Database Users

What's the incentive to the refund window change?

This isn't another thread bashing or complaining, I just don't believe it's as simple as "most apps are returned in 15 minutes, so will shorten the window."
Can any devs explain the benefits of the change?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

Increased profits.

I would guess to post cash flow to the devs.
Imho 15 is way to short for some Apps
from my phone duh

CheesyNutz said:
I would guess to post cash flow to the devs.
Imho 15 is way to short for some Apps
from my phone duh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 to that hell there are some games you download think you have the complete game only to find out you have to wait almost 15 mins while it downloads cause all you got from the market was a downloader

15 minutes may yield a negative effect--people may be more selective in purchasing, resulting in a reduced app sales...
I'm gussing lots of brains at Google thought through it, but it makes no sense to me. This may be one of those policies that they will later reverse.

The goal, I think, is to keep people from buying a game, beating it in 24 hours, then refunding the game. Personally, I think that Google should allow developers to specify a refund duration for their app. With some apps you need more time to decide than with others.

Sounds to me like a bait-n-switch... Most people won't be satisfied with some apps in under 15 minutes, and then it's too late to get their money back!

Ok, I know that going from 24 hours to 15 minutes is pretty drastic, the way I look at it is we're lucky to get a chance at all to return it.
Please tell me if I'm wrong but as far as my experience goes, apple doesn't allow refunds and neither does blackberry appworld or whatever they call it. At least I don't think they do? Idk about WP7 so can't say for them...
Sent from my HTC EVO 4G.

For me it dont matter. If I spend $.99 on a game and dont like it whatever. If there is an app that I think I may like that cost like $10 or something I will do my research on it. For the bigger apps it may slow down sales but the little ones I dont think will be hurt too bad.
My only gripe about the new market is how HUGE the new header is. It is annoying as hell.

Its possibly for the developers. It would be disappointing when people buy and to backup the app, then return without having to pay.
15min may be a bit too short tho, but 24hrs is too long. Plus is could encorage for more quality apps, than the garbage that's cluttering right now.

Apple devs only have to worry about one controlled platform. Android devs have to worry about compatibility with many variants in hardware and AOSP customizations.
If one cannot obtain a refund, it may actually reduce sales for the devs.
Some devs approach this differently by a free version and a fee-based key to unlock full features or eliminate ads. This is a good approach. It allows one to test for compatibility and efficacy without having to initiate a transaction.
I agree that it should be the dev's choice. He/She should be able to decide how to run their business...

Either more trial apps or potentially fewer app purchases.

snovvman said:
Apple devs only have to worry about one controlled platform. Android devs have to worry about compatibility with many variants in hardware and AOSP customizations.
If one cannot obtain a refund, it may actually reduce sales for the devs.
Some devs approach this differently by a free version and a fee-based key to unlock full features or eliminate ads. This is a good approach. It allows one to test for compatibility and efficacy without having to initiate a transaction.
I agree that it should be the dev's choice. He/She should be able to decide how to run their business...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this. I like the fee-based key to unlock full versions of apps, good business model imo.
But also, I believe Google is doing this to change the way some developers are profiting from their apps. I kind of think that they actually want to reduce the overall amount of paid apps in the Market. They would rather have apps with ad driven, imo. That is the Google way, they want eyes on phones and eyes on ad banners. That'll be the furture of the Market.
Of course, this works for games and social apps where you are actively using the app a lot, but it does little for the awesome apps that you don't actually interface with a lot.

Competition, plain and simple.
The refund ratio on Android apps is a big turn-off to developers producing mobile apps. It's much higher than iOS.

I think 15 mins is also to short maybe the devs making the choice would be better
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

josh995 said:
Please tell me if I'm wrong but as far as my experience goes, apple doesn't allow refunds and neither does blackberry appworld or whatever they call it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sad times. We use Apple's policies as a reference. Android should be better than that.

[Q] Making GOOD money on ads?

I've read some success stories online about devs making good money from ads in free aps, but has anyone here actually made a decent amount of money from it (i.e. per day/week/month) And if you have how do you think it became so successful? I've only made 59 cents in 3 days so far

I have an app that makes about $4-$5 per day, it has 40k downloads and 10k active installs according to the developer console. It's not a huge amount of money but it's enough to buy me a new phone every 6 months or so.
I think you need to have a large number of users to make real money from ads. I would need at least 100k-200k active installs to earn enough to survive on without a day job.

