Anyone using TapContext?

[WNASH]

@alecman

@WNASH these are dream numbers. What did you set? push+banners/everything? Please tell me

I’m using both in-app Interstitial Ad & Contextual Notification Ad. To optimize the earnings & not to annoy the users, I put Interstitial Ad upon exit the apps & set ‘very low mode’

for Contextual Notification Ad.

[Didldak]

Can anyone explain me the thing with $20,000 bonus when I sign now?

[SBA]

Clicking on the promo says
“If you have over 2,000 downloads a day, you may be eligible for an increased bonus up to $20,000 based on your average daily installs and traffic quality during your first 7 days!”

No idea how stringent they are about that, but probably very considering 20 %!@!#@ K probably very. It sounds like 2k+ installs a day for 7+ days for the first week as soon as you sign up, and those installs ALL agree and press OK to notifcation ads AND they are all active for those 7 days, then you can get that bonus. It sounds like they’re trying to encourage you to update a currently popular app with TapContext. So if you have an app that’s getting that many dls or will if you update it, and you’re looking to diversify, now is the time to do it.

[alecman]

@WNASH

I’m using both in-app Interstitial Ad & Contextual Notification Ad. To optimize the earnings & not to annoy the users, I put Interstitial Ad upon exit the apps & set ‘very low mode’

for Contextual Notification Ad.

Thank you, I will try

[alecman]

Just one last question: What did you guys set to make it appear “legal” on the market?
I mean, is it ok, that when I click “close” on the EULA, a smartwall-like view is shown? And can I set some ‘ad-level’ so these virus scans that might break policies don’t get showed?

Please tell me.

[Aleksa]

@david

This surprised me too, at first. But on a technical level, it’s not difficult to make this work. Any app has permission to list all the packages you have installed. That’s right - you don’t need any special permissions for this. Surprising, but true. I just tried it myself, and was able to list every package on the system without adding a single permission to a new Android project.

So all TapContext has to do is grab a list of your installed apps, compare it with another list (provided by the antivirus “advertiser”) containing the package names of supposed malware. Then they can show the pretty “antivirus scan” window, which just has to scroll through the list, highlighting malware when it comes up.

This does raise an important question: is TapContext sending the list of installed apps to the advertiser? Or is the advertiser providing a list of malware, which the SDK compares on the client-side (i.e. without sending anything back to the server)? I’d think that both ways are technically legal (comply with Google Play policies). But sending a list of apps to a third party has significant privacy implications which developers should be made aware of.

I am quoting this from another topic, just for reference.

[alecman]

Maybe it doesn’t technically send the package names to a server but it sends the first 3 characters of an app/package name to a server which responds with a list of package names and their status that begin with these letters so the phone compares it.

example: sdk finds “Advanced Task Killer”
sends a request with “Adv” to the server.
server sends a list back that looks like:
Advanced Music Creator - infected
Advanved Task Killer - clean
Advanced Xylophone Smashing Women With Two Chainsaws In Her Hands Live Wallpaper - clean
(Any reference to real, existing apps are totally random, as you might notice, I made up these names lol)

Then the phone doesn’t really send the installed app names but downloads a list of them.

[Aleksa]

@adforandroidapps

QUOTE:
I’ve been using TapContext for about a month now. At first the SDK seemed to be causing excessive battery usage for some users. I sent this feedback through to my account manager, and a fix was implemented very quickly. In my experience the company has been very responsive to feedback and quick to follow up any issues I encountered.

The battery issue maybe related to their use of the WAKE_LOCK - which is generally not encouraged these days - and other options like KeepScreenOn() (or whatever the API is for that) are recommended practice. But they may have some special reason for that - i.e. greater reliability to track install or something. However WAKE_LOCK is an optional permission - hopefully not using it will not affect things too much.

Since these are Leadbolt HTML AppWalls - Leadbolt can ONLY measure clicks (and not final/complete installs from Google Play - something like THAT would be possible with an SDK - as AppBrain/Tapjoy/GetJar SDKs do - I don’t know if the Leadbolt SDK version of AppWall is able to do the check or if that AppWall is exactly the same as the HTML AppWall).

One way Leadbolt COULD be doing checks for actual installs - is if an advertised app is run after being downloaded - if it has Leadbolt SDK installed, that can inform Leadbolt about an installation - and if there is some correlation between the location, IP address etc. - then that is seen as confirmation of a “causal” link between a click and an actual install. I don’t know if Leadbolt is doing this.

