GamesBeat

Tapjoy says Apple has banned lucrative pay-per-install apps

Mobile app distribution service Tapjoy said today that a number of its developers have found that Apple has rejected their apps because they were running incentivized app installations, where one app encourages users to download another app as a kind of advertising promotion.

Apple hasn’t commented yet. Mihir Shah, chief executive of Tapjoy in San Francisco, said that the company’s developers found out over the weekend that Apple was rejecting their new pay-per-install apps and updated apps because of Apple’s concerns about whether the apps violated one of the company’s app store rules. In a pay-per-install app, a user is encouraged through an incentive to install another app. The developer of the app that gets installed shares revenue with the original app that steered the user in the first place, so it is a kind of advertising program. And it has been a lucrative one at that.

But when Apple tweaked the way it calculates App Store rankings, it also changed its stance on pay-per-install apps, for a largely unexplained reason. Developers have been directed to section 3.10 of the Apple developer program license agreement, which says, “Developers who attempt to manipulate or cheat the user reviews or chart ranking in the App Store with fake or paid reviews, or any other inappropriate methods, will be removed from the iOS Developer Program.” It may be that Apple views the campaigns as unfairly gaming the system. Apple evidently doesn’t want its top App Store rankings to be manipulated.

The problem is that Tapjoy, Flurry, AdMob, W3i and Apple’s own iAds generate considerable revenue through pay-per-install campaigns. It isn’t clear why Apple would virtually shut down the businesses of those companies that have innovated on top of its platform. Shah said that he and other important developers have asked to sit down with Apple’s senior management and get clarity on the matter and figure out a “sustainable way to move forward.”

“The concerning part is the lack of information for the developers,” Shah said. “I’m hopeful this is about a misunderstanding of the model.”

Shah declined to say what would happen if Apple refused to make any further changes or rescind the policy change. Somehow, Apple seems concerned that advertising apps in this way — the pay-per-install campaign — is wrong. But this is the single-largest advertising category on the iPhone platform. One report said that 25 percent of all ad requests were app downloads in September, 2010. Now it is more like 50 percent of all mobile ads, Shah said. And the pay-per-install model isn’t really different from coupon programs.

“It’s a very big ecosystem,” Shah said, and many developers are using it. “The single biggest ad revenue comes from someone saying, ‘Try my app.'”

If Apple doesn’t have a great explanation for this and its motivation is simply to grab the revenue of pay-per-install companies for itself, it will likely have another antitrust problem on its hands. One big problem for Apple is that it does not get a cut of these incentivized app install campaigns. Shah declined to comment on that.

Here’s what Shah sent to affected developers:

As you may have heard, a number of applications submitted for update have very recently been rejected from the Apple App Store based on the fact that they were running incentivized app installs within their apps. This is something new from Apple and we, along with every partner we’ve talked to, were unaware of this prior to these notices of rejection. Like many application developers, we have reached out directly to Apple and look forward to clarification.

To be clear, there is no new Apple policy that we are aware of. It seems there may be a new interpretation of the existing 3.10 clause, which is a bit surprising, as Tapjoy, AdMob, iAd, Flurry, W3i and others all power various forms of app install advertising. Many of the brands that promote their apps via Tapjoy also do the same on other major ad networks across the mobile advertiser ecosystem, and all of the apps we promote on iOS are Apple-approved. 3.10 reads:

3.10: Developers who attempt to manipulate or cheat the user reviews or chart ranking in the App Store with fake or paid reviews, or any other inappropriate methods will be removed from the iOS Developer Program

Unfortunately, we believe much of this is caused by misconceptions around pay-per-install, the free-to-play model, cross-app promotion and their collective value to the ecosystem. We believe there are significant benefits to the advertiser (only pay for what you get), the publisher (monetize users who otherwise wouldn’t pay), and perhaps most importantly to the users, who not only get to discover new, exciting applications, but receive what is essentially a coupon for ad-funded virtual currency inside one of their favorite apps. All of this, of course, adds up to value for Apple as well, by creating a viable and thriving ecosystem.