People have two types of apps on their phone. Ones they use all the time, and ones they rarely use, but want keep because they are important.
If your app is one that is rarely used, but is important (like "wheres my droid", or "car locator"), i would aim to make money off of a paid full version.
If your app is addicting and gets used all the time (games like angry birds), then I would say you can make good money off ads.
I have a couple games on the market, and they earn on average about 22 cents per thousand ad views. So if I made a utility app that people use once per day, I would not see much money.
The trick is to have good "replay value". If its a game with only 3 levels, and when the user beats it they uninstall it, this is not a good strategy for an ad driven app. Angry birds offers good replay value, because it takes hours to beat it

jgittins said:
I have an app that makes about $4-$5 per day, it has 40k downloads and 10k active installs according to the developer console. It's not a huge amount of money but it's enough to buy me a new phone every 6 months or so.
I think you need to have a large number of users to make real money from ads. I would need at least 100k-200k active installs to earn enough to survive on without a day job.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How long did it take to reach that many downloads?

About 2 months so far. I haven't really promoted it apart from posting on a relevant forum, so I'm sure if you started emailing all the android blogs asking them to mention it you would get going a bit faster.

[Analysis] Motorola cutting R&D costs and why that matters?

What it tells you when a company currently reshaping the market with their Android platform start cutting R&D costs, globally, from the company [Motorola Mobility] that they have recently acquired? Actually few things.
Source to the cut costing: http://www.slashgear.com/google-motorola-cuts-costing-us-340-but-theyre-only-the-start-04250360/
- Google's Android mission is not what it makes to the naked eyes. Something I have always claimed
- Google would want to pass on major potential financial losses to the other entities
- Motorola Mobility is no longer a reliable manufacturer in which consumers would want to purchase hardware from. If targets are not met Moto stops providing support, they have already strongly demonstrated that. With the smaller budget Moto has, it puts them in more fragile position compared to the other manufacturers
- I predict Motorola Mobility "most likely" wouldn't make Android phones in five years time which is in line with the end of five years promise the Chinese government got from Google to keep Android open-source in exchange to agree to the acquisition. No one has ever questioned why a Government has to request something that allegedly free and open-source already as a bargaining chip? This is something Google doesn't want anyone [General Public] to know.
If you agree with any of the points in above then you should realise Motorola Mobility now is an unreliable company to purchase hardware from which require constant software updates i.e. Smartphones.

Well... It just looks like Google wants to annihilate Motorola. Now they got their tech, they don't care about Moto anymore. They have a partnership with Samsung for a long time now, we can't expect a Motorola-made Nexus device anymore.

CSharpHeaven said:
What it tells you when a company currently reshaping the market with their Android platform start cutting R&D costs, globally, from the company [Motorola Mobility] that they have recently acquired? Actually few things.
Source to the cut costing: http://www.slashgear.com/google-motorola-cuts-costing-us-340-but-theyre-only-the-start-04250360/
- Google's Android mission is not what it makes to the naked eyes. Something I have always claimed
You say you have always claimed this, so you must have a theory as to what they are really doing?
- Google would want to pass on major potential financial losses to the other entities
Which "other entities" are you referring to?
- Motorola Mobility is no longer a reliable manufacturer in which consumers would want to purchase hardware from. If targets are not met Moto stops providing support, they have already strongly demonstrated that. With the smaller budget Moto has, it puts them in more fragile position compared to the other manufacturers
You have no idea what Motorola Mobility's budget is, nor what the corporate strategy is as they and Google move forward.
- I predict Motorola Mobility "most likely" wouldn't make Android phones in five years time which is in line with the end of five years promise the Chinese government got from Google to keep Android open-source in exchange to agree to the acquisition. No one has ever questioned why a Government has to request something that allegedly free and open-source already as a bargaining chip? This is something Google doesn't want anyone [General Public] to know.
Your predictions are based on personal assumptions and a complete lack of knowledge regarding corporate acquisitions imo, and the resulting restructuring that occurs, and nothing to do with the article you have put up a link to. Every major organization which is bought out by another, usually bigger, organization goes through major restructuring, layoffs, plant/site closures, and ultimately alignment with the corporate strategies of the purchasing body. Customer service and support always suffers through this teething period. I predict Motorola Mobility won't even exist in 5 years, let alone design and manufacture devices. They will either be stripped and sold off, or swallowed whole and devoured by Google, but then again, my predictions are also assumptions.
If you agree with any of the points in above then you should realise Motorola Mobility now is an unreliable company to purchase hardware from which require constant software updates i.e. Smartphones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cutting R&D costs doesn't necessarily mean an organization is going out of business, or stopping development. It can simply mean they have defined where Motorola was going wrong, and are adjusting for future R&D and NPI activities. If they plan on releasing only a couple of high end devices a year, why would they need a large R&D team. You keep the cream and trim the fat. Retain the achievers and get rid of the slackers.