So the stable number here should be the EPC - which is stable around $0.02-$0.03 range (though this TOO maybe tuned by Leadbolt according to the “quality” of the developer etc. - who knows).

The variable part is the CTR - which will depend on the how frequently you are showing the AppWall (similar to “refresh rate” for banner ads), if it is presented at an inopportune moment, and on the user demographics and their match with the ad types shown.

So these can vary from the developer app to app.

The CTR however seems to be varying on a DAY-TO-DAY basis from 1.38% to 3%.
eCPM varies greatly between U.S. $0.80 to $1.69 for France to $0.60 for Great Britain.

So there are so few clicks (for the apps above) - that there may be random noise (perhaps because the revenue in a day is actually dependent on so few apps ?).

For the last few weeks I am seeing lower revenue from Leadbolt - and on a daily revenue graph can see great variation - some days it is $10 - which is closer to what it used to be - but on alternate days it is $2 - in fact seems to alternate between high and low days etc.

EDIT: I am now seeing more (and stabler day to day) revenue from Admob banner ads (!) than Leadbolt interstitials.

Comparing with David’s numbers for TapContext, one can see that the CTR and EPC are both almost 2x what I see - thus the eCPM (and total revenue) is 2x2 = 4x what I am seeing with Leadbolt.

The question is - are these numbers sustainable - or do we just use TapContext interstitials while they give reasonable revenue ?

A higher CTR COULD be supported IF they truly target users by the apps they have installed etc. (so pitch similar apps to those users).
A higher EPC may just be artificially high right now - to promote the network.

A few issues with TapContext:

• do they have SEPARATE SDKs for their push notifications ? (if a developer wants no push notification or EULA)
• does their interstitial have a prefetch ? (not having such will impact user experience - HOWEVER, I guess it could be argued that if revenues is still higher despite no-prefetch then maybe ok ?)
• they offer a 15% commission for referrals - so the referrer gets 15% of your income FOREVER !! So TapContext clearly values referrals - and it can indirectly be used to drive favorable reviews and blog posts. However, the developer is getting 15% less of what they COULD be getting. What does this bode for the company (perhaps referral percentage will go down over time). So TapContext is stingy about net30 (though will give net15 terms to those with $500/month revenue as mentioned in posts here) because it is willing to give 15% to referrals. Perhaps that 15% is coming from the 30% or whatever TapContext’s own margin ?

I would consider them for their interstitials - but don’t want to be tainted with push notification EULAs etc. (or anti-virus complaints later).
And I would like if there was a prefetch mechanism for the interstitials.

@adforandroidapps

Another standard issue with TapContext (as with other ad networks) - if they have no ad to show for your location, you don’t see anything - so clicking on the interstitial ad did nothing.

Don’t see any push notification ad either.

Then some seconds later SUDDENLY the “Running a Quick Virus Scan of all your apps” appears - which rapidly seems to be scanning actual apps on your device as their names appear briefly on screen as it scans.

It gives an option to “Install Protection NOW!” - big red button (along with “Certified by AV Test” and “eTruste” etc. medals of the app).

There is a “not now” button - which is in all lower case and in grey.

I clicked on the “1 Threat found” - but it did not give a list of exactly WHAT it had found. However few seconds later it started scanning something again - and then it says “2 Threats found”. And this paragraph:

Warning: 2 Threats Found by Virus Quick Scan
Strongly Recommended to Install Armor for Android for Threat Repair, Phone Protection & Deep Scan

Now this is likely to make THOUSANDS of your users see a threat - and immediately associate “virus” with your app - if nothing else there will be many who were not thinking of “virus” but will think so now as they will have a Pavlovian response trained into them - whenever they open your app they are reminded of “viruses”.

I don’t think this is the type of message developers have in mind for their users …

So after some time I have a choice of:

• not now (greyed out and lower case)
• INSTALL PROTECTION NOW! (in a big red button and in caps!)

Which should I choose - I’ll click on the red button - should be more interesting …

Rather than going directly to Google Play - see a choice between browser types (as happens with many ad networks - I guess they are informing the advertiser and URL redirects of a click) - I click one of the browsers - it is actually a webpage (and not Google Play).

Is asking for Credit card - total is $0.49.

Now maybe this is a great app - and I would really like if my app had a paid option like this (since paid apps not available in my location) - however I suspect selling apps like this is NOT legitimate for my own app (once it is downloaded from Google Play) - but what about an ad that is selling another app (which is most likely NOT on Google Play - like this Armor for Android app) - as far as the ad network is concerned this may be legitimate (since app is not on Google Play).

