
Search Ads - arturgrigor
https://searchads.apple.com
======
physcab
From their ad copy they say 65% of all downloads come from app store search.
If this is true, this is bad news for FB. A huge chunk of FB revenue comes
from mobile app install ads bc that was the only method large app developers
had to send users to their apps. I previously worked at a gaming firm that
spent $5M/month on these types of ads.

If App Store search is effective, this will swing ad budgets away. FB still
has all the demographic and audience info, but arguably none of that is
important bc all you want to do in those types of ads is attract users who
spent. Apple is at the top of the chain, they can do this better than FB bc
they have reliable transaction data and FB has to rely on properly
instrumented SDKs, then use machine learning to figure out who "might" be a
spender, then have the marketing person optimize those ads. Wouldn't you
rather just say, target anyone who has previously made a purchase in a game
and be done with it?

Another note. I once created a niche utility app that I eventually had to
takedown because as an indie dev it was difficult to rise above the ranks,
even if the apps above mine were super shitty. I'm going to resurrect that app
tonight bc for the first time this might be an effective form of user
acquisition. FB ads were terrible bc it is not intent-based and Adwords were
terrible because people don't search Google for apps then pull out their
phones to download apps (or search in Safari then switch to App Store).

~~~
CatMtKing
I only use the search when I know what app I'm looking for. Wouldn't that
would drive up the numbers artificially -- as I had the intention of
downloading the app before I began searching.

~~~
zbuttram
I wouldn't think so, not if they're saying a percentage of all downloads come
from search, as opposed to a percentage of all searches lead to a download.

~~~
hasbroslasher
But searching is the only way (sane) people find anything on the App Store.
When was the last time you browsed the store until you found the cool new app
you just read about?

Whenever I use the App store, I'm on a mission. But it's also a mission to get
free stuff, so maybe I'm not even part of the equation.

~~~
suprfnk
I agree. Whenever I download an app it's because I read or heard about it
somewhere else. Open the app store, head to search, type name, tap install.

I don't think I've casually browsed around the app store since I got my first
iPhone (first smartphone), around 2009 or 10.

~~~
dhimes
Me too. But I am skeptical of free stuff and almost always look for a paid
version.

------
staticelf
This is bad for everyone except Apples revenue and already rich app-makers.

First off, it's bad for the end user since app quality has nothing to do with
the amount spent on advertising. It is also bad for indie developers since
they won't be able to compete with big businesses. Most likely, the indie made
app you love will be harder to find since other apps will be shown instead.

This sucks and is a totally greedy move from one of the largest corporations
in the world.

~~~
Razengan
> It is also bad for indie developers since they won't be able to compete with
> big businesses.

Craig Federighi and Phil Schiller address these obvious concerns in this
candid post-WWDC talk:

[http://daringfireball.net/thetalkshow/2016/06/17/ep-158](http://daringfireball.net/thetalkshow/2016/06/17/ep-158)

~~~
staticelf
Can you TLDR it for us?

~~~
Razengan
Not a TLDR but from the transcript [1] under "On App Store search ads":

 _...how do you do it in a way that gives advantages to small and indie
developers, because it 's easy to imagine a system that didn't do that.

First of all, there's no minimum bid. So we don't set a bar, if you have a
very small amount of money, you can just do what you can with a small amount
of money.

The fact that we're going to work really hard to try to make relevance the top
priority, over bid, for why something gets shown. That the users are the
ultimate deciders of what gets shown, based on their clicks, they're a big
input to what is relevant to the search result.

The fact that we're going to work hard to try to police and improve the whole
metadata system if we find, as it easily could be abused to hurt [small]
developers.

The fact that — and this has been a hotly-debated thing — the fact that you
can do conquesting. You can use someone else's brand in your ad words that you
want to use. As we thought about it, that is more likely to benefit the small
developer than the big developer. Because the big developer isn't going to
pick on a lot of small developer terms, but a small developer can try to latch
on to a big developer's name. If I want to search for Angry Birds and your
game, you can. Right? And so we think that that can help them.

The fact that there's no exclusivity. So a large developer cannot say, "And I
want to be the top bid, and I'm going to spend everything I can to buy out
this term." There will be no exclusivity, there's going to be a rotation
there, and as that rotation appears, the relevance will help drive it further.

We're trying everything we can, and I think one of the best things is, right
now, once we're in beta throughout the summer, the downloads the users get
from the ads are real downloads to benefit the developer, but we're not
charging [for ads] during the beta time. So there's a chance for everybody to
get in and try it out, help us learn from it, and drive real downloads and
real business without any marketing spend._

[1] [http://www.imore.com/our-full-transcript-talk-show-
wwdc-2016...](http://www.imore.com/our-full-transcript-talk-show-
wwdc-2016-phil-schiller-and-craig-federighi)

------
georgyo
For many many years, the number one reason people told me why they used apple
products was privacy and that with apple I'm not a product. It's how they
could justify paying the high premium for apple products.

