/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

Some subscription app developers suspect Apple is buying Google ads that send users to their apps in the App Store, to protect its cut by decreasing web signups

Apple is secretly buying Google ads for high-value apps to collect potentially millions of dollars in subscription revenue, multiple app publishers have told me.

Forbes John Koetsier

Context & Ripple Effects

The allegation fits a longer App Store push toward recurring revenue: Apple had previously encouraged developers to adopt subscriptions and paired in-app subscriptions with a more favorable 85/15 split after a year.

That model also concentrates conversion and payment inside Apple’s storefront. Concerns over Apple’s ad-tracking limits had already highlighted how a shift from external acquisition toward in-app purchases could increase Apple’s subscription commissions.

First-order effects

  • Publishers that say their branded Google ads are being intercepted face more App Store-originated subscriptions, placing the transaction—and Apple’s commission—inside Apple’s billing system rather than on the publisher’s web checkout.
  • Apple gains a potential acquisition channel for high-value subscription apps while retaining control over the App Store destination and associated subscription revenue.

Second-order effects

  • Affected developers have a stronger incentive to distinguish web conversions from App Store conversions and to reassess whether search spending is actually bringing incremental customers.
  • Google ad inventory for app-related searches becomes a contested acquisition channel when the platform that controls the destination is also alleged to be bidding for the same users.

Third-order effects

  • The episode sharpens the platform-conflict question: an app-store operator can influence discovery, checkout, and its own take from subscriptions in the same customer journey.
  • If this approach is sustained, subscription developers may have less ability to build direct billing relationships even as Apple’s earlier subscription-focused developer outreach continues to shape app business models.

The trend: Mobile subscription economics are increasingly shaped by the app-store operator’s control of both user acquisition paths and in-app payment rails.

Discussion

  • @mohamedmansour Mohamed Mansour on x
    Advertisement Arbitrage has been going on since the beginning. I remember when I worked for Ads, people used (not affiliated to the company) to buy Advertisements to crypto websites that have referrals. 1/ 2 https://twitter.com/...
  • @herf Michael Herf on x
    What you say in an ad is the beginning of a customer relationship—how you are perceived and to how people talk about your company. It's very strange for Apple to do this, and it's apparently without consent? https://www.forbes.com/...
  • @forbes @forbes on x
    App publishers say it's been going on for at least two years: https://www.forbes.com/...
  • @chetfaliszek Chet Faliszek on x
    Holy moly... as if promoting another app in the search for your exact app name wasn't bad enough... https://twitter.com/...
  • @carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
    Incentives are a thing of beauty. Apple runs Google ads for iPhone apps with subscription services such as HBO because they get 30% cut of the revenue when the user subscribes to the service from the app. That's an evil genius move. 🤯 https://www.forbes.com/...
  • @matthewstoller Matt Stoller on x
    Apple's behavior here is unethical, a kind of soft theft. But its ability to carry this out is a result of its own app store monopoly and Google's enabling of trademark appropriation on its search monopoly. https://www.forbes.com/...
  • @eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
    This is absolutely egregious behavior if true https://www.forbes.com/...