But are ad networks we use supposed to be doing this ?

How is this different from us selling an addon via credit card purchase ?

Clicked on the interstitial button again - and now “App Loading” appears and the antivirus ad appears faster this time - again doing a virus check.

Clicking on Back button DOES dismiss the ad - so that is good (for the user).

Clicked again - this time dismissed the ad using the “not now” greyed out button - and that does the same thing as the Back button.

Now I suppose I could put this in an app and for sure it will give better revenue - may even bother the users less … but something about it doesn’t seem right. It is very aggressive marketing of an app.

A question that arises is WHY is Armor for Android not being sold via Google Play directly - and why via ad and the credit card page ?
And it is really only $0.49 - or is that some smaller version ?

Checking Google Play - there IS an Armor Antivirus:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.armorforandroid.security&hl=en

And it is selling for $29.95 !!

Next I checked through the ratings/comments - and sorted by Rating - and tried to find any negative comments - there were almost none - and barely could find any 4 star comments. They were all 5 stars. I wonder if that is normal. Plus all comments were ecstatic (maybe it really is a great app ? - but antivirus apps on android are not as needed as on windows - so why the ecstatic behavior - or maybe it has some other “features” as pointed out in the comments).

It is a paid app with 5,000-10,000 downloads. HOWEVER, the number of ratings are 1020 !!

I have that many ratings with nearly 500K downloads !

Just checking if perhaps paid apps have a higher frequency of ratings/downloads:

History Eraser Pro - 10K-50K downloads - 2K ratings - so seems in same ballpark.
Kaspersky - 100K-500K - 30K ratings

So I guess the ratings/download figure is NOT indicative of anything fishy …

Anyway …

To adforandroidapps:

You can switch off/on 2 types of ads under Ad Control tab in your TapContext account.

For second quote:

TapContext’s SDK lists all your apps and sends the list to advertiser antivirus company. They check the lists. There are only common apps in their list. Your app is ignored. The malware you are getting is maybe an unstable app. Remember, your app is not being listed!!!

[adforandroidapps]

@androiddev

i wonder if david still using this. tapcontext seems to be a very tricky scam company. i just noticed when i install an app, it shows a push ad and ask to buy their antivirus. im not sure if this is even comply with google TOS.

This probably complies with Google TOS - as has been examined here before (because it is downloading content from outside Google Play and THAT app CAN be bought with alternate payment methods) - but makes for a very bad user experience - and will cause a lot of hand-wringing by developers as well.

It seems that TapContext is sitting on a good idea - but have managed to get it hijacked by a couple of companies (perhaps they were all they could get initially) - but it seems the whole company is running on Armour for Android and Battery Saver apps. Or they are the maker of those apps (?)

But the basic idea is not bad - IF it was implemented along lines similar to current AppWalls - start from there and then maybe grow out.

When I analyzed in earlier posts - what seemed interesting was the potential to target users (by the apps they already have) - and show apps on the AppWall which closely fit what they already have - with a higher likelihood of conversion to download.

For instance someone who has fashion apps - will likely find “Fashion Story” worth checking out - while someone who has word games may like mind’s Word Hero.

The problem with this approach may have been (reason they didn’t do that) - was perhaps the inventory of AppWall advertisers is very limited - so it may in practice be very difficult to find an advertiser to match the user. And if they avoid showing ads for some stuff how does that help the advertiser ? It surely helps the developer because the “eyeballs” space is used better. They could perhaps show fewer ads etc.

But the advertiser needs to push the apps they have been given to advertise - so the problem here (as with video ads ?) is that the market is not big enough for such targeting.

Now what they do instead is leverage the “find the apps on the user’s phone” capability - to actually do a scan of apps against a list of known bad apps - and thus their “ad” is able to report that you have some bad apps.

Perhaps it may have been less harmful if their ad didn’t have that red icon with a cross through it - which was kind of shocking - but then they may not have gotten the conversion rate they get (?).

Basically the techniques are using a “shock” approach to harass the user into getting apps - a more milder design MAY have been better tolerated.

[adforandroidapps]

@Aleksa

To adforandroidapps:

You can switch off/on 2 types of ads under Ad Control tab in your TapContext account.

For second quote:

TapContext’s SDK lists all your apps and sends the list to advertiser antivirus company. They check the lists. There are only common apps in their list. Your app is ignored. The malware you are getting is maybe an unstable app. Remember, your app is not being listed!!!

I guess you mean that a virus app could use your SDK and will not be listed as a virus.