It would be very interesting if they get into the advertising business.
Harvesting data about my usage it and using that data to charge more for ads
that are well targeted.

It would mean that in addition to apple selling a product at a premium, the
users would also become a product.

Combine this with things like the disappearing head phone jack, and apple is
becoming actively hostile towards its users.

~~~
downandout
This isn't general advertising. It's only on the App Store and is based on the
keywords you enter into a search in the store. They rolled this out because
it's basically impossible for an unknown developer to get noticed anymore on
there. Apple haters will use any new product to criticize the company, but
this seems fairly benign and fills a need among developers.

~~~
jest3r1
Ahh yes, more fees for developers.

> it's basically impossible for an unknown developer to get noticed

They could improve the search algorithm to solve this. Perhaps redesign the
app store UI to better accommodate new apps. Or they could stagnate for years
and then solve the problem by charging developers more.

I'm not a hater though.

~~~
downandout
_> Ahh yes, more fees for developers._

Developers (including myself) are already paying these fees to Google,
Facebook and Bing in the form of app install ads. We'll likely get more more
bang for the buck directly on the App Store though, so IMO it's a win for
developers.

~~~
jsonne
Your media mix will likely shift, but you'll still be paying Facebook, Google
etc. as well. Btw take a look at Twitter if you aren't already. I've had good
results there.

~~~
downandout
Thanks, I will. I had always heard that Twitter sucked for most stuff...glad
to hear someone is having a good experience.

~~~
jsonne
Absolutely. Feel free to reach out if you want any in depth advice. (Email is
in my profile.)

------
the_common_man
This is...insane. The whole point of the App Store is to help in discovery and
I already pay a 30% cut for my app. And now they want to charge me for
promoting my app in their store. This should just be a built-in part of the
App Store story for the customers. This is why Apple customers pay a premium.
Instead Apple sees an opportunity here to make even more money off me / the
app authors?

Hats off to Apple. First, they charge developers to even develop for their
platform (though this has become free off late). They only allow developing on
their Macs. Then they take 30% cut of apps and also in-app purchases. And now
they want more money to promote stuff in their store. I don't know what to
say. I am sure this will be a raging success as well :/

~~~
HSO
> _The whole point of the App Store is to help in discovery and I already pay
> a 30% cut for my app._

Actually, the point of the app store was distribution. That's what the 30% cut
was for IIRC. And that's how they sold it, by comparing it to the 50% and more
cut that older, traditional channels took at the time of introduction. I don't
think they ever even thought about discovery, which would explain why the app
store has become such a mess in the first place!

> _And now they want to charge me for promoting my app in their store. This
> should just be a built-in part of the App Store story for the customers.
> This is why Apple customers pay a premium. Instead Apple sees an opportunity
> here to make even more money off me / the app authors?_

I don't think making money is the main consideration for Apple here.
Advertising _can_ also play a useful role as a market mechanism (keyword:
"price discovery"). For example, if you spend money to promote your app, you
signal confidence in its value proposition. Also, you might be more selective
in your targeting. Etc. So the money itself is almost incidental, what we
really want here is the information aggregation and surfacing function of a
competitive market, the most efficient matching of offers (app makers) and
bidders (app users) across an extremely heterogeneous collection of agents.

But it needs to be set up correctly (this is what all the mechanism design
literature is all about). Hopefully it is, but I suppose we'll just have to
wait and see.

~~~
georgeecollins
What distributor of software ever charged 50%? Retailers of CD-ROM games (when
they were a thing) and video games do not charge that kind of markup.

You are crazy if you think this is a way for Apple to do anything other than
capture some of the existing market of app ads, which has been incredibly
lucrative for Facebook. They have so many ways to get more information about
how useful an app is likely to be for you that they don't use, they don't need
another signal.

~~~
HSO
> _Retailers of CD-ROM games (when they were a thing) and video games do not
> charge that kind of markup._

Maybe not anymore but the app store was launched in 2008. If you look at the
percentage a writer or a band makes from a physical book resp. studio album,
50% actually looks very optimistic. Don't forget, there were multiple layers
involved, including shipping, wholesalers, retailers, etc. and everybody
wanted a cut. There's a reason desktop software to this day has a much higher
price anchor than mobile!

~~~
georgeecollins
2008? I started making retail software in 1995 and believe me in those days
stores often only took 10 - 20% of the retail price for CD-ROMs because they
drove buyers into the store.

My point was that "distributors" or retailers never took 50% as the original
post suggested.

