News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B by GekkePrutser on Saturday February 05, 2022 @02:58AM (#30218868)
If you're so certain, it means you already have reliable data for attribution. Why do you need Facebook's tracking to confirm it to you?

I understand it's nice to have fancy reports etc but it sounds like you already know where your customers are coming from. And tracking is very invasive, in this case it doesn't really seem to add much value.

You could also ask your customers "where did you hear about us" for example. Perhaps you already do and that's the source of that 100%. If not you might even discover a way you didn't know of. Eg word of mouth, some obscure forum where your product was mentioned. As well as that it's a method where you respect your users' privacy.

Re:Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B by samwillis on Saturday February 05, 2022 @06:36AM (#30220137)
> If you're so certain, it means you already have reliable data for attribution. Why do you need Facebook's tracking to confirm it to you?

We were in unique situation with this one campaign where, quite right, we knew where our conversions were coming from as we were confident there was no other source. Within a few weeks we had other campaigns running and no longer could have the same level of confidence.

The point it outside of this unique situate of a new product only marketed on Facebook the conversion attribution on their platform is broken. This is affecting marketers decision making process and reducing the spend on that platform.

The interesting thing is we were able to see the affect of Apples change quite clearly. Most people are not able to see that.