That was not my main concern …

I think another post above did talk about a quote from David discussing that TapContext SDK would send info to a server or server to the SDK - either way it makes for an SDK that seems TOO tied to Armor for Android - though I can see how the apps list could be used for a number of things - the one I found interesting was the possibility of showing AppWalls with apps that are picked to “match” the temperament of the user (which you can judge from the apps they have installed).

That would improve the conversion rates.

The effect of all this IS slightly creepy though - when an ad network is scanning apps being used by a user. It would be less creepy if the end-advertising was not so blatant - as TapContext has chosen to START off with an antivirus company advertisement campaign.

The idea is interesting - and I would think most ad companies would wind up using contextual AppWalls perhaps (if they are not already) - though I suspect the limiting factor is enough advertiser apps to be able to find matches - given the choice of advertiser they have they have no choice but to shove whatever apps they have to as many users as possible.

Often also these advertisers run campaigns for a limited time - in which case there is little point to target that - that concern seems to be more from the developer side who have a choice of AppWall ad networks and may consider having a way to show an appwall that is suited to the user - not clear if this interest is exactly the most prominent one for ad networks (?)

[adforandroidapps]

I had been really intruiged by TapContext’s referral fee of 15% - which seemed an order of magnitude greater than the “norm” for ad networks.

The referral fee for Leadbolt is 1% !!

What does this say ? That 15% is going to come out of somewhere - which means the early developers pushing TapContext stand the most to gain - while those who follow will be paying 15% tax to those who came earlier.

Not exactly a pyramid scheme - but still it is a surprise.

Such a high referral fee also makes it next to impossible for fair discussion to take place among developers.

But perhaps this is another way to do business - and it may succeed where others have failed.

This is what I posted earlier within this same thread:

QUOTE:

• they offer a 15% commission for referrals - so the referrer gets 15% of your income FOREVER !! So TapContext clearly values referrals - and it can indirectly be used to drive favorable reviews and blog posts. However, the developer is getting 15% less of what they COULD be getting. What does this bode for the company (perhaps referral percentage will go down over time). So TapContext is stingy about net30 (though will give net15 terms to those with $500/month revenue as mentioned in posts here) because it is willing to give 15% to referrals. Perhaps that 15% is coming from the 30% or whatever TapContext’s own margin ?

---

Add to that the VERY AGGRESSIVE behavior towards developers and their efforts to recruit them - from someone else’s post in this thread:

QUOTE:

I got a email everyday from TapContext, they say they will pay me $300 bonus if I use their SDK in my games, kinda promo. Is this real or fake, anyone gets similar email ??

So TapContext is REALLY trying to turn things around fast - but doing things too fast - and the danger is it may wind up killing the chicken to get it’s golden eggs.

[superbella]

I do have a question regarding your model, which confuses me. On your site you state that that the future revenue is guaranteed (“additional guaranteed future money each month for six months into the future.”), but what happens if someone cancels their subscription to the antivirus software, does that also cancel our future revenue for that sale, thus making it not guaranteed?

@TapContext

Hello @appsg,

I suppose you could think of it as “installments”, although that’s not what’s really happening behind the scenes, and not how I would describe it.

I would think of it more like Amazon.com (to use an example that everyone is probably familiar with). They don’t use the exact model we do, but for this example, the concept is close enough.

Amazon.com has a program, called Amazon Associates, that someone – let’s say a blog writer – can join. Now the blog writer can, for example, review a new book, include a link to Amazon.com, and get paid a small referral fee if their reader buys the book.

Think of that as how a traditional ad network pays you. You show an ad, and if your users taps the ad, or performs some desired action, you get paid a small fee for referring that customer to the advertiser.

So far, so good. That should all make sense.

But now let’s go back to the Amazon.com example. They are pretty good at selling customers add-ons products, related products, and just about everything else under the sun. So that original customer that went to Amazon.com just to buy the book from the review may end up also buying the movie. And maybe they even buy 4 books for their book club. And maybe even a new watch that was a Deal of the Day. Or whatever. Again, Amazon is very good at selling the user more stuff than they came for.

So Amazon decided that they would rather share with their Associates than just take all that additional revenue for themselves. They know that the Associates are an important part of their ecosystem. So Amazon.com gives the blog author referral fees, not just on the book they recommended, but anything else that customer buys. Which is a pretty good deal for the blogger, right?

