3 ms·

Why did you buy desktop ads to try to get mobile installs? Of course you're going to get a ton of impressions and hardly any actual installs: no one browses Fac

Why did you buy desktop ads to try to get mobile installs? Of course you're going to get a ton of impressions and hardly any actual installs: no one browses Facebook's desktop site via their android phone, and people on desktop aren't looking to install an app. Also, your Google ad is significantly better looking than your Facebook ad, and is also much more likely to be seen while people are on their mobile phones.

xxbondsxx 13y ago
Not to mention the complete lack of conversion tracking. He's measuring success of the mobile app ad by monitoring game activity WoW which is laughably unscientific. Facebook supports conversion pixels as well, so conversions through his signup flow could have been measured. Instead we just get a vague disappointment in WoW signups
- calbear81 13y ago
  If you install the Facebook SDK, you get to track conversions directly.
  - mathrawka 13y ago
    Only if you use a "partner" analytic service. If you use your own, or a 3rd party like Mixpanel, you cannot track where an install comes from.
- codeka 13y ago
  Developer here: you're right that it's totally unscientific. I never really set out to do a "scientific" comparison, because being an indie developer, I really don't have the time or budget to spend hundreds of dollars to find out if something works or not. So I spent around the same time setting up the Facebook campaign as the AdMob one (about an hour each, including the time to make the graphic), and for the time/$ spend, the AdMob campaign trounced the FB one. In terms of conversion tracking, it was quite unscientific, true. But basically, I can track the number of new players of the game per day. Normally I get a pretty steady flow just from the Play Store. With the FB campaign running, there was no significant uptick in signups, but with the AdMob one running, the uptick in signups was immediately clear. I didn't actually know it's possible to target mobile only with FB campaigns, and so I'll definitely be giving that a go. Anyway, my point with the post was just that for someone on a tight budget, with not a lot of mental bandwidth to spare for tracking ad conversions, AdMob was just way better value for me.
- jrmenon 13y ago
  Conversion tracking is definitely the norm in the app-install world. However what the OP did is sort of life-time-value (LTV) analysis which in the long run might give a better indicator on return-on-ad-spend. Post-install tracking is available now via various 3rd party tracking solutions. It does involve more up-front work on an app developer - i.e. find all the important metrics in the app that is relevant (sign-ups, various activities like virtual good purchases etc...), and track these metrics over time. There are quite a few flaws in the OP which most of the comments here have captured, and provided remedies to fix them, so I won't repeat them here. I look forward to the follow up here. Disclaimer: an ex-Admob engineer + currently working in a mobile ad startup.
jlees 13y ago
Since you can install Android apps remotely on your device via the web, desktop ads for mobile aren't that ridiculous.

xxbondsxx 13y ago

Not to mention the complete lack of conversion tracking. He's measuring success of the mobile app ad by monitoring game activity WoW which is laughably unscientific. Facebook supports conversion pixels as well, so conversions through his signup flow could have been measured. Instead we just get a vague disappointment in WoW signups

calbear81 13y ago
If you install the Facebook SDK, you get to track conversions directly.
- mathrawka 13y ago
  Only if you use a "partner" analytic service. If you use your own, or a 3rd party like Mixpanel, you cannot track where an install comes from.
codeka 13y ago
Developer here: you're right that it's totally unscientific. I never really set out to do a "scientific" comparison, because being an indie developer, I really don't have the time or budget to spend hundreds of dollars to find out if something works or not. So I spent around the same time setting up the Facebook campaign as the AdMob one (about an hour each, including the time to make the graphic), and for the time/$ spend, the AdMob campaign trounced the FB one. In terms of conversion tracking, it was quite unscientific, true. But basically, I can track the number of new players of the game per day. Normally I get a pretty steady flow just from the Play Store. With the FB campaign running, there was no significant uptick in signups, but with the AdMob one running, the uptick in signups was immediately clear. I didn't actually know it's possible to target mobile only with FB campaigns, and so I'll definitely be giving that a go. Anyway, my point with the post was just that for someone on a tight budget, with not a lot of mental bandwidth to spare for tracking ad conversions, AdMob was just way better value for me.
jrmenon 13y ago
Conversion tracking is definitely the norm in the app-install world. However what the OP did is sort of life-time-value (LTV) analysis which in the long run might give a better indicator on return-on-ad-spend. Post-install tracking is available now via various 3rd party tracking solutions. It does involve more up-front work on an app developer - i.e. find all the important metrics in the app that is relevant (sign-ups, various activities like virtual good purchases etc...), and track these metrics over time. There are quite a few flaws in the OP which most of the comments here have captured, and provided remedies to fix them, so I won't repeat them here. I look forward to the follow up here. Disclaimer: an ex-Admob engineer + currently working in a mobile ad startup.

jlees 13y ago

Since you can install Android apps remotely on your device via the web, desktop ads for mobile aren't that ridiculous.