Some questions about how the UMP SDK works on iOS

[astrovicApps]

Hi, I have two questions:

1)

On Funding Choices I created the TCF and ATT messages for an app.

- If I enable both messages, only the TCF form is displayed, and after I click Confirm or Submit, the iOS ATT alert appears directly, without showing the ATT message I created on Funding Choices.

- If on Funding Choices I disable the TCF message, the customized ATT message appears correctly, before the iOS ATT alert.

This is how it should work normally? Or is there some problem?

2)

When UMP Consent dialog appears, if I click on Manage Options and then on Submit, no ads appear, even if I manually enable all switches. Is this a bug?

My app is free, if user doesn't want to see ads, I want to show an in app-purchase option to buy the app and disable ads.

Actually the user can disable the ads and use the app for free, and the developer earns nothing.

I believe that the UMP SDK should provide a system to know the consents chosen by the user, otherwise it doesn't make much sense to use it for AdMob.

Thanks

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi there,

The ATT message only comes up if there's no TCF message, the TCF message is more comprehensive, so there's no need for the ATT message when there's a TCF message available. Besides, to show 3 messages in a row may not be good UX. Usually, the ATT message will show once upon install outside the EU area.

Regarding pressing "submit" and no ads show, if you scroll to the bottom of the data preferences screen and tap on "Vendor preferences" and agree to Google as a vendor you may see ads. You will see test ads if you agree to the "Store and/or access information on a device" and you agree to Google as a vendor.

I will raise with my team your request to determine consent given by user so that you can implement a paywall. You may monitor our blog for an update.

Regards,

Aryeh Baker Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2GHg4k:ref

[astrovicApps]

Well Aryeh, thanks for the clarification on how the custom message works before ATT.

Regarding the second question, so there can be a total of 3 windows:

-1 Confirm / Manage options

-2 Manage options / Vendor preferences

-3 Vendor preferences

If in window 1 I choose Confirm, the user automatically confirms windows 2 and 3.

But if instead I go to window 2 and enable all consents and submit, wouldn't it be coherent to automatically confirm all consents of window 3 (as happens in window 1)?

If instead the user decides to also open window 3 (Vendor preferences), in that case all consents should be manually selected. I think it would be more linear that way.

Regards

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi AstrovicApps,

Thank you for the response back. In looking over the previous responses as well as the various conversations that we have had regarding this. At the present moment, with the way the system is setup, we would not be accessing previous settings. Also due to various other reasons at the moment. We do not have any plans to go back and pull the consent and have it populate back to the previously entered choices. But know that this is something that we are always talking about. Also the other thing we would suggest, is that if you can show a loss in revenue that is significant with this behavior it would help to reaffirm the need to look into this more.

Regards,

William Pescherine Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2GHg4k:ref

[astrovicApps]

Hi William,

maybe I didn't quite express what I meant.

The UMP SDK can show these three windows attached below.

If the user in WIN 1 clicks Consent, WIN 2 and WIN 3 are not shown, so the user automatically confirms all consents.

If the user in WIN 1 clicks Manage options, and enables all consents in WIN 2 and clicks Submit, shouldn't that automatically enable all consents in WIN 3 (which is not shown)?

    

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi there,

Thank you for further clarifying your question that if user presses submit on 2nd form why can't the 3rd form be considered consented to? This forum can only assist implementing the SDK into apps and policy questions are out of scope. I can point you Funding Choices Help where it states how the UMP SDK must also comply with the IAB Europe Transparency & Consent Framework policies (more information here).

Regards,

Aryeh Baker Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2GHg4k:ref

[astrovicApps]

Thanks for the clarifications.

This is one more reason why it would be advisable for the SDK to give the possibility to know the choices made by the user, so as to be able to decide which services to offer (for example the purchase of the app to remove the ads, in case in which the user has denied consent).

Regards

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor Prod]

Hi,

your request to determine consent given by user so that you can implement a paywall has been raised to my team already. You may monitor our blog for an update.

[Alessandro Genco]

In my case I got an error also if I used the code on the documentation, so that the message isn't shown to the user...

Anyone could help me please?

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi Alessandro,

Thank you for reaching out to us. We would ask if you can give us more of a description of what is happening  or the code that you used. If you can share with us a simple sample app that we can look at with steps to replicate the issue would help us in looking more into this for you.

Regards,

William Pescherine Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2GHg4k:ref