Tapjoy has been and continues to be very supportive of the Apple app ecosystem, and we were not surprised about the Top Free & Paid rankings algorithm changes – we’re all for incremental changes that add to the user experience and keep the environment dynamic. But banning the largest and most effective channel for app installs has a significant and long-term negative impact on the user experience, developer innovation and advertiser utility.

As the market leader in application distribution and monetization of free-to-play games, Tapjoy is currently coordinating with a number of our developer partners, as well as others in the market, to get a clear understanding of the issues and to continue to partner with Apple to meet their needs, along with those of app advertisers, developers and users.

VB Mobile SummitThis April 25-26, VentureBeat is hosting its inaugural VentureBeat Mobile Summit, where we’ll debate the five key business and policy challenges facing the mobile industry today. Participants will develop concrete, actionable solutions that will shape the future of the mobile industry. The invitation-only event, located at the scenic and relaxing Cavallo Point Resort in Sausalito, Calif., is limited to 180 mobile executives, investors and policymakers.


Mobile developer or publisher? VentureBeat is studying mobile marketing automation. Fill out our 5-minute survey, and we'll share the data with you.
0 comments

Trackbacks

  1. [...] suffered a well-publicized hiccup when Apple cut off one of its lucrative businesses, banning the practice of marketing apps through a pay-per-install process. Apple viewed the [...]

  2. [...] incentives for installing certain apps. The company suffered a well-publicized hiccup when Apple cut off one of its lucrative businesses, banning the practice of marketing apps through a pay-per-install process. Apple viewed the [...]

  3. [...] of the mobile game market, there is a setback. Apple wounded its own market in April when it abruptly cut off pay-per-install marketing, where developers paid marketers such as Tapjoy to offer incentives to users to install other apps. [...]

  4. [...] of the mobile game market, there is a setback. Apple wounded its own market in April when it abruptly cut off pay-per-install marketing, where developers paid marketers such as Tapjoy to offer incentives to users to install other apps. [...]

  5. [...] of the mobile game market, there is a setback. Apple wounded its own market in April when it abruptly cut off pay-per-install marketing, where developers paid marketers such as Tapjoy to offer incentives to users to install other apps. [...]

  6. [...] of the mobile game market, there is a setback. Apple wounded its own market in April when it abruptly cut off pay-per-install marketing, where developers paid marketers such as Tapjoy to offer incentives to users to install other apps. [...]

  7. [...] mobile diversion market, there is a setback. Apple bleeding a possess marketplace in Apr when it abruptly cut off pay-per-install marketing, where developers paid marketers such as Tapjoy to offer incentives to users to implement other [...]

  8. [...] (like installing an app) result in revenue-sharing payments to the app in which those ads appeared. Apple banned this kind of “pay-to-install” app in March, and Shah said the ban had an immediate, negative impact on revenues as well as consumer [...]

  9. [...] (like installing an app) result in revenue-sharing payments to the app in which those ads appeared. Apple banned this kind of “pay-to-install” app in March, and Shah said the ban had an immediate, negative impact on revenues as well as consumer [...]

  10. [...] contrast, Tapjoy (pictured right), which offered pay-per-install marketing until Apple shut it down (it has now moved to Android) said at MobileBeat 2011  that its services in mobile discovery have [...]

  11. [...] contrast, Tapjoy, which offered pay-per-install marketing until Apple shut it down (it has now moved to Android) said at MobileBeat 2011 that its services in mobile discovery have [...]

  12. [...] of the mobile game market, there is a setback. Apple wounded its own market in April when it abruptly cut off pay-per-install marketing, where developers paid marketers such as Tapjoy to offer incentives to users to install other apps. [...]

  13. [...] Adler, CEO, Fiksu, speculated that Apple’s banning of incentivized promotions, or pay-per-install promotions, could explain the change. Under incentivized promotions, app [...]

