Suggestion for AppWalls and Interstitials

Monetizing, Advertising & Marketing Advertising Networks
21

I think Google goofed in a major way in this regard - from the view of developers (result being an inconsistent and more complicated payment scheme that Google is having such difficulty expanding to more countries).

Unfortunately there is no natural pressure on Google to reform itself (to align with developers). So it is a dictatorial situation (as I noted earlier Google policy of non-response on e-mails and “axe hanging over the head” type of policies towards developers - sure many are probably spam app developers maybe - but the perception that creates is that of “terror” i.e. it could be argued that Google deliberately employs techniques which are designed to invoke a “terror” response in the developer - so they remain in line - within a “hazy line”).

This strategy is required by Google - because they have adopted a policy of low human contact - and automation (compared to Apple of human-involved review of apps). Google thus can beat Apple in that area - but it has essentially adopted the policies of the IRS - i.e. “we cannot police this complex world” so when we do act, we will do so with “extreme prejudice” - as is the common public’s perception of the IRS audit.

I don’t know how long such a high-automation process will work for real humans - or is the intent that eventually Google will be able to whittle away the developers to big name outfits - and that should be sufficient revenue. In the meantime let the developers duke it out - yet the reality is Google has given NO thought to how a developer could be given the environment to succeed. Surviving developers will then churn out pachinko machine type apps - which users are glued to - and paying hand over fist to pay. Essentially a type of addiction (“whales” paying $1000s) and Las Vegas casino environment.

An important factor for Google’s hands-off decision was also that they probably wanted to experiment with what works for the App Store and what doesn’t - but they didn’t want to spend their own money doing that - far better to let developers do that - both the ones who survive and the ones who fail will have contributed to the experiment - but only the ones who succeed will get payback (usual entrepreneurial).

Apple has devoted itself more towards the user experience - and probably spends a huge amount on testing apps (compared to Google).

A big part of the justification for Google’s approach is probably the mantra of “open-source” - that suggests that since Google is open about it - people should be aware that things are going to be a bit threadbare.

The problem is that who is the beneficiary of that threadbareness - the open-sourceness of Android - has little impact to the bottom line for developers or users - what Google’s hands-offness (“we opened up the OS - what else do you expect us to do”) however does is it creates a parched environment - one which is palatable to developers only because of the “potential” for the platform (as an open source OS and which is expanding heavily - esp. at the low end).

A more positive view of this however is also that it is still “early days” in the Android ecosystem - as a sustainable survival model does not exist for apps - this means there will be considerable flux - and this would be an opportunity for new entrants - as well as keep the existing developers on their toes.

22

Or maybe Google feels it needs to play catch-up with Apple’s store, considering the number of apps was much more prevalent than that of Play. In which case the submission policy is slack and any app goes. I don’t know what the numbers are like now, but I wouldn’t be surprised if that is another stat Google would look to beat Apple in. Of course the overall app quality of both stores is significantly different, but I’m sure that won’t cross the average user’s mind…at least not until after they buy an Android and see for themselves.

Just a theory.

23

@adforandroidapps,
Considering the percantage of total revenue for each adNetwork;
Admob is 80%
Tapjoy 20%

And I think and will repeat again, it is because users not motivated to unlock features in my app.

You think a little bit in a wrong way, why you need to include in your app only IAP/Tapjoy/GetJar or the Startapp+Airpush and etc, why to do not combine them all? I see all your posts are about to find a maximized way to get revenue from the app, I will answer you shortly, so dont do any researches on this anymore;). The most way to maximize the app is to use as much ads as you can, and the difficult part here, is to optimize and show the ads on natural app’s breaks, where users will not piss off.
That’s it. Done.
And dont think about the way is the user will be satisfied or no, if you cant sell it via Play Market, using Tapjoy/Getjar+Startapp/Leadbolt/Airpush is your way to survive, so use them all.

24

The discussion has gone to very interesting and deep arguments.
I don’t know about Google strategy, probably I’ve got too small experience to evaluate long term strategies by such a company.
But story repeats.
Microsoft had a huge advantage on the market when they distributed Visual Basic and Visual Basic for Applications, allowing users to “extend” their products and developers to sell good applications.
Apple invented the app-market and is strongly linked to the small developers.
So, I think, is Google. Why should Google frustrate developers that guarantee a future to Android, just to get some immediate money more (when they have enough to buy the world already)? It would be a blind strategy, and Google is not the company to have blind strategies, without the great numbers of the market, made by small developers, the market simply wouldn’t exist.
Now with google glass it will be the same, why should Google impede small developers to earn from the google glass business? Google gets great advantage from this.
So, even if the analysis of @adforandroidapps is certainly good, I think that we should not be scared by Google strategy.
It is also to say, if the analysis is correct, Google can CHANGE its strategy in a matter of HOURS.

