4 ms·
The lesson here to me is simple. If you do not have an email address, you have not 'acquired' a user. If they had email addresses, they could have focused on se
by OoTheNigerian 14y ago
The lesson here to me is simple. If you do not have an email address, you have not 'acquired' a user. If they had email addresses, they could have focused on sending out emails while trying to seek other platforms to develop for.
As for the people offended about AppGratis' business model. Can you explain the difference between it and Groupon? Or any super bowl ad? It is wrong for someone to have money to promote their apps?
- querulous 14y agoi'm not offended by AppGratis' business model but i am offended by the notion that Apple are in the wrong for cracking down on paid installs. AppGratis can do whatever they want but they shouldn't expect Apple's support
- piyush_soni 14y agoBut the fact is that there are a huge number of other famous applications which do that and still not banned, it looks like a selective ban - and that has become kind of an Apple culture now.
- tayome 14y agoagreed, it's Tapjoy's story repeating again http://www.tuaw.com/2011/04/19/apple-banning-pay-per-install.. http://www.tuaw.com/2011/04/19/apple-banning-pay-per-install.... ok, Appgratis was "curating" the apps, and their reviews were quite funny sometimes, but still, their business model was not "editorial", you need to pay to get reviewed. And why would you do that? Well...to boost your rankings within the App Store. With that developer/advertiser money Appgratis can then do their own paid promotion to acquire more downloads, then go back with an even bigger claim to advertisers/developers and resell that inventory. This is basically an arbitrage model and i can understand why Apple wouldn't like that. Anyway, they've got $13M to pivot, so they should be fine.