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.
Apple to Charge Up to $1 Million for iAd Placements?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, I wonder who buys the advertised stuff. I just tried advertising my app with quattrowireless - total waste of money. Are there click-bots on iPhones? Maybe on jail-broken ones?
Do we really have to go over this again? Nothing is going to change with iAds...
It's not. In an ideal world there would be no advertising. However, as that is unrealistic, the ads might as well be good (high quality and targeted). If they are not getting in the way and are good I don't mind them really.
There are far better ways to get exposure for your apps then banner ads in other people apps.
That was also Apple's stance on a flash to iPhone compiler, until it wasn't.
But hey, if Apple can charge 1m for an ad package, that will only increase the cost of advertising on the web in general. No problems with that!
Well-put! This will be HUGE for both Apple and those who get in at the bleeding edge.
Blackberries are not gonna have ads in them?
That sounds like VERY wishful thinking to me...
You will only see adds when you run free apps that are paid by adds. If you don't want adds, don't run free apps.
When I have the choice between a free app and a paid app I choose the paid app. Not just for the lack of adds, also because paid apps tend to be of a better quality.
How will the ads be more intrusive?
1) If you see just the banner, they are charging a penny, which is probably as much, as Google charges through Admob. We have seen what these banner ads look like.
2) It gets expensive if you tap on the ad. This would pressure on making the rolled out ad more intrusive, but how much more intrusive can you get than the whole screen itself? OTOH, opening this screen is absolutely optional, and closing it is easier still.
And don't forget that 60% of those $2 are going to the developers. i.e. Apple is only seeing about 80c, (although they have created the platform, and are spending the effort and money to court the advertisers).
1) If you see just the banner, they are charging a penny, which is probably as much, as Google charges through Admob. We have seen what these banner ads look like.
2) It gets expensive if you tap on the ad. This would pressure on making the rolled out ad more intrusive, but how much more intrusive can you get than the whole screen itself? OTOH, opening this screen is absolutely optional, and closing it is easier still.
And don't forget that 60% of those $2 are going to the developers. i.e. Apple is only seeing about 80c, (although they have created the platform, and are spending the effort and money to court the advertisers).
Social networking for one. Also, there are review sites and sites you can give out free codes.....
No it wasn't. Apple didn't have a stance on that, because the flash-objective-C compiler didn't exist. When it did, Apple took a position on it.
As an iPhone developer that's prepping a new app for the June launch, you can either download the free version and deal with the ads. Or, if you don't want to see ads, you can buy the other version for $1.99. Or, ignore it altogether. It's freedom of choice, and everybody wins.
Developers, Developers, Developers!
Google:
Makes money selling ads on mobile devices.
Apple:
Makes money selling mobile devices.
Makes money selling apps on mobile devices.
Makes money selling media on mobile devices.
Makes money selling accessories for mobile devices.
Makes money selling ads on mobile devices.
Hmm, I wonder who has the better business plan here?
Makes money selling ads on mobile devices.
Apple:
Makes money selling mobile devices.
Makes money selling apps on mobile devices.
Makes money selling media on mobile devices.
Makes money selling accessories for mobile devices.
Makes money selling ads on mobile devices.
Hmm, I wonder who has the better business plan here?
Those ways do not work neither - I tried them. The only thing that works is when Apple puts your app on the iTunes front page (like Staff Favorites or What's Hot) - I've been there, this really works. Everything else - waste of time and money.
Yeah, way to take the fun out of that. So much for a humorous observation.
I did choose this phrase with the forum in mind. Sure, famous would have been a better word, but this is macrumors. Over the last few years, Apple has become "evil" for making a profit and that ad has taken on new meaning. How many images with Jobs face have we seen on the big screen around here? I say infamous...
Modified that for you. Has the lack of ads in paid apps been confirmed?
I would imagine that if companies are shelling out big $$$ for adverts, they would want them everywhere...
Of course they will, however it's not them nor Apple that puts ads in the apps.
Developers can still charge whatever they want for the apps, but it would only make sense that an app with ads should be free in order to get it out on as many devices as possible.
yes but how much would that be in today's money. likely a lot more
Also, if this is $1 mil for ads that Apple is building for them, it's really not that crazy. Especially when you consider the potential audience
Your not going to see any ads on your iPhone unless you are using free apps. I never do. That's a lot better than watching TV with ads on Cable channels that you pay monthly for.
I suppose on the iPad with subscription content you will see ads, how they draw attention will probably need to be inventive as just simply popping up is likely not to get the desired reaction of open interest.