Think about tactics, I still don’t find a good solution for interstitials… :slight_smile:

25

Daler,

I get your point that if the GetJar/Tapjoy payment is structured correctly it could yield better percentages. There are income report blogs by some developers which have reported higher percentages for Tapjoy compared to Admob - so that is something to be worked on …

I asked for comparison with Admob - because Admob seems to be a very robust metric to compare against (as opposed to other factors which can be hugely different between apps).

That is an interesting statistic however - keeping in line with the comments above - i.e. ads will dominate your revenue strategy and GetJar/Tapjoy can only complement that.

That is a shame from an idealistic perspective - and seems a shame given that a $0.01 to $0.05 charge per app download from the App Store could easily be palatable by users (though true that that would have to go down for lower-income countries). If there was a degree of curation by Google - perhaps they approve the app for various tiers of payment by it’s “quality” - or app needs certain number of ratings or install/uninstall rate to qualify for the higher tier $0.05 charge bracket - then that would have easily avoided the dependence on ad-base model.

This is something that would be Amazon’s cup-of-tea - since they are primarily centered around payment and purchases. It would take a radical restructuring for Apple to transition to that (why mess with it when their existing App Store works).

With Google - their compulsion seems to have roots in their ad-based history - Google is all about search (and by consequence - ads - which finances the search).

Google has carried over that model right over to app development - when such a model MAY not work for it beyond the very top tier. This bit of Google history may have blighted how the Google App Store was to develop.

If Google had been a different company - they may have instead focused on revenue sharing and app store revenue. However that would then have been a very different company - and may have led to a more restricted store (and expensive) - and may even have led to telecom operators getting the lion’s share of the revenue.

By making things “free” - Android has promised lower tier phones - and the App model has developed as a low priced “free” one as well - which has effectively placed it OUTSIDE the purview of the telecom operators (if it’s free they won’t be interested in it right ?). Having established a foothold on the App store (and telecom’s acceptance of it as “can’t be better than free”) - the question is if Google will tinker with the model to make it more “healthy” and robust for app developers ? So that say, it is 5x more revenue generating than it currently is … ? That would be the holy grail for developers (of course if it was a slam-dunk - it would raise more competition - so it may not be clear if in the end it would make things any more profitable for the “average developer” - but it would certainly enrich the app space for the user - if there were more resources available for developers to build even the 2nd tier apps - i.e. the ones in the 100K to 500K category of free apps).

I am seeing that Admob revenue seems fairly stable - meanwhile the Leadbolt HTML AppWall revenue has fallen to 1/5 recently of what it started out with (some maybe fatigue for returning users - and lower payments per download). Same for AppBrain exit ad (esp. if Leadbolt AppWall has already fatigued the user).

I do not currently use StartApp or push notifications - though both seem to be good money earners - as suggested also by Beppi’s stats:
StartApp icons: 50%
AdMob banners: 40%
StartApp exit-ads: 10%

26

Beppi,

I have used AppBrain (exit AppWall), Greystripe interstitial - then switched to Leadbolt HTML AppWall (you can find some of the code on this forum for caching the ad so it appears instantly).

Leadbolt HTML AppWall initially paid much more than Greystripe was paying (pitiful) or Admob banner ads or AppBrain.
A downside was that it reduced the AppBrain (which I had continued to use on exit) - understandably so because user sees too many AppWall interstitials during app use to bother with one extra one shown at the end.

But overall Leadbolt still doubled the overall revenue.

However recently Leadbolt HTML AppWall has dropped to 1/5 of that numbers - so on some days it is matching the Admob banner ad revenue. AppBrain is also near-zero and of these Admob banner ads are the most robust i.e. it keeps ticking every day at nearly same numbers (there was a fall some weeks back documented here on this forum).

For this reason I am beginning to see Admob banner ads as a “benchmark” - with which developers can perhaps compare across apps for “potential”. That is, if Admob can earn this much then how much can I earn with such and such ad network.

Also I have seen that Admob banner revenue is not parasitically affected by AppBrain/Leadbolt etc. interstitials - which argues for the use of Admob banner ads as a type of “standard” or benchmark (with which to judge other ad networks against).

27

Leadbolt HTML AppWall probably pays more to new developers (to get them hooked up), less after time.

28

Of the ad networks mentioned (Admob, Leadbolt, AppBrain) - it seems AppBrain was stable while I used them, and Admob has been stable also. Leadbolt going down, and one hears stories of Airpush notification ads also going low, and of StartApp (though they may still be paying reasonable - but for how long once market gets saturated ?).