CaelanT said:
Cutting R&D costs doesn't necessarily mean an organization is going out of business, or stopping development. It can simply mean they have defined where Motorola was going wrong, and are adjusting for future R&D and NPI activities. If they plan on releasing only a couple of high end devices a year, why would they need a large R&D team. You keep the cream and trim the fat. Retain the achievers and get rid of the slackers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Entities refer to those who are part of Android Alliance program for instance.
I have been writing about Android on XDA on many occasions, some were talk of tech-media months later. I have removed some content (in form of article) from XDA before in protest of a thread closure. I'm learning to move on from incidents like that now. You can search my threads from my profile.
I formed my opinion on Motorola mainly based on actual shortcomings in the past nearly two years that has nothing to do with their budgets. However, I have to remind you that Motorola had the money to give one individual person [Sanjay Jha] $66m and god knows how much collectively the executives received but Motorola, apparently, didn't have the money to hire contractors for six months to cook the ICS ROM for us. So I might don't know how much budget they have but for sure I know Motorola Mobility has no clue in "budgeting" plan.
It is well documented what Chinese government asked regarding Android remain open-source for the next five years. Google it please. Take my word for it, many things in this acquisition will remain secret anyway. Please read your own comment in the same section to see how contradictory you sounded.
I have never made a link between R&D cost cutting and Motorola Mobility being shut down. I haven't even said Motorola Mobility was going bust soon, you did.

I'm so glad Motorola split. I love Motorola hardware.
Sent from my Atrix 4g MB860 running leaked official Motorola ICS

Slymayer said:
Well... It just looks like Google wants to annihilate Motorola. Now they got their tech, they don't care about Moto anymore. They have a partnership with Samsung for a long time now, we can't expect a Motorola-made Nexus device anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think many of us were expecting a Motorola nexus device.
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium

CSharpHeaven said:
Google's Android mission is not what it makes to the naked eyes. Something I have always claimed
You say you have always claimed this, so you must have a theory as to what they are really doing?
Entities refer to those who are part of Android Alliance program for instance. So please explain where you get this theory of passing on financial losses from.
I have been writing about Android on XDA on many occasions, some were talk of tech-media months later. I have removed some content (in form of article) from XDA before in protest of a thread closure. I'm learning to move on from incidents like that now. You can search my threads from my profile. I'm not protesting your thread, and it makes no difference to me how much you have written about Android. I could write about knitting all day,but that doesn't mean I know how to "stitch one".
I formed my opinion on Motorola mainly based on actual shortcomings in the past nearly two years that has nothing to do with their budgets. However, I have to remind you that Motorola had the money to give one individual person [Sanjay Jha] $66m and god knows how much collectively the executives received but Motorola, apparently, didn't have the money to hire contractors for six months to cook the ICS ROM for us. So I might don't know how much budget they have but for sure I know Motorola Mobility has no clue in "budgeting" plan. We all know corporate big wigs get massive payouts. That's a given in any large corporation. Where do you get that Motorola couldn't afford to hire contractors from? I'm betting Motorola/Google have very good experience in budgeting. Companies do not grow as big as them without strategic budgeting, and a ruthless business sense. New technology is all about time to market............beating your competitor to release. It's never been about consumers, and this has nothing to do with budgets in the sense of lack of budget, but rather huge ROIC numbers of 25+% being required by greedy shareholders who will cancel NPI projects in the blink of an eye if they do not meet target costs of 60%-62% profit margins.
It is well documented what Chinese government asked regarding Android remain open-source for the next five years. Google it please. Take my word for it, many things in this acquisition will remain secret anyway. Please read your own comment in the same section to see how contradictory you sounded. I have not argued this point with regards to the Chinese government, but rather the 5 year part. I see it that they will not exist in 5 years because if they aren't making phones they have nothing to exist for other than development, and they will be wholly integrated into Google by then. If Google doesn't want anyone to know, then how do you know?
I have never made a link between R&D cost cutting and Motorola Mobility being shut down. I haven't even said Motorola Mobility was going bust soon, you did. Seems like your whole post was pointed at budgetary cuts, R&D activity cost cutting, and Moto Mobility not making phones in 5 years. Maybe I was incorrect in reading between the lines and seeing reduced budgets, job losses, and a 5 year life span. In any event, what you said does not reflect the article you linked to other than R&D spending cuts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anyway, I'm on my hols for 2 weeks after tomorrow, so I'm gonna go have a beer or three!

