My typo traffic issues with Epik and others

Started by Plan, Jun 21, 2022, 02:51 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

PlanTopic starter


I've been experiencing typo traffic or almost 0 from epik and other tried registrars suspect with my domains like 50 strong typos. What can I do if they are not top-level nor being helped but to expose them and ask for advice..

I have been a domain investor since January 1999. Finally founded paydirt in og wwwtraffic awaiting to monetize


In all these ten years, I have never burned so much as with the current "Epic vs Apple" situation. And to be more precise, it starts with the public reaction, and with the fact that for some reason no one notices an obvious and extremely important factor.

For some reason, many people think that if Apple allows developers to use their own payment cards, then:

30% of the commission will immediately go into the pocket of these developers;
many non-profitable projects will become profitable;
there will be a bunch of new games on the market;
developers will start thinking about how to make cool and interesting gameplay, and not about how not to go broke.
Spoiler: No, it will be the other way around. And in that topic I want to explain why this is so.

How F2P works
The gaming industry is very highly competitive, especially mobile F2P.

In retail, the buyer chooses a particular store not because it is cheap and tasty there, but because he has only three grocery stores in the block. And we have the Internet here, and the buyer can choose from tens of thousands of games. Everyone competes with everyone. I will tell you (extremely simplifying) how it looks from the inside in general.

First you make a project. Pay salaries (with all taxes) to employees: programmers, artists, game designers, testers, a cleaner, an outsourced sound engineer, and so on. Do not forget to pay for the room, electricity-light-water and so on. For several months you pay without getting anything in return.

As soon as the project is ready, you start buying traffic. A little bit first (soft-launch). Then more and more — ideally (more on this below). And the cost of buying users at some point begins to significantly exceed the salaries of employees. By the way, by that point, user acquisition, bizdev and other "serious" guys inevitably join the team receiving a salary.

Here important concepts come on the scene:

CPI (cost per install) — the cost of attracting a user.
LTV (lifetime value) — how much the user will bring you money during its existence.
ROI = LTV / CPI. Quite exaggerating, we can say that if ROI > 1.0, then you are working in a plus, and if ROI < 1.0, then you are wasting money.
LTV is primarily influenced by game designers, and the goal is always to increase that indicator. If LTV has grown, it means either the game has become better (GD well done), or traffic has become more relevant (UA handsome). If he fell, on the contrary.

As for the CPI, everything is more complicated here.

Cheap traffic may be irrelevant, have a low LTV and bring little money. For instance, you are developing a shooter, and the provider is driving a bunch of housewives aged 35+ into your project through advertising with fake gameplay.

Or brings you to the English-language game traffic from Iran. Both of them leave without paying, and even putting stakes (which, by the way, also increases CPI). On the other hand, in some cases it may be profitable to buy a lot of traffic, just to get to higher positions in the stores and thus get more high-quality search organics.

Traffic is a limited, exhaustible resource. The gaming audience in the world is growing, but not endlessly, and there is a serious struggle for each player. It is quite realistic to bring hundreds of players with good LTV and low CPI through a narrowly targeted advertising campaign. A thousand is more difficult. A million is very hard. A hundred million is unrealistic. The more traffic you buy, the less relevant it becomes — the lower the ROI.

Therefore, user acquisition is always looking for a balance between the cost of installation and the quality of traffic, trying, on the one hand, to keep the ROI at a level above 1.0 —
 but at the same time increasing the volume, buying as much traffic as possible. Because, of course, you can buy a hundred users and have excellent performance in terms of 1 player, but the income from that hundred will never pay off the costs of project development (salaries of employees, etc.).

In practice, this means that the ROI is kept around one. Once it grows, the company starts buying more advertising until the ROI drops back. Business development in that case is not an increase in ROI per se, but an increase in the audience that the company can afford to purchase with this ROI. And ROI = 1.0, in turn, means extremely low marginality of the business (i.e. companies in some sense are balancing on the edge between profit and loss).

Of course, there are other factors here that I ignore in order not to go too deep into the wilds. For instance:

the above-mentioned indirect attraction of organic matter;
usually LTV is taken into account not entirely, but for a limited time — for instance, how much money the user will bring in a couple of months, because the return on investment should occur in some reasonable time;
with ROI = 1, you cannot pay salaries to employees, so in reality the ROI should be slightly higher.
Now imagine that this is how all market participants act. For all, the ROI tends to one. Everyone squeezes every penny out of the user. Everyone optimizes everything. On the part of the game dev in each company, analysts, game designers, user acquisition, and possibly someone else are doing that at the same time. In fact, ROI = 1 is a constant, it is a stable situation to which the market will somehow come anyway.

Tell me: do you really think that if Apple suddenly stops taking 30%, you will get ROI = 1.333 ... (because 1.0 = 70% * 1.333), and these 0.333 ... will go into the pocket of developers?

No, of course, the system is self—balancing. The cancellation of Apple's commission only means that LTV will grow by a third while maintaining the quality of traffic.

The growth of LTV means only one thing: that companies will be able to spend a third more money on attracting users. To be more precise, those and only those companies that can afford to create their own payment system — that is, Epic—level giants - will get such an opportunity. But small companies of up to a hundred people will not be able to do that .
Once again: the market will no longer be.
There will be no more users by themselves. Epic will make more profit and will be able to spend more money on purchases. Small companies will not and will not be able to. Both of them (I'm not sure about Epic, but the latter are for sure) will spend all their income on attracting users (except for employee salaries).

This means that the share of Epic will grow, while the share of everyone else will decrease. Companies that are not able to create their own payment system will find life even harder, since with the same indicators per player, the size of their audience will shrink.

As Epic and other large corporations spend more money to attract users, the CPI will inevitably grow. Advertisers are also in the black, hooray! (only since when have we been rooting for them?!)