If you believe that the reason desktop software has a higher anchor price
point than mobile is the multiple layers, please explain why the price point
on the Steam store is so much higher than the app store.

~~~
r00fus
But did retail press your disks and prepare your packaging? Did they provide
analytics?

Your Steam analogy is flawed due to selection bias - Steam is about games, and
games are more similar to movies than apps. People want entertaining content
(and a good amount) for that initial price.

Does Steam allow for freemium? What about ad-driven games?

------
AJRF
"App Transaction Data.

This includes historical information about your transactions in the App Store,
including apps you have downloaded and in-app purchases you've made."

Yuck.

[https://searchads.apple.com/privacy](https://searchads.apple.com/privacy)

~~~
M4v3R
Apple already has this information, so this is only putting it to use. Plus,
they continue below:

> Advertisers have the ability to select user segments based on this
> information when setting up their campaigns to guide the delivery of their
> ads. However, no user segment can be smaller than 5,000 people. No
> individual user data may be exported from Search Ads, ensuring that only
> aggregate campaign delivery information is available and no individual user
> data is ever exposed to advertisers.

So individual developers don't have access to this information.

~~~
cageface
So, pretty much exactly the same as Google Search.

------
ksec
I find it strange they prefer Ads as part of the solution to discovery
problem. Apple App Store Search SUCKS. And I have no idea why. It is not that
they cant do search ( Spotlight in Mac ), but they cant do search at scale.

It is also to get some of the Ads revenue from Google and mainly facebook,
where Apps install is a huge deal.

~~~
electrum
This was actually the original idea of pay-per-click search ads. GoTo.com was
founded on the idea that paid listings would be of higher quality and
relevancy, because websites that pay more are likely better sites.

The idea has some merit: you can't spam the search engine with completely
irrelevant ads, because users will click them and thus charge the advertiser,
but they'll quickly leave the site because it isn't relevant to their search.

Modern pay-per-click (PPC) does yield management and ranks ads based on the
click-through-rate (CTR) multiplied by the PPC. So if you create irrelevant
ads that no one ever clicks on, they'll stop being shown in favor of more
relevant ads with a higher CTR.

------
leppr
I wouldn't be too keen to pay for a feature that works only half the time. Fix
your sh*t before trying to sell it.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=app+store+apple+blank+screen](https://www.google.com/search?q=app+store+apple+blank+screen)
(Notice how the results spawn from 2012 to today)

------
amelius
This time Apple has gone too far. This is a move of greed and shows complete
disrespect for developers.

------
chrischen
Apple has terrible App search, so this is an opportunity for Google to provide
a better app search/discovery system so that Apple doesn't get away with
charging for ads to fix their terrible search and discovery.

------
kalleboo
If 65% of downloads come from search, why don't they surface their curated
collections (e.g. "best photo apps") when you search for "best photo app"?

------
on_and_off
Damn. I was disappointed but not surprised to see search ads appear in the
play store but now in the app store too ?

App discovery feels utterly broken

~~~
stuartaxelowen
Why does app discover seem broken? Don't people just search for the problem
they have and find solutions?

------
jfoster
This will be interesting. I have a feeling that once Apple get a taste of
sweet search ad revenue, they won't be able to let Google own overall search
without a fight. I know Apple have been rumoured to be working on a search
engine for a long time, but Siri aside, it never seemed to reach fruition. I
think this could give them some renewed focus on that, though.

------
palakchokshi
This is interesting. On one hand it discontinued the iAd product and allowed
Developers to go to third party Ad networks. On the other hand it provides a
better experience for the user by serving ads when the intent of the user is
clear and generating revenue off of it.

I think if Apple prices correctly it has the potential to reduce in-app ads
considerably at the same time increasing revenue for Apple because most ads in
apps are to download other apps and if relevant apps are served up via Search
Ads it could be a better business model than iAds.

------
slackoverflower
This is a huge opportunity for Apple's own ad network, iAd, to really take
off. Now that they have the advertisers who are willing to spend money and the
information on iOS users who actually spend money in the App Store, this makes
iAd much more valuable. Apple loves to control their ecosystem so having their
own ad network implemented in majority of ad-revenue-based iOS apps would work
out quite well.

~~~
r00fus
Yeah, except the part where iAd was put out to pasture:
[https://developer.apple.com/iad/](https://developer.apple.com/iad/)

"The iAd App Network will no longer be available starting July 1, 2016"

------
cmsj
Anyone else getting an error when saving credit card information?

~~~
Hbthegreat
This should instantly stand out to you as being a bad idea.

~~~
colechristensen
Why?

It's a credit card, you're not liable for fraudulent charges and you're saving
it with the largest company in the world (market cap).

------
omarchowdhury
May the best apps win. Amen.

------
hackaflocka
RIP Steve.

