Can Apple have its high prices and hold on to marketing data too? The success of the iPad — and its ability to get users to pay for newspaper and magazine subscriptions — has kept publishers beholden to the terms Apple sets for iPad apps. But advertisers want more data from their digital ads than they are getting, according to AdAge.

And unlike publishers, advertisers have a little more freedom on where they spend their money.

The iPad presents an interesting model for brands and publishers. But the high cost doesn't necessarily bring with it more information. And for advertisers that have become used to getting detailed data from their online purchases, that could become a problem. 

So far, publishers are pleased with the amount of time that iPad users are spending with their content. Conde Nast says that users are spending more than two hours on average with its Vanity Fair and GQ apps — twice the amount of time that readers spend with the print titles.

But iPad users are not the average consumer. The high price point of the new technology means that it is still a small niche product at this point. When more demographics start using iPads, there's no guarantee that they will acquire the same reading habits.

However, readers are spending more time with magazine apps as they get accustomed to the product. According to AdAge:

 "Vanity Fair's interaction times jumped more than an hour from June to July; GQ's jump was much more modest at only few minutes, according to metrics firm Flurry. Time spent with iPad apps also beat digital channels: Two hours with an iPad app trumps an average of 15 minutes on websites and 75 minutes on mobile apps per month."

But Apple is still being stingy with its data, as Brenda White, senior VP-publishing activation director at Starcom Worldwide, notes to AdAge:

"We have been waiting for any kind of data."

Apple reportedly charged as much as $10 million for advertisers that participated in the launch of the iPad. According to the Wall Street Journal:

"Ad executives say they are used to paying between $100,000 and $200,000 for similar mobile deals."

And yet, advertisers continue to flock to the device. According to Millennial Media, ad requests on the iPad were up 160% in the first month the device was on the market.

But that doesn't mean that such enthusiasm will continue. Interaction rates are great for publishers, but that's not the data advertisers are looking for. Adam Kasper, senior VP-digital innovation for Havas Digital, tells AdAge:

"People spending more time with apps than magazines is interesting, but it's not something that's going to make me want to shift budgets just yet."

Ads on iPad apps now reportedly cost between $50,000 to $1 million. AdAge's sources report that such commitments cost three to 10 times as much as similar buys on the sites of premium digital publishers online.

Apple has done an impressive job furthering and controlling the mobile digital space. But while the iTunes store has been able to monetize digital music and building up Apple's place within it, magazine and newspaper subscriptions are a different breed.

If Apple can get consumers to pay for subscriptions in the mobile space, publishers will be beholden to the way the company wants to share its data with them. But advertisers have more options as to where they spend their money. As Chris Allen, VP-director of video innovations, Starcom USA, puts it:

"So far the results have been strong in terms of traction. We're meeting audience-delivery estimates, but what we are still lacking is engagement metrics. We definitely need to take it further with third-party tracking."

Meghan Keane

Published 9 August, 2010 by Meghan Keane

Based in New York, Meghan Keane is US Editor of Econsultancy. You can follow her on Twitter: @keanesian.

721 more posts from this author

You might be interested in

Comments (4)



I bought an original iPad (WiFi version) and am now glad I did not spend the money on the 3G version.  They boasted and bragged about how you could get the $30 "unlimited" data plan with the iPad and then pulled the plug on that not long after the device hit the market, offering stingy low-data iPhone plans for the iPad.

I HAD planned on buying an upgraded 3G iPad next year, but now I won't.  What's the point of having a device that's billed as a multi-media device, when you can only watch 1 downloaded movie a month on it while on the road, before you run out of your data package and have to shell out $$$ for more??  They can have it... but I won't. 

Steve Jobs sold his soul to AT&T when he did his agreement, and while they can brag about how many iPads and iPhones they've sold so far, I can count a lot of people I know who specifically did not buy them because of AT&T's data limits now.  They ARE losing money.

almost 8 years ago


MD Guy

You seem to forget you have free unlimited Wi-Fi with that iPad. Most hotels and surely your home has fast Wi-Fi available. Why do you feel so angry that you didn't buy a 3G model for movie downloads? Makes no sense.

almost 8 years ago


Richard McDonough

Oh, waht nonsense.  

Advertisers will not go with the iPad, though it has a very desirable demographic?  What rotten analysis.

almost 8 years ago

Meghan Keane

Meghan Keane, US Editor at Econsultancy

Richard, If advertisers don't have access to demographic information and other data they get from most digital platforms, iPad ads aren't going to be that useful to them. Apple might offer up more data in the future, but right now it's very limited, even if the initial demographic is desirable.

almost 8 years ago

Save or Cancel

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Digital Pulse newsletter. You will receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.