Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by neals 4444 days ago
They used to ask a million dollar minimum spending? That's insane, right?
7 comments

It is, Apple is terrible at advertising sales. I think they thought that would mean they would only get large branding campaigns (Toyota, Coca Cola, McDonalds etc) that would pay high CPMs and that those large advertisers would clamor to reach the high spending iOS users. It failed as hard as an advertising platform can fail, evidences by dropping the minimum from $1,000,000 to $50 and is still not gaining traction.
Initially it was aimed at big-budget ad agencies. The idea was that they could create polished little micro-sites that were launched from the ad, and wouldn't have to leave the app showing the ad.

In reality, ad-funded apps never really took off on iOS, probably due to free-with-in-app-purchase becoming a big money maker. And with the growth of Android, making a platform specific ad was not nearly as appealing.

No, it's perfectly reasonable.

They wanted to jump start the service with few select big clients, like Nike, Coca Cola, Disney etc.

For those kind of companies, 1 million for an ad campaign in a major mobile platform is small change.

Except that didn't happen and they had no ads to run on their highly touted network. If you want to jump start the service with a few big fish you sign deals with a few big fish. You need to have ads to fill inventory or there will be no inventory to sell.
>Except that didn't happen and they had no ads to run on their highly touted network.

Nope, it did happen. When they started it they had quite nice rooster of collaborating companies, and quite good conversion rates. At some point, they had 15% of the mobile ad market.

Plus, they didn't just go from 1M to $50 because nobody came to them at $1M. That was the inital price back in 2010, and just for the launch. Afterwars it was a gradual progress of opening the service and letting more advertisers in (went to $500,000, then to $100,000 etc)

> Plus, they didn't just go from 1M to $50 because nobody came to them at $1M. That was the inital price back in 2010, and just for the launch. Afterwars it was a gradual progress of opening the service and letting more advertisers in (went to $500,000, then to $100,000 etc)

Sounds like a roaring success!

>Sounds like a roaring success!

Or a gradual rollout.

Why assume their intention was to only catter to $1M customers and leave all the long tail untapped?

It's a high ask, but there's a fundamental difference between iAd talked about in this article and the million dollar commitment iAd they started off as. The original vision for iAd was branding campaigns ie-tv and magazine like campaigns. A million dollars minimum and from Apple isn't crazy at first glance. What they're focused on now, especially in this article, is CPI app installs. Totally different markets.
Actually talking about two very different products here. iAd banner ads, what the OP is talking about, are cheap and accessible.

The large minimum spends still apply to rich media iAds. Despite iAd Producer being readily available, the ads you create in it can only be used as creative for rich media campaigns. That requires a relationship with an iAd account manager and a minimum spend of $100,000 per campaign per region (as of last week).

That's pennies. Broadcast TV can be more than $40 cpm, often going above $90-100. Cable has a lower average which still exceeds the price of most online inventory.
Ya, crazy... Now it makes sense