CaelanT said:
Anyway, I'm on my hols for 2 weeks after tomorrow, so I'm gonna go have a beer or three!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Back in March 2012 I started a thread with the following title: "Android a Fragmented, Differentiated, and Misrepresented Platform". I completed the first six parts taking me over 100 hours of work before I removed them which I have already provided the reason. I still have a copy of the original works. As you can guess by now, it would take a lot of effort just to answer your first question. I might complete the articles or use them as part of other future articles one day.
When others investing money in developing hardware for Android then Google has nothing to lose should market take a 360 degree on Android for instance.
You are assured bragging about something is not my style but I will go to the end of the world for what I believe in. Several parts of the articles actually covered the technical side of Android rather than the business model of it.
Sorry I can't make any useful comment about your fourth paragraph. I made a point and you turned into a very complicated matter in particular in the beginning of your paragraph.
I was actually being very careful to write Motorola Mobility wouldn't (most likely but not surely) make hardware such as smartphones in fives years time when it requires constant software support. The reason was Motorola Mobility develops other products such as Bluetooth headphones, TV Set Box, and etc.
It is my fault not citing from the article in the first place which was the following;
"Other impacted territories are Asia and India, with cuts in R&D spending across various locations in Chicago, Sunnyvale, and Beijing."
In my opinion the intention of Google to cut spending in R&D is far more important than what was being reported which was Google has realised even scaling down is going cost the company a fortune.
This is what wikipedia has to say about R&D
"In one model, the primary function of an R&D group is to develop new products; in the other model, the primary function of an R&D group is to discover and create new knowledge about scientific and technological topics for the purpose of uncovering and enabling development of valuable new products, processes, and services." -- Wikipedia
Even if Motorola Mobility uses both models that were described in above description one can say (as I did) Motorola Mobility or rather Google planned (might still be on) to stop or reduce developing new products or innovating new products/services/technology (second model). Obviously when R&D is scaled down then all the forces across all business processes also need to be scaled down otherwise, the business is simply will waste money.
Motorola Mobility stock share should lose values based on this report alone because clearly Motorola Mobility no longer wishes to be proactive in the very competitive market. From consumers point of view this should be a further warning that things are not promising at all.
Enjoy your long holiday and see you around on XDA soon.

I remember the article you wrote because I read it. Why you had to remove it I have no idea, and I am disappointed that you did.
<edit> Went back and looked through that thread. And here I thought I could be a royal arse at times! XDA can be a very rough place sometimes.
That being said, I manage R&D activities in a very large global company which is 85% focused on R&D and NPI, with very little manufacturing occurring other than with 3rd party vendors in low cost countries.
All arguments aside, I was pushing for an explanation of your comments which did not seem to relate much to the article you linked, or the thread title. Your last post explains your reasoning behind your comments much better.
Cheers!

Software development costs could be being cut as Google may be moving Motorola onto having a pure android experience. As Google has its own devs, why get moto to change anything?
Sent from my MB860

