Silly as what? What were Apple's reasons?
WTH is anyone in this thread talking about???
[no one knows]
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
WTH is anyone in this thread talking about???
[no one knows]It's not about more ads, it's about better ads that increases the user experience (in comparison with other ads, such as Ad-mobs). It's not really about being a selling point to put in the ads, but to have people notice that they prefer iPhone to other smartphones. It doesn't matter if they don't know why or not..
Another example when the media keep talking about "control freak" Steve, and nothing else in the article.
Jet, they can not say why the ads were rejected. Where is the credibility of these articles?
Sorry, but I don't buy it. I'm sure the html5 was buggy or it was rated 13 or something. Maybe Nike contract was behind the rejection, not Steve himself.
Every time I read the words "control freak" in some article related to Apple, later I realize it is just BS or FUD. In this case it is BS, because the exact cause is not known
Jet, they can not say why the ads were rejected. Where is the credibility of these articles?
Sorry, but I don't buy it. I'm sure the html5 was buggy or it was rated 13 or something. Maybe Nike contract was behind the rejection, not Steve himself.
Every time I read the words "control freak" in some article related to Apple, later I realize it is just BS or FUD. In this case it is BS, because the exact cause is not known
I'm sorry, are we even reading the same thread ?
Do I need to quote you all the posts jumping on Adidas and bitching that they were wrong/lame/bad ad, etc.. ? Both sides need to chill until the entire story is out there, if it even ever comes out.
So apple cares more about the 10 million and the affect the addidas advert would have on the consumer more than Addidas? I find this logic flawed.
Apple needs a reality check, you cannot go on pissing off those who are trying to pay you money.
Its funny how the apple fanboys are demonizing and/or marginalizing Adidas and stating that apple did the right thing because they expect a certain amount of quality.
The bottom line is that this is not the first time a major sponsor pulled their advertising from apple and if apple doesn't get off their high horse, it won't be the last. It doesn't matter if apple is the 800 pound gorilla, they can use other marketing avenues, like google's
While this is a big hit to Adidas as well, they can take what they worked on, for iads and move it to another competitor with some work.
Its funny how the apple fanboys are demonizing and/or marginalizing Adidas and stating that apple did the right thing because they expect a certain amount of quality.
The bottom line is that this is not the first time a major sponsor pulled their advertising from apple and if apple doesn't get off their high horse, it won't be the last. It doesn't matter if apple is the 800 pound gorilla, they can use other marketing avenues, like google's
While this is a big hit to Adidas as well, they can take what they worked on, for iads and move it to another competitor with some work.
So what if Adidas or any other sponsor remove their ads from Apple? If they don't like the restrictions, they can vote with their wallet. Which is exactly what they did. However, I wonder who needs who more. I think Adidas benefits more because of the large Apple audience. One of the goals of advertising is to reach as many people as possible.
$10 million is not a big hit for Apple. Hell, iAds is not going to make or break Apple. Really I never understood why so many people get their panties in a bunch whenever they feel Apple is to restrictive.
$10 million is not a big hit for Apple. Hell, iAds is not going to make or break Apple. Really I never understood why so many people get their panties in a bunch whenever they feel Apple is to restrictive.
You can't reject advertisements for "Lame Ideas".
Google, for example, has all kinds of ridiculous policies and guidelines for rejecting ads and advertisers, but none of them boil down to something being lame.
Apple does a lot of their own advertising, they would never advertise on a platform or in a medium where they had to cede the kind of control it seems Apple is asking for here... so their position is hypocritical at best.
It is one thing if it violates some specific content guideline, say for violence, sexual content or something else.. but I get the idea this is possibly something entirely different, and it won't take long before advertisers just ignore iAds if this is the case.
Google, for example, has all kinds of ridiculous policies and guidelines for rejecting ads and advertisers, but none of them boil down to something being lame.
Apple does a lot of their own advertising, they would never advertise on a platform or in a medium where they had to cede the kind of control it seems Apple is asking for here... so their position is hypocritical at best.
It is one thing if it violates some specific content guideline, say for violence, sexual content or something else.. but I get the idea this is possibly something entirely different, and it won't take long before advertisers just ignore iAds if this is the case.
Get over yourself. So what Apple didn't give Adidas the reason for the rejection, truthfully they don't have to. Apple sets specific guidelines and if these companies want to put up iAds they are responsible for reading everything required to place an ad in the App store. Did it ever occur to you that Adidas didn't read all the guidelines and were so full of themselves they figured they were to big to adhere to Apple's requirements? Did it ever occur to you that they read the requirements and still went against them?