29

I agree that AdMob banner are really stable and can be considered a sort of benchmark.
Currently, as I said, StartApp is giving me more than AdMob and it does every and single day, I will always be grateful to StartApp’s people for this. Thank you!
Yes, maybe the game will stop soon or later, but the market will ever be saturated? I don’t think so.
Anyway note that I get revenue for a StartApp download also for users that had downloaded before another app with StartApp!

When I tried other networks I never had such a good opinion, all those that I tried generally start well and then drop (RevMob produced for me about 10x AdMob the first 2-3 days, then completely stopped! And a similar thing, although less violent, did LeadBolt).
Please note that I consider also the stability. As a small developer I cannot afford the stress and risk of a network that gives me eCPM = 5$ but I get those 5$ one day, and then zero for the next 3. I prefer a low eCPM but a smooth graph of the revenues.
So StartApp is constant too, very constant BOTH with icons, and exit-ads. It’s incredible. Although eCPM for exit-ads may not so high (around $0.5).

For every app, I tried to understand which ad type combination was better. I divided ads in:

  • banners
  • interstitials / popup appwalls
  • appwalls on request
  • push ads
  • exit-ads
  • icons

After some experiments, I came to the optimal setting (for me): banners AdMob, exit-ads and icons StartApp, appwalls on request LeadBolt (that give me almost nothing).
As you can see, I think that there is a large space for more revenue by using popup interstitials or appwalls, on a CPC model. Until now LeadBolt did not give me good results, AdMob does not work on all apps, RevMob dropped after 3 days of usage, AppFlood was too unreliable (being a CPI model), AirPush gave me poor results. It looks to me absurd that I cannot find a good solution to integrate with the existing.

30

EXACTLY the point - there is still no reliable revenue model for Android !

The ones which are - by happenstance or whatever are:

  • Admob (could change tomorrow - and there ARE dips)
  • AppBrain (I haven’t used them in a while so not sure if they still pay the same)
  • StartApp (variable here is their RPMD which IS variable)

Compare this to some other reliable payment models:

  • paid apps (here what you see is what you get i.e. $1 or $5 - variable is how good app is to justify purchase by user and general economic climate, and location specific buying power) - advantage here is “whales” - as some apps sell $9.99 and $99.99 type of products within the app (and there evidently ARE rich users who will pay)

  • GetJar/Tapjoy type (this too is stable in that it depends on desirability of app/its features - the variable here is the conversion rate i.e. if GetJar/Tapjoy start getting paid less they start to have offers which give fewer coins from 85 coins they become 42 coins etc. - reducing revenue for developer for the SAME user effort to earn those coins) - one MAJOR disadvantage of these and so this cannot be called “payment” schemes is you CANNOT leverage the whales - you cannot charge even $5 which would mean 50 app downloads worth of effort by the user !

So clearly of all the revenue models - Admob is one (as long as Google can keep up rates - and they SHOULD be able to since search IS their business - growth of internet/search did NOT reduce ads as a revenue source for Google i.e. oversupply of eyeballs did not lower total revenue earnable - HOWEVER situation is different for individual developer - here you have MANY developers competing for same eyeballs - so there IS a possibility of lowering of revenue PER developer - for example if users grow 10x, that growth would be erased if developers grow 10x - which is certainly possible if it attracts people from all other programming jobs). Realistically at some point it will become economically infeasible to live off app development and that will be the balance point - which will dissuade new developers - there will be a bunch which starve and a bunch which will be doing well.

EDIT: actually this analysis is incorrect - developers will STILL be paid according to the eyeballs their app can garner - since an eyeball is an eyeball - whether there are other developers will not LOWER the inherent value of your apps - if you have 100K eyeballs per day you SHOULD be able to get the same revenue a year later regardless of rising competition. Since 100K eyeballs/views will be similar priced a year later presumably (all other economic situation being the same).

And the best revenue model is direct CASH - and this should get a boost with carrier billing (transparent micro-transactions straight to developer). That is the holy grail.

Unfortunately Google is unable to even expand the current payment models beyond a handful of countries - so that does not say much for this expandability.

If one of the posters was correct (Magnesius) - if the reason that Apple is able to offer payment for developers all over the world - then maybe Google needs to do something similar (but then may force it to also go towards curated/screened apps if there is greater liability with such ownership of the app quality/safety by Google).

31

AppBrain is stable, but CTR on AppBrain goes down like hell - it’s only good for new users, who don’t know what it is. :slight_smile:

32

Exactly, best thing to do is show it a few times for new users (used sharedPrefs to do this) and/or show it sometimes (use rand on onBackPress, if doesn’t show, use another type of interstitial that changes).

33

Hi,
We are serving app walls and 1-2 app offers (app’s poster) and we’re seeing great results so far.
Would be great if you gave us a try. We’re a new network with a strong learning and improvement curve :slight_smile: