Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 579 posts

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#21

Post by danpalmer »

00000000005 wrote: post #15

Facebook failed to pay the big money to Apple that they should have been paying for years. If Zuck had been handing Apple $5,000,000,000 per year as google does, then Apple would never have kneecapped Facebook. Larry and Sergei know how the protection racket works. You pay your dues to the local mob, you get to do business in their street corners. What do google pay Apple $5b for? Ummm… to be in the search of Safari.…

What would that payment be for from Facebook?

Opinions aside, Google are paying for a thing, not just donating money. What would Facebook pay for? I'm not sure that them being a search engine makes sense, I don't think Apple would give up the position of iMessage in favour of Messenger.

(Disclaimer, I work at Google, but don't have any inside info or opinion on the Apple/Google relationship.)

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#22

Post by wizzwizz4 »

samwillis wrote: post #9

As a rough datapoint, I run a consumer targeted e-commerce site. We ran a campaign before Christmas were we were selling a new product that was only marketed on Facebook, we are certain that (almost) all customers found it though that Facebook campaign. Facebook was only able to attribute about 50% of the sales to the ads, it should have been close to 100%. This then meant that Facebooks estimated CPA was effectively…

> Facebook was only able to attribute about 50% of the sales to the ads, it should have been close to 100%.

Word-of-mouth exists. It's possible Facebook wasn't making it up. Did you use a Facebook-specific link in the ads?

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#23

Post by 00000000005 »

danpalmer wrote: post #21
00000000005 wrote: post #15

Facebook failed to pay the big money to Apple that they should have been paying for years. If Zuck had been handing Apple $5,000,000,000 per year as google does, then Apple would never have kneecapped Facebook. Larry and Sergei know how the protection racket works. You pay your dues to the local mob, you get to do business in their street corners. What do google pay Apple $5b for? Ummm… to be in the search of Safari.…

What would that payment be for from Facebook? Opinions aside, Google are paying for a thing, not just donating money. What would Facebook pay for? I'm not sure that them being a search engine makes sense, I don't think Apple would give up the position of iMessage in favour of Messenger. (Disclaimer, I work at Google, but don't have any inside info or opinion on the Apple/Google relationship.)

> What would that payment be for from Facebook?

To live.

This is Tim’s town and if you think you’re doing business and cutting Tim out then you’ve got $10b concrete boots coming.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#24

Post by scim-knox-twox »

nojito wrote: post #18
00000000005 wrote: post #15

Facebook failed to pay the big money to Apple that they should have been paying for years. If Zuck had been handing Apple $5,000,000,000 per year as google does, then Apple would never have kneecapped Facebook. Larry and Sergei know how the protection racket works. You pay your dues to the local mob, you get to do business in their street corners. What do google pay Apple $5b for? Ummm… to be in the search of Safari.…

How so? Safari hides so much info from google search by default. The money google pays apple is strictly for marketing purposes.

https://gizmodo.com/google-paid-apple-to-stay-out-of-the-sea...

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#25

Post by HPsquared »

dodgerdan wrote: post #7
friedturkey wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. Even with universal ad blocking on their platforms, iPhones are the minority worldwide and Macs even more so. Websites would just make sites painful to use for Apple users and force them into exceptionally expensive subscriptions (which most people won’t pay for) or onto cheap devices that allow endless ads.

Users of iPhones are many many times more valuable to advertisers than Android users.

Only if they see the ads.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#26

Post by danpalmer »

tromp wrote: post #10

> But last year, citing privacy concerns, Apple turned off IDFA by default and forced apps to ask people if they want to be tracked. It seems most do not: a study in December by AppsFlyer, an ad-tech company, suggested that 54% of Apple users who saw the prompt opted out. Hard to believe that nearly half of all people is ok with being tracked...

Also this is 54% of people who saw the prompt. The standard practice for this sort of prompt in products that are trying to _optimise_ acceptance is to pre-ask the user first, almost "If we asked you if we can track you, would you be likely to accept". So that's 54% of users who are probably ok with the idea of personalised ads or however the app pitched it, then go on to say "actually no".

Essentially this number is far lower than the total population.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#27

Post by Foivos »

00000000005 wrote: post #15

Facebook failed to pay the big money to Apple that they should have been paying for years. If Zuck had been handing Apple $5,000,000,000 per year as google does, then Apple would never have kneecapped Facebook. Larry and Sergei know how the protection racket works. You pay your dues to the local mob, you get to do business in their street corners. What do google pay Apple $5b for? Ummm… to be in the search of Safari.…

Then, why does google pay big money to Firefox?

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#28

Post by curling_grad »

peregren wrote: post #14
tromp wrote: post #10

> But last year, citing privacy concerns, Apple turned off IDFA by default and forced apps to ask people if they want to be tracked. It seems most do not: a study in December by AppsFlyer, an ad-tech company, suggested that 54% of Apple users who saw the prompt opted out. Hard to believe that nearly half of all people is ok with being tracked...

Couple of possible factors (with speculation) — Most apps nudge you to accept tracking before the dialog comes up. Probably influences some users - A lot of people probably don’t even read the dialog properly. - a lot of people who have apps like facebook installed are either unaware of the tracking stuff or don’t care

This. I saw many non-tech savvy people just blindly hitting OKs to whatever dialogs shown on their phones.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#29

Post by 00000000005 »

Foivos wrote: post #27
00000000005 wrote: post #15

Facebook failed to pay the big money to Apple that they should have been paying for years. If Zuck had been handing Apple $5,000,000,000 per year as google does, then Apple would never have kneecapped Facebook. Larry and Sergei know how the protection racket works. You pay your dues to the local mob, you get to do business in their street corners. What do google pay Apple $5b for? Ummm… to be in the search of Safari.…

Then, why does google pay big money to Firefox?

To avoid a competition lawsuit from the justice department.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#30

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

dodgerdan wrote: post #7
friedturkey wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. Even with universal ad blocking on their platforms, iPhones are the minority worldwide and Macs even more so. Websites would just make sites painful to use for Apple users and force them into exceptionally expensive subscriptions (which most people won’t pay for) or onto cheap devices that allow endless ads.

Users of iPhones are many many times more valuable to advertisers than Android users.

iPhone users spend much more money on Apps per user - but the vast majority of advertising is not for apps. It's to buy real things.

Android Users spend similar amounts as iOS users on everything besides apps.

Even in-app purchases for games isn't "many many times more" - it's close to 2x.

Post reply on HN