You are welcome! I was in the same situation as most of the developers, made a game, implemented ads, but the revenue was a bit low at start. Then I decided to try out StartApp and it did worked for me, now I can focus more on making games. Good luck to all of you and have fun!
Yes, for all it’s “moral” weakness as outlined in previous comments (i.e. revenue model is based on an essential unfairness i.e. taxing of the dumb) - this is one of the few download-based models.
Also I suspect it’s returns may be far greater - since there will be 50% of users (at worst) who may click on the EULA (some may do it by finger-twitch mistake) - which will be far greater “click-through” than users do with banner ads etc.
The biggest indicator of real-world use perhaps are the comments which scarcely mention anything about the ads being an inconvenience (primarily because clicking is purely optional) !
I was anxious about the EULA at start too, but it turned out to be great, because users can skip the EULA and still play the game (it does not force them to accept), so you will not see many complains about it, if any. Also there is an 80% acceptance rate, because the EULA states everything the user will get in a short paragraph. For me it is the best model out there for Android and I am happy with it! 
As I understand it your use is of the completely optional type - i.e. user is given choice Yes/No - and either way they get the same app experience.
It is possible this approach may give a warm feeling to the user, that this is something that benefits the developer so why not etc. …
It may also suggest to the user that saying “Yes” is something minor (if there are no penalties for saying “No”).
Do you remind the user every time they run the app (nag screen) or the softer approach of reminding them softly every 3rd time they run the app etc. ?
What is your feeling on the alternate ways of presentation (which actually most developers would think of first as a modification of the ad model) i.e. if the user says “Yes” they get an ad-free app, and if “No” then they get their usual app filled with ads ?
I suspect that way may in fact alienate the user (slightly more) - and give them a sense that saying “Yes” must do something significant, otherwise why would developer be “forcing” us to accept the terms. Which may raise a barrier to their accepting the EULA or the app itself.
So there maybe some human engineering going on here (for this to be so accepted) - but do you feel that denying access to the app is too strong (programmatically developer has to code for that - plus it complicates the user’s understanding of the app dynamics ?) and the approach where you leave it up to the user (perhaps with a “friendly” nag screen reminder) yields better conversion ratios ?
Thanks for your help.
Detailed user-experience test of the app/StartApp:
Tested the app and the first thing I notice is that the EULA is quite non-threatening. The design is reasonably appealing and the language clear about what it does.
It adds a shortcut to the home screen called Search.
The default browser home page is changed - the url is of the form:
http://www.searchmobileonline.com/?sourceid=XXX&app=YYYYYY
The webpage looks a bit like googles - is spartan.
At the bottom it shows (c) StartApp 2012 and “by APPNAME”. So it DOES brand the search with the app name - essentially making the app responsible - and probably also complies with Google policy that the changes should be attributable to the app which made those changes.
Search results look like Google - a bit - but simplified. The images and videos tag looks similar to what people expect - however results are weaker.
A banner ad appears near the bottom of the search webpage.
Tabs visible are: Web, Images, Videos, Twitter
The Twitter tag does a search on twitter.
Apart from setting the home page, it adds a “Search” bookmark also (searchmobileonline.com again).
The home screen shortcut is also similar (searchmobileonline.com).
After you uninstall the app (Settings - Clear Data, Uninstall):
- the home screen icon remained (could be deleted by dragging to Remove)
- the default browser bookmarks can be removed by Menu - Bookmarks - delete
- the home page in default browser - can be removed by Settings - Set Home Page - http://www.google.com (then Menu - Settings - Clear all cookie data, cache, history, form data)
Restoring the home page can be done via Settings - Set Home Page
Then going to some other webpage.
One thing I noticed when the app was running was that it was showing some banner ads - but then realized that these were “house ads” i.e. the developer’s other apps.
I am happy you tested the app, thank you!
Yes the EULA states everything so it is not “spam” and it complies with Google “new” policy. The ads in the game are house ads for promotion of my other games (another strong point of StartApp is that you can use it for income and implement house ads to your other games that also have StartApp and boost the revenue more this way).
So many permissions though!
Hi guys,
so far I’ve had quite good experiences with StartApp. It seems like users don’t really care about the permissions at all, the install rate of my apps didn’t drop since implementing StartApp. I think users are just getting used to EULAs
Just wanted to mention that StartApp now offers a referral program for developers which also the referred developer can profit from.
If you get invited by another dev, you will receive a 25$ bonus on your publisher account for free.
If you want to, you can follow my invitation here in order to receive your bonus: StartApp - Register
cheers,
harvstar
Thanks for your post… What can you say about this? -> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-L2rN64i3JeA/UDYIHFPycuI/AAAAAAAAGic/0bFXlw6Izb0/s1600/adnetworkgraph.png
AppBrain blog: The new Google Play policy: why you should stop using push ads now
Hi androapp,
We are well aware of this article by Appbrain, which was published over 3 months ago by the way. We discussed it in the thread previously.
