Yahoo CEO Bartz says that Apple's iAd network will "fall apart"
Yahoo's CEO might have been simply repeating what the WSJ printed in an August story. According to the businessman's bible, advertisers were seeing delays in launching ads because Apple has "kept tight control on the creative aspects of ad-making, something advertisers aren't used to." Ads were taking 8 to 10 weeks to launch, a timeframe that other networks were easily beating. Apple said that the wait time was well worth it for advertisers since the Cupertino firm delivered an interactive "app within an app" and delivered ads that did not require the user to leave whatever application he was using and launch the browser to see the advertisement. Early iAd customers, Nissan and Unilever, agree with Apple and advertisers says that Apple's interactive ads are 5 times as likely to be clicked on than the usual mobile ads from the competition.
1. JeffdaBeat (unregistered)
Yeah...because Yahoo! has been the pentacle of stellar business planning and advice...
2. nak1017 (Posts: 328; Member since: 08 Jan 2010)
I'm wondering how they collected that "5 times as likely" number... It sounds cooked, like they're counting accidental clicks.
3. VZWbamf (Posts: 61; Member since: 11 Oct 2009)
Steve Jobs is the Adolf Hitler of the business world. Apple is the Nazi regime of electronics. Granted, they make great products, and usually have good reasons for their overbearing control, but the ends dont always justify the means. Apple needs to be a little less Hitler and little more Mandella... Hahaha
9. ilia1986 (unregistered)
If it works - don't change it.
10. Hazel (unregistered)
One word: Kaizen.
4. hawk62 (Posts: 320; Member since: 21 Nov 2009)
Microsoft is the one in court all the time. They 'controlled' their stuff too. But Apple is the one everyone complains about. Apple's control almost ruined their company years ago. Now it might be what is making them THE computer company. Their market cap has surpassed MS. If you don't like apple's control, THEN DON'T BUY THEIR STUFF!!!!!
5. Lollipopjones (unregistered)
actually what nearly ruined apple wasn't the control but lack thereof. Apple used to allow third party "macs" and ended up not being able to compete with the third party companies that they were allowing to make their own "macs". When Steve Jobs took over the company again in the 90s Apple was being destroyed by those vendors . He yanked their liscensing and created a tightly controlled product and the company started to break its slump eventually becoming profitable when the iPods were released. Tight control has never lead to the demise of a busines. Its just like being open VzW is losing more money on phones since they "opened up" their network to phones like Android and hence why they are slowly closing down the OS.
6. phonedemocracy (Posts: 98; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
Hawk, your version of history is absolutely false. I'll shit a brick the day MAC OS surpasses Windows. Arguements can be made to which one is better, but market share is inarguably in favor of Microsoft. I might buy a Mac to look pretty and complement my beast of a PC, but in the end its going to be an accessory, not a "real" computer for me. Apple broke out of their slump when the iPod and iPod Touch took off. They continued it with their phones. Their computers are still the LEAST profitable part of their lineup, not including the iPad, which will take time to grow (if it takes off). The question in these articles is whether Apple can compete with other online advertisers. The statement posed is if their 6-8 week approval timeline for ads is worth a higher click rate. I don't think so, ads need to be fast. That's my opinion, and the same as the Yahoo CEO.
7. hawk62 (Posts: 320; Member since: 21 Nov 2009)
My version? really? thats a good one. Apple's market cap is billions $$$$$ more than microsoft. That is stock price stuff, maybe over your head. Apple also is big in the graphic world (guess they don't the blue screen of death). I have not owned an apple computer. so don't think I drink the cool-aid. But the ipod touch and the iphone I had are great. I bet the 6-8 weeks will be shortened and since the iphone is the number 1 phone PERIOD! companies will go alone with apple.
8. roscuthiii (Posts: 1712; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
The thing about stock price is it's a bogus number. A blurb in periodical by some anonymous executive can influence perceived value and stock price can go up or down. Get a statement from a top tier VP or higher and -BAM!- people can be popping corks of bubbly or slashing their wrists. Neither statement really affected production value, cost of manufacture, number of sales, or profitable revenue. That's the problem. It's just perception and people can be fickle. Playing the stock market is like playing at a casino in Vegas: the longer you're in, the deeper you get and in the end the House wins. I wouldn't necessarily compare Steve Jobs to Hitler and Apple to Nazi Germany like others do but there are surprising similarities. Germany [Apple] was in dire straits until Hitler [Jobs] came back from exile and through the charisma of public speaking and iron fisted control amassed a loyal cult-like following. They both even blamed others (Jews for Hitler- Flash, lefties, and atennuation for Jobs) for their own misfortunes. Germany [Apple] had very high production quality and momentum in which they quickly and decisively expanded the borders [market share and profits] from their enemies [competitors]. But that was only until the Allies [HTC, Motorola, LG, Samsung, RIM, Sony, Nokia, Google, & Microsoft] were able to consolidate their positions and manufacture equivalent or better weaponery [technology- namely Android]. So, how did that turn out for Adolph [Steve] and his Third Reich [Apple]?
11. Hazel (unregistered)
Apple is a manufacturer, not a network provider.
12. Hazel (unregistered)
The iPhone is certainly not number one. There are other phones out there that are better and but are open-source. And I guess it's all a matter of time before everyone sees that.