I like the idea. It could shake up the whole lurker pool of users or fail miserably. Wouldn't it be interesting to have a community of users that are 100% engaged?
I worked at an oral surgeons office for a few years. Everytime we performed jaw surgery on someone who was in a fight, 9/10 times they also had a broken hand.
Apple wants to create a monopoly for advertising across the entire Apple product ecosystem. If they're the only company with install attribution across apps and devices, they can serve (re)targeted advertising to you on the Apple TV, your iPad, your iPhone, and Safari, all through the cross-platform iAD.
Agreed - app advertisers are playing a performance marketing game with their install ads. This change is going to make user acquisition more tedious in several ways:
- some networks will become straight CPC, which will be a pain in the ass to arbitrage to a CPI - there will be a lot of campaign monitoring required
- other methods of install attribution simply aren't as reliable. This will affect the eCPMs of in-app advertising that consisted of app-install demand.
Whats wrong with using the highly reliable IDFA for install attribution?
1) Allows the advertiser to know exactly which publisher provided the install, thus allowing for fair billing.
2) Allows advertisers to study users on a app-level to see which sources provide the high quality users.
3) Ultimately helps ad networks target more relevant ads to users, providing a better user experience and higher eCPMs for publishers.
You won't see any ad units that you don't like disappear - the transaction point for the advertiser will just be the click rather than the install.
This is only going to push the industry away from the heavily favored CPI pricing to CPC pricing.
It took the government to intervene into a very long running and prosperous "free market" to bring an end to discrimination, and nobody was making a economic case for it.