Why Blacklisting Isn’t Always Smart Mobile Monetization Strategy
Of all the choices mobile game developers have to make when it comes to monetization, deciding whether or not to run ads for competitive games seems like a simple one. With mobile user acquisition costs on the rise, retaining and keeping active users engaged is the main goal – so why would any game developer let their players see ads for games in the same category?
Because like with most things monetization, sometimes tactics that seem like “common sense” actually lead to less revenue. And in the case of blacklisting – or the practice of excluding competitive ads – that’s exactly that’s what leading mobile social gaming company Storm8 learned.
A True Monetization Partner — Not Just a Platform
Storm8 wanted to generate more income from Bakery Story and Restaurant Story, two older games within their portfolio that still had strong, loyal player communities. So they tapped us as a monetization partner, and integrated our Rewarded Video ad units into both games.
Almost instantly the team had to make some big choices – such as how often to show users an ad, what kinds of rewards to offer in exchange for their attention, and whether to blacklist competitors from appearing.
But Storm8 didn’t have to make these decisions alone – they collaborated with our growth and monetization experts to test, retest and test again, before finding the sweet spot of frequency, reward type and whether to blacklist (or not).
And at the end of the trial, Storm8 found that not blacklisting competitive ads drove more revenue from both games – up to 40 percent higher eCPMs – at no cost to user retention or engagement.
Hear more of Storm8’s perspective in this Featured Post on Gamasutra, but you can also dive into the full case study here. Interested in going even deeper? Reach out to our developer relations team through developers [at] fyber.com.