Sure, Apple could've told Adidas what they refused them for but Adidas knows what's up if they read the requirements, so again, get over yourself instead criticizing other forum members.
I'm sorry, a 10,000,000$ account is not a 99$/year developer. If they are serious about getting into the Ad business, they better not adopt the attitude you're proposing here, or you'll be seeing very few iAds indeed.
I think it's you that needs to get over yourself. Attitude doesn't work with 7 figure contracts.
People need to understand what makes a good ad.
A good ad is one that works.. Which means it sells product, creates awareness for a company or product, or whatever the goal is.
That someone might have a subjective opinion on the appearance of an ad has nothing to do with it being a good ad or bad ad. If an ad that some people find annoying still effectively allows the advertiser to sell products and make money then it is a good ad.
Taking the idea that advertising should be something more than that is ridiculous and will not fly.
Again, if Apple has specific guidelines and rules for content, and Addidas crossed it (perhaps they were advertising All Day I Dream About Sex), that is one thing... But if it was a visual design that Steve or someone at Apple just did not like that is something very different.
Ads either work or they don't online. Unlike TV advertising where there is no real way to know if they are working or not, online the people who buy the ads can actually measure return on their investment. So even if you see what you find annoying ads, they are still effective and thus why they keep running. If they did not work they would not be running.
Everyone wants to boil this down to an aesthetic measuring stick, and that would be a horrible way to run an advertising supply business. Again, you can have rules to restrict specific kinds of businesses and content, but just to reject something because you don't "like it" will lead to monumental fail. Like I said above, Apple would not advertise on iAds if they did not own it. So why would they think anyone else would?
I would add since my business is buying advertising online, I have never seen any company with a competent group of people involved in the approval of ads. I have not used iAds yet, but everyone else. The enforcement is inconsistent and often incoherent. In most cases you could submit the same thing 5 times and have 4.5 different responses, including 2 denials, 2 approvals and 1 further investigation required. I suspect Apple is no different there. The people they have had to come from somewhere... It is unlikely they were able to create them without this horrible built in inconsistency, but only time will tell.
I recently had a campaign I had run for years get rejected by someone for the reason, "Unuseful content". I have talked to multiple people for weeks now, and have never managed to get anyone to explain anything to me but tell me to look at the guidelines. This is the reality of the online world. Google is actually one of the worst at it, although you can usually figure out what the problem is most of the time, sometime you can not. This just leads me to believe, though, Apple will be as hard to work with as all the other companies, and thus will do nothing to improve the experience for the advertisers.
A good ad is one that works.. Which means it sells product, creates awareness for a company or product, or whatever the goal is.
That someone might have a subjective opinion on the appearance of an ad has nothing to do with it being a good ad or bad ad. If an ad that some people find annoying still effectively allows the advertiser to sell products and make money then it is a good ad.
Taking the idea that advertising should be something more than that is ridiculous and will not fly.
Again, if Apple has specific guidelines and rules for content, and Addidas crossed it (perhaps they were advertising All Day I Dream About Sex), that is one thing... But if it was a visual design that Steve or someone at Apple just did not like that is something very different.
Ads either work or they don't online. Unlike TV advertising where there is no real way to know if they are working or not, online the people who buy the ads can actually measure return on their investment. So even if you see what you find annoying ads, they are still effective and thus why they keep running. If they did not work they would not be running.
Everyone wants to boil this down to an aesthetic measuring stick, and that would be a horrible way to run an advertising supply business. Again, you can have rules to restrict specific kinds of businesses and content, but just to reject something because you don't "like it" will lead to monumental fail. Like I said above, Apple would not advertise on iAds if they did not own it. So why would they think anyone else would?
I would add since my business is buying advertising online, I have never seen any company with a competent group of people involved in the approval of ads. I have not used iAds yet, but everyone else. The enforcement is inconsistent and often incoherent. In most cases you could submit the same thing 5 times and have 4.5 different responses, including 2 denials, 2 approvals and 1 further investigation required. I suspect Apple is no different there. The people they have had to come from somewhere... It is unlikely they were able to create them without this horrible built in inconsistency, but only time will tell.
I recently had a campaign I had run for years get rejected by someone for the reason, "Unuseful content". I have talked to multiple people for weeks now, and have never managed to get anyone to explain anything to me but tell me to look at the guidelines. This is the reality of the online world. Google is actually one of the worst at it, although you can usually figure out what the problem is most of the time, sometime you can not. This just leads me to believe, though, Apple will be as hard to work with as all the other companies, and thus will do nothing to improve the experience for the advertisers.
