Deconstructor of Fun•March 27, 2026•10 min read•1 views
Written by Josh Chandley , COO at WildCard and host of the UA Monthly podcast , where mobile marketing and user acquisition strategies take center stage. The mobile ecosystem is experiencing some massive shifts this month. Together with Michail Katkoff , Josh Chandley and John Wright , we cover Unity Vector's D28 campaign, Google's fee cut impact on growth, AppLovin's plans to build a social network & more.
⬇ Networks See Days, Publishers Need Years Every ad network in mobile is getting better at the same thing: Optimizing for what it can see. That means measuring revenue between seven and twenty-eight days from installs. The network watches what happens in that window, learns which users convert, and optimizes toward more of them.
For e-commerce, that works. Someone buys, subscribes, or doesn't. The network sees the full picture in days.
For games, it's a structural mismatch. Mobile games don't sell a single purchase. They build multi-year relationships.
The value of a user acquired today won't be fully understood for months, sometimes years. Two users with the same d28 ARPU are valued by networks equally, even if one has already churned. The bidders aren’t designed to care.
They’re designed to arbitrage. Nobody on the other side of the table is incentivized to close that gap for you. Networks optimize for short-horizon proxy metrics because that's what they can observe reliably.
Publishers optimize for long-horizon yield because that's what actually pays the bills. And no single party owns the translation between the two. That gap is the defining tension in mobile UA.
It's where margin gets created or captured. And for most publishers, nobody has explicitly claimed it. Check our UA Monthly podcast , where marketing tactics and user acquisition strategies get debated with by expert hosts.
From Boardroom to Bid: Yield Architecture Closing the gap starts with a question that most studios skip: what the fuck are you actually optimizing for? Too often, the answer is assumed. For live titles, that decision sits on a spectrum between maximum IRR on deployed capital and maximum total dollar yield.
Maximum IRR on your capital, including studio overhead, means lower spend, higher ROAS targets, and better capital efficiency. Maximum total dollar yield means more spend, more risk, lower ROAS, but more total dollars profit on an absolute basis. That’s not a UA decision.
It’s a business strategy decision. And most studios never explicitly make it, which means their UA teams risk calibrating towards an ambiguous target that defaults to driving to topline because it’s easy to measure. Once that objective function is set, the translation work begins.
Each network delivers users with different LTV curves, different retention shapes, and different monetization profiles. A user acquired through one network matures differently than a user acquired through another. The same d28 ARPU may have a totally different d720 LTV.
This means you need unique short-term ROAS targets backing into your long term goal at the network and algorithm level. If you're setting one universal d7 or d28 target across all networks, you're either overpaying on some or underscaling on others. Both cost you money.
Neither is visible in the platform’s dashboard. Left: Same d28 target, wildly different long-term returns. Right: Same long-term goal, requires different d28 targets per network.
One universal ROAS target either overpays weak networks or underscales strong ones. The UA team's core job is owning the translation from business objective down to campaign level calibration. That mapping shifts constantly.
Network performance changes. Attribution models disagree on who caused the install. Seasonal swings move the curves quarter to quarter.
Maintaining it is the job. This is the translation layer. Most studios have a boardroom strategy and they have network-level execution.
They have too little in between. The team that owns the translation layer owns the growth function. Closing the Loop the Platforms Can't See But the translation layer runs on data the networks don't provide.
The network's observation window ends somewhere around day 7 to day 28. Your business doesn't. Beyond that window, the studio must own cohort maturation tracking, model-based LTV estimation, and incrementality analysis based on true returns, not platform-reported returns.
" It's not. If it produces dashboards but doesn't change decisions, it's a reporting function. Reporting is a cost center.
Measurement that reshapes your plans is a growth function. Product improvements to retention should proactively recalibrate acquisition targets. Major marketing portfolio changes should feed back into the product roadmap.
When those connections don't exist, everyone sees the numbers… but nobody acts on them. This is where the growth function earns its scope. It stops being "the team that buys users" and starts being the system that engineers the full path from first impression to long-term yield.
Every input adjusts every other input. Creative informs product. Product informs measurement.
Measurement informs creative. Eventually, the publisher automates its side of the system and connects it to the networks, which are already automated. Robots talking to robots.
The growth leader architects the system, sets the objective function, and knows when to override both. The Growth Learning Loop Every system described in this article depends on the same five properties to function. When they're healthy, the system compounds knowledge.
When any one degrades, the loop breaks and the system starts optimizing noise. Signal Clarity comes first. Structure inputs so data points to a decision, not just an outcome.
If your creative taxonomy doesn't tag hook type, format, and emotion independently, a winning ad teaches you almost nothing because there is no benchmark. Latency is the gap between data and action. Gain is how aggressively you change course.
