OpenIDFA, A Solution To IDFA-Related App Store Rejections, Debuts | TechCrunch

Today is turning into a data news roundup:

Background: “last week, Apple began to reject apps that were pulling the IDFA identifier, but were not showing any ads”

Appsfire is proposing an alternative solution. Called “OpenIDFA,” the technology allows for the type of tracking use cases that Apple’s ban could prevent, while still protecting end user privacy by offering built-in expiration that prevents the possibility of long-term tracking.

via OpenIDFA, A Solution To IDFA-Related App Store Rejections, Debuts | TechCrunch.

Google developing anonymous id for ads, or AdID, to replace third-party cookies

Interesting thing is that the word “mobile” is only mentioned once in the article.  The future is mobile and it’s dominated by the blocking of third party cookies.  A compromise like this makes that world more advertiser friendly, which benefits Google.

Google is developing an anonymous identifier for advertising, or AdID, that would replace third-party cookies as the way advertisers track people’s Internet browsing activity for marketing purposes

via Google eyes big change in online tracking for ads.

Multiscreen and the death of third party cookies

Come on guy, you can’t try to turn this into a positive thing:

So why is a cookie-less consumer a good thing? My favorite answer is that it enables us to think hard about marketing in the greater context of a multi-device consumer.

via Why Cookie-less Consumers Are A Good Thing – Business Insider.

I’ve talked a lot on this blog about 2013 being the year that multi-screen starts trending in our industry.  This article above is evidence of that.

The other options listed in the article are known solutions.  The most interesting yet non innovative in terms of tech are the cookie co-ops.  I wonder if someone can herd enough cats to create an entity with compelling size.

#multiscreen

 

 

SOURCE: Microsoft May Abandon The Ad Business Over IE10 Fiasco

Last month, I wondered about the current state of politics within Microsoft when their IE browser team announced they would ship the next browser with Do Not Track turned on by default.

Now, BI reports that Microsoft is clearly messed up:

Nonetheless, two sources tell us that times are rocky inside Microsoft Advertising.

An ad executive involved with the IE10 dispute likened Microsoft’s browser and ad departments to entirely separate companies. Indeed, IE lives within the Windows division — Microsoft’s core business, and a major source of revenue (about $19 billion a year) and profit (about $12 billion a year), while Microsoft Advertising is part of the Online group, which is on track to lose more than $2 billion this year.

The source told us that the disconnect left the advertising team in the dark about the do-not-track default.

“The decision was made with zero discussion or awareness by the Microsoft Advertising side of it,” the source said. “And yet by the same token the company has been putting them, forcing them, forward in front of the rest of the advertising world to back it, and that’s been tough.”

via SOURCE: Microsoft May Abandon The Ad Business Over IE10 Fiasco – Business Insider.

 

In Ad Network Nightmare, Microsoft Making ‘Do Not Track’ Default for IE 10 | Threat Level | Wired.com

Microsoft announced Thursday that the next version of its browser, IE 10, will ship with the controversial “Do Not Track” feature turned on by default, a first among major browsers, creating a potential threat to online advertising giants.

via In Ad Network Nightmare, Microsoft Making ‘Do Not Track’ Default for IE 10 | Threat Level | Wired.com.

This is interesting on so many levels:

  • Internal politics at Microsoft since they own web advertising businesses
  • IE’s role in a changing landscape where their market share is in decline
  • Strategic implications on their biggest competition (Google)
  • Power shift to media is can track intent without cookies (search engines)
  • Whether this announcement at this juncture is good or bad for DNT

Ultimately, I’m curious whether this means Microsoft is no longer making decisions like a monopolist (or a firm with a lot of market power).