I certainly wouldn't mind seeing less ads. I find it so interesting that people on here are defending the companies that want to put up ads that end up in our face on our iDevices. Maybe that should also tell you that Apple is not all about being greedy like some people here like to think. You seem to love to fight with me, I don't have time, nor will I reserve another 5 minutes of wasted time with you. You're motto is to start flame fights consistently so this will be my last post to you regardless what you say so don't waste your time responding.
You mean like the money you're not paying Apple buy creating that hackintosh in your signature?
$10 million dollars is not a lot of money to a company like Apple. They probably make that much in a week, if not more. If they impose standards on their apps or for iAds, then that is their prerogative. Everyone has options, including developers, advertisers, and consumers. Whenever, it gets too restrictive for your taste, then leave. When enough people leave to create a dent in Apple's revenue, then Apple will be forced to change. Until then, all you who bellyache about how Apple is on their high horse, indeed they are until someone knocks them off. However, I doubt it will be you.
This is very good!
That's great.
I like the fact that many are afraid of entering iAd.
Google ads are annoying and invisible.
Youtube ads are disturbing and obstrusive.
Other ads are just there to steal space.
Apple doesnt' want the user be disgusted again.
They want the user to love ads too. And Apple will do the miracle again.
No matter if Adidas will remain out of a business centered on user, not on gain.
That's great.
I like the fact that many are afraid of entering iAd.
Google ads are annoying and invisible.
Youtube ads are disturbing and obstrusive.
Other ads are just there to steal space.
Apple doesnt' want the user be disgusted again.
They want the user to love ads too. And Apple will do the miracle again.
No matter if Adidas will remain out of a business centered on user, not on gain.
I own a Mini and legally own OSX as I paid for the OS. Plus I buy all of my software, so its not like apple is not any of my money, in fact they seem to be getting most of itYou mean like the money you're not paying Apple buy creating that hackintosh in your signature?
Those who fail to read Marksman's post and understand fail to understand the true issue here.
p.s. Apple cares about a 10 Million ad buy. Especially with a brand new medium and division (iAds). If you think they don't - you're living in a fantasy world. And if you think this is the first or only time Apple has caused issues with advertisers - you've also not been paying attention to the news.
The bottom line is - they can do whatever they want. It's their platform. They can cheer their successes and they can sweep their failures under the rug.
But you're not going to win new accounts if you can't service the CUSTOMER. And no client is going to want to risk spending a fortune creating an ad which would possibly never see the light of day. This one incident isn't the end all/be all. But if you think Madison Ave isn't paying attention - you're also naive.
p.s. Apple cares about a 10 Million ad buy. Especially with a brand new medium and division (iAds). If you think they don't - you're living in a fantasy world. And if you think this is the first or only time Apple has caused issues with advertisers - you've also not been paying attention to the news.
The bottom line is - they can do whatever they want. It's their platform. They can cheer their successes and they can sweep their failures under the rug.
But you're not going to win new accounts if you can't service the CUSTOMER. And no client is going to want to risk spending a fortune creating an ad which would possibly never see the light of day. This one incident isn't the end all/be all. But if you think Madison Ave isn't paying attention - you're also naive.
This is the truth. I'm so happy to read things that make sense to me. Thanks.
Thanks SJ to say NO NO NO to the CRAP!
Who cares if Madison Ave is paying attention? Surely not Apple. Do you know anyone who works at a marketing company? I know a few. They would tell you that all of those companies would give anything to create the next Apple ad. Regardless to how restrictive Apple may be on iAds, it has nothing to do with how Madison Avenue looks at Apple. If anything, iAds is another source of revenue for Madison Avenue.
You did get it right. It is Apple's platform. Whoever doesn't like surely doesn't have to use it.
P.S. Once again $10 million dollars is not a lot for Apple. Stop kidding yourself.
Do I know anyone? I've been in Marketing/PR and Advertising for over 20 years. I wasn't referring to creating an ad FOR Apple the company. I was referring to ads being created for the iAd platform. iAds won't be a source for revenue on Madison Avenue if clients pull their ads and/or don't even try because of the strict rules Apple has set forth.
But I'm not going to sit here and argue with armchair quarterbacks (with the exception of Marksman) about the industry. I'll just watch amusingly.
But yes - it's Apple's platform. But it will be a failure if things continue the way they are. So there won't be a platform to discuss....
ETA: 10 Million isn't a lot? How much do you think it costs to advertise with iAds. How much is 10 million in relation to how much has actually been spent. Do you know? If not - you're speaking completely of ignorance. Which is why, again, I'll just stand back at this point and watch amusingly as people try and throw facts out of the air around. Time will be the arbiter...