  14. [...] Adler, CEO, Fiksu, speculated that Apple’s banning of incentivized promotions, or pay-per-install promotions, could explain the change. Under incentivized promotions, app [...]

  15. [...] Adler, CEO, Fiksu, speculated that Apple’s banning of incentivized promotions , or pay-per-install promotions, could explain the change. Under incentivized promotions, app [...]

  16. [...] months. User acquisition costs were as low as 94 cents back in March of this year. But then came Apple’s ban of incentivized promotions, or pay-per-install promotions. Under incentivized promotions, app developers paid companies such [...]

  17. [...] CEO Micah Adler speculated that Apple’s ban of incentivized promotions, or pay-per-install promotions, could explain the change. Under incentivized promotions, app [...]

  18. [...] it could offer users a credit for virtual items in a game if the users installed another game. Apple banned these incentivized installs in April, cutting off a profitable business for Tapjoy. Apple felt the [...]

  19. [...] aspect of the platform is serving their needs as well as the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple abruptly pulled the rug out from a lot of developers when it banned the practice of offering incentivized app [...]

  20. [...] aspect of the platform is serving their needs as well as the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple abruptly pulled the rug out from a lot of developers when it banned the practice of offering incentivized app [...]

  21. [...] aspect of the platform is serving their needs as well as the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple abruptly pulled the rug out from a lot of developers when it banned the practice of offering incentivized app [...]

  22. [...] aspect of the height is portion their needs as good as the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple during once pulled the rug out from the lot of developers when it criminialized the use of charity incentivized app [...]

  23. [...] if each aspect of a height is portion their needs as good as a needs of gamers. Back in a spring, Apple abruptly pulled a rug out from a lot of developers when it criminialized a use of charity incentivized app installations, [...]

  24. [...] aspect of the platform is serving their needs as well as the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple abruptly pulled the rug out from a lot of developers when it banned the practice of offering incentivized app [...]

  25. [...] aspect of the platform is serving their needs as well as the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple abruptly pulled the rug out from a lot of developers when it banned the practice of offering incentivized app [...]

  26. [...] the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple abruptly pulled the rug out from a lot of developers when it [...]

  27. [...] aspect of the platform is serving their needs as well as the needs of gamers. Back in the spring, Apple abruptly pulled the rug out from a lot of developers when it banned the practice of offering incentivized app [...]

  28. [...] needs &#1072&#1109 good &#1072&#1109 th&#1077 needs &#959f gamers. Back &#1110n th&#1077 spring, Apple abruptly pulled th&#1077 rug out fr&#959m a lot &#959f developers wh&#1077n &#1110t criminialized th&#1077 use &#959f charity [...]

  29. [...] have loved this model for its ability to drive revenues and downloads in a new way. This was until Apple decided to ban this kind “pay per action” advertising in March. Mihir Shah, the Tapjoy CEO fought this tooth [...]

  30. [...] you recall, Apple banned the lucrative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as part of Tapjoy’s ad network, which would place ads [...]

  31. [...] to Android after Apple burst down on a incentive-based implement program.If we recall, Apple criminialized a remunerative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as partial of Tapjoy’s ad network, that would place ads into [...]

  32. [...] you recall, Apple banned the lucrative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as part of Tapjoy’s ad network, which would place ads into [...]

  33. [...] you recall, Apple banned the lucrative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as part of Tapjoy’s ad network, which would place ads into [...]

  34. [...] you recall, Apple banned the lucrative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as part of Tapjoy’s ad network, which would place ads into [...]

  35. [...] you recall, Apple banned the lucrative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as part of Tapjoy’s ad network, which would place ads into [...]

  36. [...] you recall, Apple banned the lucrative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as part of Tapjoy’s ad network, which would place ads into [...]

  37. [...] you recall, Apple banned the lucrative pay-per-install apps, where developers could take out ads as part of Tapjoy’s ad network, which would place ads into [...]

