and obnoxious, like many App rejection stories, then shame on Apple.
So when can we find out which scenario it was?
Welcome to Mad Men
People walk off with accounts all the time. Don Draper got drunk and gave a rotten show, then he started screaming at the clients.
People walk off with accounts all the time. Don Draper got drunk and gave a rotten show, then he started screaming at the clients.
So much speculation...
So no one really knows why the apps were rejected so there's a lot of 'emo'.
So piling on ... emo
Apple had profits of $3B in their 3rd quarter. A $10M top line deal is small financially.
Apple rejecting a large player such as Adidas could hurt some given Apple has had issues of others stating that they are 'controlling'.
Going to Adidas's website they are using .asp and flash, no iOS/HTML5 version.
Apple has probably asked Adidas to step uo their game and Adidas couldn't do it.
And yes, content gets rejected by "pipe owners" all the time. I'm sure Vogue doesnt let Tag Hauer or Prada just put crap in their magazine.
So no one really knows why the apps were rejected so there's a lot of 'emo'.
So piling on ... emo
Apple had profits of $3B in their 3rd quarter. A $10M top line deal is small financially.
Apple rejecting a large player such as Adidas could hurt some given Apple has had issues of others stating that they are 'controlling'.
Going to Adidas's website they are using .asp and flash, no iOS/HTML5 version.
Apple has probably asked Adidas to step uo their game and Adidas couldn't do it.
And yes, content gets rejected by "pipe owners" all the time. I'm sure Vogue doesnt let Tag Hauer or Prada just put crap in their magazine.
This is what happens when you dissect every comment and judge it through your mask of cynicism.
#imjustsayin
What does this have to do with skinny jeans, abnormal piercings and a ton of black makeup?
You guys passing judgment on Adidas/their ad -- 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 Adidas/their ads were bloated and lame or badly designed, OK then. Adidas should be bashed. But if the ads were fine or just not something Apple liked, then Adidas has a right to protect it's brand. These ads are pushed out to kids and adults alike.
Uh, no it doesn't work both ways b/c 1) no one is passing judgment on Adidas and 2) only Apple has the power to accept or reject the ad.
Also I am neither condoning nor condemning Apple. All I'm saying is NO ONE here has enough info about the content of the ad to pass ANY judgment.
But this does remind me of the GoDaddy SuperBowl ads. They alway made several ads and purposely made versions they knew would get rejected by the network or NFL. It was a brilliant PR scheme for them.
Knowing a few advertising people myself?
My guess is, this is case of "sour grapes" as much as anything.
Yes, Apple does demand more control over the "iAds" campaign than advertisers are used to, or expect.
But if you want to market in this manner, you're doing it on Apple's territory, so it comes down to playing the game by THEIR rules.
I'm not saying I fault Adidas for backing out. In fact, I agree with the poster who said he'd "give them a few points for sticking to their guns"! If it's too much hassle getting your advertising placed the way you want it, then the only smart thing to do is look elsewhere!
But all the people whining that Apple is "screwing up" here should also consider how intrusive iAds could be if they aren't managed properly. There are probably people out there trying to do REALLY annoying things on your phone to get your attention with an ad that's this integrated, like another piece of software, into the whole experience.
My guess is, this is case of "sour grapes" as much as anything.
Yes, Apple does demand more control over the "iAds" campaign than advertisers are used to, or expect.
But if you want to market in this manner, you're doing it on Apple's territory, so it comes down to playing the game by THEIR rules.
I'm not saying I fault Adidas for backing out. In fact, I agree with the poster who said he'd "give them a few points for sticking to their guns"! If it's too much hassle getting your advertising placed the way you want it, then the only smart thing to do is look elsewhere!
But all the people whining that Apple is "screwing up" here should also consider how intrusive iAds could be if they aren't managed properly. There are probably people out there trying to do REALLY annoying things on your phone to get your attention with an ad that's this integrated, like another piece of software, into the whole experience.
The problem is Apple is trying to use early adopter, anchor, or major advertisers, to display the functionality and branding of iAd itself.
The advertisers want creative control of how to use the iAd platform and tools. Apple needs to let freedom reign.
It's bad enough every ad ever run also has iAd branding prominently displayed.
Reminds me of billboard companies. Apple's walled garden is actually necessary, but let freedom reign!
Rocketman
The advertisers want creative control of how to use the iAd platform and tools. Apple needs to let freedom reign.
It's bad enough every ad ever run also has iAd branding prominently displayed.
Reminds me of billboard companies. Apple's walled garden is actually necessary, but let freedom reign!
Rocketman
Looking out for good quality and rejecting s*** is a bad business move? I don't think so. Part of Apples success is that people know it is high quality. And looking at the financial results, it does not look like their high quality decisions are a bad move.
We don't know what the content was. So, I think its certainly poor logic to assume that these brands wouldn't embarass themselves with an ad concept that tries to use new technology in a poorly conceived manner. I downloaded a Klondike app from an iAd that was horribly sexist... although interestingly retro (think Leisure Suit Larry). Pepsi got heat for its AMP app B4U Score that told guys how to mac women of different types. Apple doesn't seem to have problems with racy content in apps, and probably not in iAds either. But, I was reading the other day about a debacle with Dr. Pepper and Facebook.
http://www.clickz.com/clickz/news/1...ook-blunder-is-latest-string-risky-promotions
This is just one example. Corporations mess up all the time. And, it may not even be "messing up". Unacceptable is whatever the ad network says it is. Personally, I've run a forum, where an advertiser slipped porn in on the network, and suddenly it was on my website and users were complaining. It could be a security problem in vetting material that dynamically makes its way into the app.
You just don't know. HTML 5 certainly opens up the possibilities.
~ CB
Developers! Developers! Developers!
So Apple denied the $10+ million they don't need it I guess. But how about the added revenue for the developers. Apple just denied this extra money to to be shared to their developers because they're control freak. If I'm giving you my money it's not your way it's my way especially for a $10 mil. I think this is bs imo!
So Apple denied the $10+ million they don't need it I guess. But how about the added revenue for the developers. Apple just denied this extra money to to be shared to their developers because they're control freak. If I'm giving you my money it's not your way it's my way especially for a $10 mil. I think this is bs imo!