WTF is going on here??
Some months ago . . .
"Ads??!! What?? Apple is turning into Google!"
"No way! I don't wanna see ads on my iDevice! Waaahh!"
"I can't believe Apple is doing this!"
"Steve is so greedy! All Apple cares about is money! ****** ads!"
Apple:
"Not to worry, it's an additional revenue stream and we'll make sure they;ll be as unintrusive, user-centric and stylish as possible."
The response:
"Well, alright. I guess if Apple will keep quality control . . ."
"Fine, but I'm still against it."
"I hate ads. But maybe Apple can pull this off."
"********** companies always in my face trying to sell me *****! You'd better do it right, Apple!"
*Apple rejects Adidas' iAd (the very ads MR users didn't want to see in the first place) because it's not up to standards.*
The response:
"Steve is a control freak!"
"Companies should be allowed to run whatever ads they like!"
"It's not Apple's job to tell Adidas what to do!"
"I cant believe Apple rejected . . . an ad!!" (the very ad you never friggin wanted to see in the first place.)
ROFL. Priceless.
And to those complaining about Apple leaving $10 million on the table. Do you know how many times in the course of a fiscal quarter Apple makes $10 million? Adidas' little iAd campaign is peanuts. Apple knows when to say NO. THAT'S WHY your iPhone is the way it is. That's why your Mac is the way it is. That's the reason you bought all that stuff. There are going to be a few potential casualties (Adidas) so you can continue to have the experience you do with nice things like that. Don't complain because some shoe company isn't getting along with Apple. BFD. You know who says Yes to everything? Microsoft, Nokia, Dell, etc. Go use their crap, then. What? No? Ok. Then maybe shut up and let Apple do their damn job. You know, the one that gets them record quarters.
Some months ago . . .
"Ads??!! What?? Apple is turning into Google!"
"No way! I don't wanna see ads on my iDevice! Waaahh!"
"I can't believe Apple is doing this!"
"Steve is so greedy! All Apple cares about is money! ****** ads!"
Apple:
"Not to worry, it's an additional revenue stream and we'll make sure they;ll be as unintrusive, user-centric and stylish as possible."
The response:
"Well, alright. I guess if Apple will keep quality control . . ."
"Fine, but I'm still against it."
"I hate ads. But maybe Apple can pull this off."
"********** companies always in my face trying to sell me *****! You'd better do it right, Apple!"
*Apple rejects Adidas' iAd (the very ads MR users didn't want to see in the first place) because it's not up to standards.*
The response:
"Steve is a control freak!"
"Companies should be allowed to run whatever ads they like!"
"It's not Apple's job to tell Adidas what to do!"
"I cant believe Apple rejected . . . an ad!!" (the very ad you never friggin wanted to see in the first place.)
ROFL. Priceless.
And to those complaining about Apple leaving $10 million on the table. Do you know how many times in the course of a fiscal quarter Apple makes $10 million? Adidas' little iAd campaign is peanuts. Apple knows when to say NO. THAT'S WHY your iPhone is the way it is. That's why your Mac is the way it is. That's the reason you bought all that stuff. There are going to be a few potential casualties (Adidas) so you can continue to have the experience you do with nice things like that. Don't complain because some shoe company isn't getting along with Apple. BFD. You know who says Yes to everything? Microsoft, Nokia, Dell, etc. Go use their crap, then. What? No? Ok. Then maybe shut up and let Apple do their damn job. You know, the one that gets them record quarters.
Apple's platform will be a failure because of this? Are you sure? I guess I and everyone else better sell my shares of Apple, because you know for a fact that they will be a failure.
For a company that makes billions a year, $10 million dollars is not a lot.
You missed the point entirely. I won't bother to explain it further as it would obviously fall on deaf ears.
No, I don't believe I missed the point. Maybe your point was not clear to me. Or maybe I just disagree with you. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing. I just believe that Apple is not losing much by rejecting Adidas' ad. If you notice, it's Adidas that's complaining, not Apple.
I'm not trying to pick an argument with you. However, I just don't get it when people predict that because of Apple's restrictive ways, Apple will eventually fail. I think quite the contrary, because of Apple's restrictive ways they have been a great success. Why would they mess with a successful formula.
With all that said, if I offended you in anyway, please accept my apologies. After all we are all on this site just voicing our opinions.
Providing better ads that won't piss of users so much that they'll actually take notice. 'Better user experience' is a means to an end to provide better value ( $$$) for advertising space.