  38. [...] way didn’t say who some of these third-party marketing services are. Some companies such as Tapjoy got into hot water last year after pushing marketing services that Apple felt were manipulative. However, Tapjoy wasn’t doing anything like what some of [...]

  39. [...] way didn’t say who some of these third-party marketing services are. Some companies such as Tapjoy got into hot water last year after pushing marketing services that Apple felt were manipulative. However, Tapjoy wasn’t doing anything like what some of the [...]

  40. [...] way didn’t say who some of these third-party marketing services are. Some companies such as Tapjoy got into hot water last year after pushing marketing services that Apple felt were manipulative. However, Tapjoy wasn’t doing anything like what some of [...]

  41. [...] way, didn’t say who some of these third-party marketing services are. Some companies, including Tapjoy, got into hot water last year after pushing marketing services that Apple felt were manipulative. However, Tapjoy wasn’t doing anything like what some of the [...]

  42. [...] didn’t say who some of these third-party marketing services are. Some companies, including Tapjoy, got into hot water last year after pushing marketing services that Apple felt were manipulative. However, Tapjoy wasn’t doing anything like what some of [...]

  43. [...] especially has been in the middle of the conversion about user acquisition because Apple banned lucrative pay-per-install apps, which Tapjoy had been pushing, about a year ago. Tapjoy changed some of its strategies to push [...]

  44. [...] services, direct chart manipulation is not the object, but ethical boundaries can be crossed. Tapjoy got into trouble last year after it started making a lot of money through incentivized installs — in effect, Tapjoy gave [...]

  45. [...] services, direct chart manipulation is not the object, but ethical boundaries can be crossed. Tapjoy got into trouble last year after it started making a lot of money through incentivized installs — in effect, Tapjoy gave [...]

  46. [...] services, direct chart manipulation is not the object, but ethical boundaries can be crossed. Tapjoy got into trouble last year after it started making a lot of money through incentivized installs — in effect, Tapjoy gave [...]

  47. [...] was rewarded for downloading apps) on Apple’s iOS platform (iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone). But Apple cracked down on that program, arguing that it led to manipulation of the iTunes App Store’s top-rankings [...]

  48. [...] a user was rewarded for downloading apps) on Apple’s iOS platform (iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone). But Apple cracked down on that program, arguing that it led to manipulation of the iTunes App Store’s top-rankings [...]

  49. [...] a user was rewarded for downloading apps) on Apple’s iOS platform (iPad, iPod Touch, iPhone). But Apple cracked down on that program, arguing that it led to manipulation of the iTunes App Store’s top-rankings [...]

  50. [...] şartlarında her mobil geliştirici gibi Apple’a bağımlı. Apple App Store kapalı, aniden kuralları değişebilir ve değişmese bile nedensiz kaprislerle şekillenebilir olduğu için, pek güven vermeyen bir [...]

  51. [...] really reflect real consumer demand. In 2011, Apple prohibited the incentivized downloads (known as pay-per-install), and Tapjoy shifted to Android in a big way, where there were no restrictions. Tapjoy calls its [...]

  52. [...] really reflect real consumer demand. In 2011, Apple prohibited the incentivized downloads (known as pay-per-install), and Tapjoy shifted to Android in a big way, where there were no restrictions. Tapjoy calls its [...]

  53. [...] really reflect real consumer demand. In 2011, Apple prohibited the incentivized downloads (known as pay-per-install), and Tapjoy shifted to Android in a big way, where there were no restrictions. Tapjoy calls its [...]

  54. […] включая улучшения и другие полезности. Однако, недавние действия Apple по предотвращению таких предложений поставили […]

GamesBeat is your source for gaming news and reviews. But it's also home to the best articles from gamers, developers, and other folks outside of the traditional press. Register or log in to join our community of writers. You can even make a few bucks publishing stories here! Learn more.

You are now an esteemed member of the GamesBeat community. That means you can comment on stories or post your own to GB Unfiltered (look for the "New Post" link by mousing over your name in the red bar up top). But first, why don't you fill out your via your ?

About GamesBeat