What’s more, Amazon knows that some people will come in as a referral from the blog, look at the product, but not come back and buy it until tomorrow, for example. Now what happens? Amazon will continue to share a portion of the future sales from that customer with the blogger. In Amazon’s case, it’s for a pretty short time period. In TapContext’s case, those revenues are shared for 6 months.

In the end, Amazon hopes to create a long-term relationship with the blogger. They want the blog writer to trust that readers sent to Amazon.com will be worth more than readers sent to other sites. To do that, they share a portion of revenues on every sale they make to that user (not just the targeted sale) and go the extra mile and share future revenues with the blogger, as well.

Does that make sense?

So we’re trying to do something similar. The details behind our model are obviously very different from Amazon.com’s product sales. But the overall effect is the same. Your users have long-term value to our advertisers. Most networks don’t even acknowledge that. We do. And we pay you for that future value… in the future, when the value is realized.

And that’s also why I don’t really like saying it’s an “installment” payment. It’s not like we got money up front and we’re withholding it from you… it’s that we know there will be future revenue that comes from new customers. And we want to share that future revenue with you. But let’s be clear that it’s future revenue for both of us… TapContext and you.

Thanks for the question. It’s a good one… and important for our developers to understand.

[TapContext]

@superbella

I do have a question regarding your model, which confuses me. On your site you state that that the future revenue is guaranteed (“additional guaranteed future money each month for six months into the future.”), but what happens if someone cancels their subscription to the antivirus software, does that also cancel our future revenue for that sale, thus making it not guaranteed?

Hello @superbella… and thank you for your question.

No, the future earnings are not contingent on a user retaining a subscription to any offering.

Once revenue is credited to the account it is guaranteed.

[androiddev]

since yesterday my ecpm dropped below $0.60 today it’s $0.35

do you experience the same?

[steckter]

@androiddev

since yesterday my ecpm dropped below $0.60 today it’s $0.35

do you experience the same?

yes, it’s fluctuating sometimes. My average ecpm this month is $11 but on 16th it was barely $4. On the other hand the day before (15th) it was almost $16. I guess there’s no point of comparing the ecmp on a daily basis because it may vary a lot. Even on a weekly basis it might not be very meaningful. Of course, if your ecpm is really decreasing every day and never goes up then you clearly have a downward trend and it might be a good idea to contact TapContext support.

[Tapio2013]

@WNASH

I have been using TapContext since a few days ago & getting $0.009 per install with 2k installs per day. I’m using both TapContexts’ ad units i.e interstitial & notification (very low push setting mode). With normal mode push notification, I used to get $0.014 per install.

Their rep. has told me that TapContext is a CPC based ad network which I believe is more preferable model than CPI. In term of revenue, for an apple to apple comparison, currently I’m getting 3x higher earnings than CPI based Appflood.

UPDATED: Latest Earning Per Install (eInstall) is $0.012.

Can you talk a little more about your CPM on both TapContext and Appflood? Also wonder what are their most lucrative ad units.

[androiddev]

@Tapio2013

Can you talk a little more about your CPM on both TapContext and Appflood? Also wonder what are their most lucrative ad units.

never use tapcontext, they pay your revenue by 6 months instalments. and their promising ecpm is a big lie. in their website, it says $4-10 but these days im getting below $0.60. when i ask about this, they said they never promised about any ecpm. also they said i will get $4 ecpm if i have 10000+ installs per day. WTF

[WNASH]

@Tapio2013

Can you talk a little more about your CPM on both TapContext and Appflood? Also wonder what are their most lucrative ad units.

I’m afraid that I cannot give you stats on Appflood. However, here I would compare my TapContent’s revenue against industry standard mobile ad network, AdMob for July 2013.

TapContext:

• No.Of Apps : 8
• Ad Unit : Push notification and interstitial ads
• Installs: 64,529
• RPMD: $45.61
• CPM: $2.74
• Earnings: $2,943.09

AdMob:

• No.Of Apps : 13
• Ad Unit : Banner ads
• eCPM : $0.55
• CPC Imps :1,961,978
• Fill rate: 99.16%
• CTR : 0.76%
• Earnings : $1,080.56

It’s obvious that TapContext outperforms Admob by 3x in earnings. To get a better picture on how other TapContexts’ developers perform, you can visit this site.

[javaexp]

@WNASH, could you pls. split the ecpm you are getting for push and interstitial separately for tapcontext.

[WNASH]

@javaexp

@WNASH, could you pls. split the ecpm you are getting for push and interstitial separately for tapcontext.

CPM:
-Push notification : $2.64
-Interstitial : $6.24