tomh235 said:
Software development costs could be being cut as Google may be moving Motorola onto having a pure android experience. As Google has its own devs, why get moto to change anything?
Sent from my MB860
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your inputs. I have to disagree with your point on pure Android experience which you must meant Nexus phones. I'm glad you mentioned that since I had few things to say about it.
As it has been reported Google is expanding its Nexus program to allow multiple manufacturers to release their own Nexus version. A careful examination would reveal a brand in Android ecosystem only would be distinguishable by differentiation i.e. Home Launchers and features. Many Android users would agree that they often miss features when move on to a pure Android experience.
Now here is my take on the Nexus program. Not many people noted that the Nexus program has brought a huge financial reward to the manufacturers who participated in it by actually establishing themselves in Android market generating more revenue from selling their other product lines. Samsung is very good example, while their Nexus range did well but SGII, GNote (probably equal to GNexus), and SGIII did far better. HTC only has itself to blame for not taking advantage of the opportunity and even though the following year of their Nexus release they did well but they went down the hill by releasing handsets that were aggressively designed for profits only i.e. the Sensation range.
The same pattern can also be observed in Google Store where developers participate in Google's promotional programs where they reduce their prices for a period of time but end up with significant revenue increase and jumping ranking position in application listings.
Now that this marketing method has been proven to work with Android consumers it would be feasible for other manufacturers to join the Nexus program, at same time. I have my reservations about the impact of more than two manufacturers participating in the Nexus program.
What concerns me the most about Nexus program is its hidden agenda. For one, Google has been trying to make Cloud services as a vital entity in their mobile platform. The obsession with cloud services is a worrying factor especially when all parties (i.e., Google, Manufacturers, and Network Operators) involved wanting your data to be stored on their servers. Nexus phones share one feature in common and that is the ommission of the SD-Card port. The LG Optimus Nexus has been said not to have the SD-Card port either. Please remember, if corporates fail to predict the consumers behaviour correctly then they would attempt to introduce that behaviour to the consumers eventually.
I know Google enough (observations) to know they don't rush into things for not being noticed. While they have good alliances with their business partners but they can seek other agendas at same time. In the world of politics it is known as "Parallel Politics". Google is the most involved tech company in the world with global politic activities. I'm willing to say, their involvement is almost in the same level as the USA government in many terms.
In my opinion the lack of upgrades would be in Google's benefits since they own and run the Nexus program itself and in our case (Atrix and Proton owners) they own Motorola anyway. Motorola's Patents was a good reasoning point, for general public, to acquire Motorola but I have my feelings it was more than the patents, keeping my eyes on this anyway.
Sorry, I never meant to write this much but now that I did I would like also to expose the $100 offer program from Motorola. A publicity stunt that would look Motorola to come across considerate when it is hardly going to cost them anything in fact. Here are my reasons;
- Upset Motorola users wouldn't want anything to do with Motorola anymore therefore the $100 is worthless
- Many users have claimed they can get more money by selling their phones. The $100 offer therefore is worthless.
- Considering the above point Motorola in fact is ripping Motorola users twice over. Remember you have to give up your phone to quality for $100
- Virtually all Network Operators have recycling-program where they buy back phones. Therefore Motorola did not offer anything new to the ripped off customers
- A cheap attempt by Motorola to keep consumers on their brand to shift more new phones, in numbers, for future financial reports
Update:
Droid-life just reported the following; "Server Logs Hint at Motorola Nexus Tablet and Phone?"
Source: http://www.droid-life.com/2012/10/05/server-logs-hint-at-motorola-nexus-tablet-and-phone/
Busy time for Nexus Program this year where potentially five manufacturers (Motorola, Asus, HTC, Samsung, LG) will have Nexus devices out before the year is out.

Is Ouya a Failure?

Can Ouya be called a failure? Ouya survives today and continues to grow. One Thousand plus games and more added all the time. The company is hiring. Agreements with Xiaomi and Alibaba to extend their content and financing.
I personally find my collection of games on Ouya to be a nice respite from my Ps4. Then there is the fact that this is a place where inspiring developers can publish their work never ment to compete with Sony or Microsoft. So how does this fit the definition of a Failure?

If change was put into motion, not a failure.
wastate2014 said:
Can Ouya be called a failure? Ouya survives today and continues to grow. One Thousand plus games and more added all the time. The company is hiring. Agreements with Xiaomi and Alibaba to extend their content and financing.
I personally find my collection of games on Ouya to be a nice respite from my Ps4. Then there is the fact that this is a place where inspiring developers can publish their work never ment to compete with Sony or Microsoft. So how does this fit the definition of a Failure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe to some degree a lot of individuals had a set of unrealistic goals and expectations in their minds. Ignoring all the information and facts that were presented to them. This could stem from being downplayed by premium vendors and critics . Using their negative comments to influence the easily impressionable providing a false image of a product that wasn't yet released at the time.
If people look back at it now and analyze it as a cultural and social event, I'm sure there could be many points that could be made at how this product gained momentum to an old idea that brought the possibility of change to an industry. Clearly many were opposed to the idea of change because it brought along choices and segmented control.
I believe it is still happening but the Ouya definitely put the possible change to the market in the spotlight, and made some people jump. Even if for a moment.