We are really not sure where these results came from, as we saw no evidence of them here…
We have yet to hear of apps that were removed directly because of StartApp. Since the new Google ad policy was released there were a few apps removed that were using our service, and we followed up with each and every developer to learn the reason why their apps were removed.
All of them received an email from Google saying it was either due to copyright issues or previous violations by their account and apps, none stated it was due to our SDK and rightfully so, since we are 100% compliant with the Google ad policy, we were actually the first to issue a real opt-in mechanism to our ads unit, were the first to require all devs to add a text disclaimer in the app description and our opt-in window is very clear and transparent to the end user (check out a few pages back for an image of our opt-in screen - Startapp Ad Network).
We are currently working with over 5000 apps in the Market and generate over 1M SDK downloads every day.
If those stats were right, then our company would have been long out of business.
We really believe in giving your end user as much info as possible before and after install, and giving him the choice to receive our product. At a later point the user can easily delete our icon from his device, permanently opt out via our site or our opt out app from the Play Store.
Best thing to do is see the positive responses from developers here in the forum.
I hope this answers you question, feel free to reach out to me here in the forum via PM or email me [email protected]
Thanks,
Ariel.
i agree - startapp is a great company! using it for about a week and the results are better then expected. plus they have the easiest to implement SDK. If you considering using them - click on my link below - you will get $25 right away just for singing up
I have been using them for under a week on my most successful app now and I’m really pleased with the increased revenue and the service overall.
I am however frustrated at most of the Anti-Virus apps identifying their SDK as a virus. I have had about 10 out of 70 ratings complaing that my app has a virus in it, most often referencing Dr.Web.
The wording as to the “pay per download” is slightly misconceiving on StartApps part, in that you only seem to get paid when a user actually accepts the EULA. My download counts on the Play Store are about 20%-25% higher than those reported by StartApp, which leads me to believe this.
I am not complaining about that though, and if I am right about it I wouldn’t hold it against them, since I am making much more revenue with them on one app than I am altogether per my other ad networks.
If they can sort out the whole ‘virus’ thing (which is bulshit in all fairness to them. Those Anti-virus apps are so jumpy and don’t leave any room for the open nature of Android) and if they pay on time then I will definitely stay with them.
Also, here is my ref link if you’re interested in signing up: StartApp - Developer Register
Hey asanka,
As mentioned before our developers are at top priority.
You will receive a response today.
Feel free to email me about anything [email protected]
kfir
I don’t think you can do anything about that anti-virus. The companies behind anti-viruses are like mafia, My Windows application for a client was reported as a virus - probably by users who were mad at my client - to Norton and Norton now… removes installer of that application without question from users computers. They refused to do anything about it. The application of course has nothing to do with viruses. Android anti-viruses are going the same path and since there are no viruses on Android they report adware as such to show users that they detect something so users think they are usefull.
StartApp rep:
I recall someone here mentioned that the developer has a choice between doing:
- shortcut on home screen
- bookmark in browser
or just the simpler:
- shortcut on home screen
How does the payout differ for these two options ?
Also the RFMD listed on the startapp.com webpage currently shows $14 (i.e. $0.014 per shortcut/bookmark install on average).
Is this a real-time or a reasonably ok estimate of what currently to expect ?
I’ve been wary of StartApp - but might consider the shortcut-on-home-screen - as that is something the user can remove easily.
The choice is between having
- Bookmark
- Shortcut
- Homepage
= US new user - $0.055, Non-US new user - $0.01, returning user (SDK already on device) - $0.01
OR
- Shortcut
- Homepage
= US new user - $0.04, Non-US new user - $0.008, returning user (SDK already on device) - $0.003
Got that info from the site, so it’s accurate and up to date.
I believe the RPMD is real time and is developer specific, since I get about $10.6 RPMD at the moment due to my app having only 15% US users.
Ok. Thanks.
Why is the returning user without full integration giving better revenue than with? (0.03 vs 0.01)
Excluding the Bookmark wouldn’t do much - is there a combination:
- Shortcut
- Bookmark
(i.e. excluding the Homepage - which may throw off some naive android users)
He probably quoted the wrong number, this is what it says on their FAQs:
“Our payment is based on number of app downloads; you get paid for each download generated with our SDK inside. There are 2 integration levels available: Full and Partial. The amount of payment depends on the integration level you choose. For full integration, we pay $0.055 for each new U.S install , $0.01 for each new install from any other country. For partial integration, we pay $0.04 for new U.S installs and $0.008 for new installs from any other country. A new user would be a user who’s device does not have the StartApp SDK present. A returning user (with the StartApp SDK on his device) will grant you $0.01 each from the US and $0.005 for all other countries for both full and partial integration.”
Source: FAQs - StartApp
So it’s actually $0.005 per returning user, no matter if it’s a full or partial integration (unless the FAQ is not updated.)