Found a new creative champion after 6 months? Can you ship three variations tomorrow or does production take three weeks? Change course too slowly and your competitors will catch up before you can double down.
Receiver Capacity is translation. " Data that isn't understood doesn't drive decisions. It drives dashboards nobody reads.
Loop Closure separates a system from a process. Every budget allocation must reference last cycle's projections and actuals. Five properties drive every growth system.
Signal flows through the loop in sequence. When one degrades, the system as a whole slows. Find the bottleneck, and you find what's capping your growth rate.
Creative: The Highest-Frequency Input Creative is the last input publishers control. Higher IPM equates to higher ROAS at the same scale. That delta between your IPM and your competitor's is the last UA source of alpha the platform doesn't control.
But that alpha is under threat. AppLovin and Meta are both building AI creative tools that generate volume natively inside the auction, optimizing against signals nobody else can see. Networks will own baseline creative.
That's inevitable. But baseline gets you parity, not margin. The gap between baseline and breakout is where yield lives.
The Growth Learning Loop runs on inputs. Creative is the highest-frequency one. But creative is the input you can change every single day.
And without enough volume, the system doesn't have enough signal to learn. Signal Clarity requires enough variants to isolate what's actually working. If you ship one concept a week, a win tells you almost nothing.
Was it the hook? The mechanic? The emotion?
You don't know because you only tested one combination. Ship twenty variants with tagged variables and the system starts pointing to insights that compound, not just outcomes. On a per week basis, it is difficult to achieve breakout performance unless you achieve a minimal viable volume.
Below it, each win is a lucky week you can't repeat. The floor for minimum viable creative volume is rising every quarter. Studios below it are starving their learning loop of signal.
The gap between baseline and breakout is real, but it only stays open for studios producing fast enough to find breakout before competitors copy it. That window is shrinking. A winning creative format today might give you two months before the market replicates it.
When networks agentically generate variants of what's scaling, that could collapse to days. The advantage isn't having a winner. It's having the production velocity to find the next one before the last one decays.
The defense isn't taste. It's clock speed. The studio that treats creative as a production system feeding the learning loop will find winners faster than the studio that treats it as a craft.
The Org Chart for 2026 The traditional UA team was built around the act of buying media. Network management, campaign optimization, bid strategy. That work isn’t disappearing, but it’s no longer a source of competitive advantage.
It’s being absorbed by automation. What’s replacing it requires a fundamentally different team. The new growth team is a systems team with the same budget and completely different people.
Starting at about $500k in monthly spend, the structure is lean but the functions already need to be distinct. Ad monetization, if applicable, sits alongside UA because at this scale, the buy side and sell side of the ad economy need to be coordinated tightly. No data function at this spend level means nobody owns the translation layer.
If it doesn't exist yet, that's the first hire. At $5 to $15M, the functions become directorates. Assuming there is a portfolio of games, dedicated UA leads appear by genre, monetization strategy, or individual title because a puzzle game and a strategy game have fundamentally different LTV curves, creative languages, and audience behaviors.
The creative team grows, but likely stays at least partially independent. If too little spend is going towards new creatives, a Creative Strategist becomes a must-have . Breaking out ASO is optional.
Data scales into analytics and engineering. Automation, tools, and measurement infrastructure become competitive advantages, not just overhead. At $25M+, the full architecture is visible.
Three directors report to a VP Growth: UA, Creative, and Ad Monetization. There are two dotted lines: Product and Data. Each segment gets its own UA, Creative, and Product leadership roles.
ASO becomes its own function. This is the org that runs every system described in this article: the translation layer, the Growth Learning Loop, the measurement architecture, and the product feedback loop. One growth leader.
One system. Beyond a certain scale, additional VPs may need to be added to break down the portfolio into digestible pieces. One thing these org charts don't show is where the growth function's boundary ends.
Increasingly, it doesn't. This isn’t because Growth is taking over from Product, but because the shared surface area is growing. The path from first impression to year-two yield runs through onboarding, retention, and LiveOps.
Creative is the first seven seconds of the product experience. Retention data recalibrates acquisition targets. LiveOps signals reshape which creative archetypes get seeded next.
The growth team doesn't just acquire users. It engineers the full journey from ad to long-term value. UA doesn't end at the install anymore.
It ends at year two. The System the Platforms Can't Build for You Platforms own targeting. What you build around it determines your margin.
The translation layer. The growth learning loop. The measurement architecture.
The team that runs it all. The growth leader who knows when to trust the machine and when to override it. Networks will keep optimizing for what they can see.
The studio that owns the translation between their seven days and your two years is negotiating for the margin. Nobody on the other side of the table is building this for you. That's the point.
Everyone else is letting the networks decide how much they make.
Deconstructor of FunMarch 27, 202610 min read1 views