Capt.Obvious said:
I believe to some degree a lot of individuals had a set of unrealistic goals and expectations in their minds. Ignoring all the information and facts that were presented to them. This could stem from being downplayed by premium vendors and critics . Using their negative comments to influence the easily impressionable providing a false image of a product that wasn't yet released at the time.
If people look back at it now and analyze it as a cultural and social event, I'm sure there could be many points that could be made at how this product gained momentum to an old idea that brought the possibility of change to an industry. Clearly many were opposed to the idea of change because it brought along choices and segmented control.
I believe it is still happening but the Ouya definitely put the possible change to the market in the spotlight, and made some people jump. Even if for a moment.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said I just always hear people bash Ouya and have to wonder if they have even owned one? Ouya could stand to be more interactive with its userbase particularly the game customers. I see a good support structure for devs but few regular gamers?
Ouya corporate needs to come out of the closet and let it's users know what is going on? I like all the recent improvements but have no news from them for the future so you sit idle month to month wondering if they are even in business? Then there is the biggest mystery of all is the current console one of a kind or will there indeed be a Ouya 2. I hope they conduct themselves better in China or they truly will be finished? Love the product but the management needs a complete house cleaning.

I hopped on Ouya late in the game and never even heard about the hype. All I know is that Kodi and Plex work great on it and I've played through a few really fun games on it. I bought it for $80. How could I or anyone be disappointed with it unless they thought it was going to be an $80 ps3 or something? Maybe I had more realistic expectations because I've been on android phones for so long, including various tegra chipsets. For what it is, I'm still mostly impressed haha.

Airpush Dropped their rates

Airpush was not bad alternative for admob, however in the best days Airpush was giving 10% of the admob income .. I compared that for years with the same apps after getting banned from admob.
Couple of weeks ago it got even worse when Airpush dropped their rates dramatically by 90%.
So with them one day you make $100 daily, next day your income is $10.
I contacted them and they confirmed that they dropped their rates, just like that.
Huge drop
Big disappointment
Bye Bye Airpush
====
If any have any better alternative, please share.

This entire thread feels like a plug for Supersonic to me. I use Airpush and they recently reduced rates for one specific type of integration, not across the board. Agreed they used to be much more profitable in years past, but they are still very competitive compared to others.

Hello ahmedabdrapo,
My name is Gerard Ngwang and I’m an official representative from Airpush. Thank you for being a great partner of Airpush. At the end of July, the competitive rates for our Bundle 2 SDK, which is for app monetization in alternative stores, were reduced. Please note that the change was only for one of the monetization solutions currently utilized by Airpush publishers. This reduction in rates, although significant for some publishers, still remains highly competitive in the market.
At Airpush, taking care of publishers and working on continuous profitability is a goal taken seriously. Besides Bundle 2 SDK, other inapp monetization solutions such as Bundle 1, Standard & Universal SDKs could be a viable alternative. We also offer very competitive solutions for mWeb. We can definitely work together to see ways of getting back your income on track.
If you or any other member of the forum would like to discuss such issues of rate drop or drop income, or would simply like to try Airpush monetization solutions, please feel free to PM me or email me directly at [email protected].
Look forward to working with you and developing an even greater partnership.
Regards,
Gerard
JonathanXua said:
This entire thread feels like a plug for Supersonic to me. I use Airpush and they recently reduced rates for one specific type of integration, not across the board. Agreed they used to be much more profitable in years past, but they are still very competitive compared to others.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ahmedabdrapo said:
Airpush was not bad alternative for admob, however in the best days Airpush was giving 10% of the admob income .. I compared that for years with the same apps after getting banned from admob.
Couple of weeks ago it got even worse when Airpush dropped their rates dramatically by 90%.
So with them one day you make $100 daily, next day your income is $10.
I contacted them and they confirmed that they dropped their rates, just like that.
Huge drop
Big disappointment
Bye Bye Airpush
====
If any have any better alternative, please share.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Thought I should add that if you are looking into video advertisements, to look in Teads SDK, currently in beta testing with HUGE publisher signing bonus...

Use Adsota
Airpush's reduction of rate is such a huge let down.
I think you can switch to Adsota. its eCPMs is very decent. You can find it at "ads.appota"