Increasingly I'm seeing companies consider web onboarding flows to a) avoid Apple's 30% / 15% platform fees and b) allow for campaign optimization post-IDFA. This isn't a bad idea! But there are a few considerations as these are constructed: (1/X)
2/ Background: how does this work? Advertiser runs in-app ads (mostly / exclusively on Facebook) that lead to mobile web destination. User goes through some web-based onboarding process, registers, potentially subscribes via Stripe (or other CC processor), and is forwarded to app
3/ I think the best examples of this come from Calm and Noom. Calm has been doing this for a very long time. One thing to note: the web onboarding is *exhaustive*. Users must prove intent before being forwarded to the app.
4/ There's obviously an additional step of friction involved in this onboarding flow: rather than the ad leading to the app, the web destination has to forward user to the app. Since the user has presumably finished the long onboarding flow, they're likely to make that leap
5/ But some wont. How do the economics of acquisition change if that dropoff is 5%? 10%? Keep in mind that you can't optimize these campaigns for in-app events: you're optimizing for a web event. So you either optimize for registration or purchase, both of which take place on web
6/ Corollary: this is likely impossible to do for apps that monetize via sequences of IAPs (read: games). Subscription apps are the most logical beneficiaries of this approach. You have to push the user from within the app to the web for purchases (again, friction)
7/ Some users won't want to make purchases on the web: they have their CCs integrated with the App Store / Google Play and are accustomed to making app-based purchases that way. Consumers also dont care about the 30% platform fee! So more users will drop off at this step.
8/ While web-based flows have obvious benefits, they are no panacea. Many developers may conclude that app-based acquisition + monetization is superior from a conversion rate standpoint to the web-based flow.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The black box inside the black box: Google announced yesterday the availability of its Generative AI-based creative tools in Performance Max campaigns. What considerations should marketing teams make in expanding total campaign automation to creative production? (1/X)
2/ First, dispelling two myths. The first: marketing teams view Generative AI as a novelty or a toy that is not yet practically useful. This simply isn't true: I've seen marketing teams that have radically improved their workflow with Generative AI tools already.
3/ Second, wholly automated campaign optimization tools like Advantage+ and PMax are naturally hostile to advertiser goals. This isn't true, either. These tools can present competing incentives, but many advertisers benefit materially from their use. mobiledevmemo.com/google-pmax-me…
The control exerted by Apple & Google over the consumer internet is often expressed in terms of content discovery / distribution & payments. But a more subtle and esoteric form of control is emerging: advertising attribution. (1/X)
2/ Both Apple & Google have launched native advertising attribution frameworks for their mobile platforms & browsers. These dictate how and, crucially, how accurately digital advertising can be evaluated, based on rules set by these companies.
3/ These frameworks have been introduced alongside, or as components of, privacy policies that were authored by the platforms themselves. Moreover, it seems that the platforms' privacy restrictions don't consistently apply to their own advertising products.
Meta announced changes to its Aggregated Event Measurement (AEM) protocol this May. Meta introduced AEM a few months after Apple revealed (but before it rolled out) the App Tracking Transparency (ATT) privacy policy. (1/X)
2/ AEM was initially modeled on Private Click Measurement, Apple's own privacy-focused attribution framework for web-to-web and web-to-app advertising campaigns. Meta stated as much in an early version of its documentation for AEM.
3/ But I noted when Meta first announced the changes coming to AEM that the reference to PCM had been removed from its documentation. I interpreted this as meaning that AEM would no longer be tethered to the PCM design imperative.
Yesterday, The Verge reported that Meta will introduce a direct-to-install advertising product on Android in the EU once the DMA goes into effect next year. Some thoughts on the efficacy of such a product and its impact. (1/X)
2/ First, I believe the DMA will be systemically disruptive (in the EU). It has broad implications for all "gatekeepers" / large platform operators, not just on mobile. To my mind, the DMA represents a fundamental reset on competition in consumer tech. mobiledevmemo.com/a-deep-dive-on…
3/ Meta says that its ad product will allow consumers to install apps on Android directly from an ad click, sidestepping the intermediate step of visiting Google Play. This has the potential to meaningfully improve conversion rates (and thus decrease acquisition costs).
Yesterday, Apple announced its new Privacy Manifests feature, which takes direct aim at device fingerprinting on iOS. Privacy Manifests will hold SDK publishers and app developers accountable for how user data is collected and utilized. (1/X)
2/ Apple explicitly stated in its blog post announcing Privacy Manifests that their intended purpose is to disrupt device fingerprinting to force app developers to indicate a legitimate use case for data collection by potentially non-compliant SDKs. From the post (emphasis mine):
3/ Apple's approach here is, to my mind, ingenious: by effectively segmenting SDK permissions from general app permissions and forcing developers to certify that SDKs are behaving in accordance with App Tracking Transparency, Apple places the onus of compliance on developers.
Apple seems to be saying that app developers will be held liable for the validity of SDK data use attestations through the privacy manifest system. Will a BigCo legal team be willing to sign off on data usage claims by a third party that it knows to be practicing fingerprinting?
I’d characterize this list of SDKs as “commercially sensitive.”