MAM
Cheetah Mobile Responds to Kochava’s Misleading Statements on Advertising
MUMBAI: Cheetah Mobile Inc. (NYSE: CMCM) ("Cheetah Mobile" or the "Company"), a leading mobile internet company with global market coverage, today announced plans to take legal action against mobile app attribution and analytics company Kochava. As per the company, Kochava has provided false information and opinions about Cheetah Mobile’s advertising system to the media, leading to a sharp decline in the company’s stock price. The company believes that Kochava’s actions are misleading and completely without merit.
Kochava has accused Cheetah Mobile’s apps of engaging in a fraudulent advertising practice known as “click injection.” Kochava has based this assertion on a series of tests carried out in a simulated smartphone environment, the results of which were shared with Cheetah Mobile and the media in a series of videos. However, upon analyzing the videos and other evidence, the company discovered that Kochava’s testing methods contained fundamental mistakes, leading to a number of false or misleading conclusions, including:
1. In the evidence provided to Cheetah Mobile, click injection occurs whether Cheetah Mobile apps are installed or not. It is unrelated to Cheetah Mobile’s apps.
On November 27, BuzzFeed News published the following statement, attributed to Grant Simmons, the head of client analytics for Kochava:
“The explanation provided by Cheetah refers to SDKs meant for ad delivery in-app. The fraud detailed in our research and the related article does not look at in-app ad delivery from the apps in question, but instead the syndication of fraudulent signals taking place on the device when the apps are present," he said in an email.
In the videos, Kochava first opens a Cheetah Mobile utility app while a large number of apps and SDKs unrelated to Cheetah Mobile’s apps are open, such as Appcoach and Webeye. These ad SDKs have no relationship with Cheetah Mobile’s utility apps. Kochava then uses the smartphone simulator to install a new app, which causes Appcoach or Webeye to report the installation to Kochava. But since Appcoach and Webeye are not installed inside Cheetah Mobile’s apps, this action has nothing to do with Cheetah Mobile.
In fact, in the above simulation environment, even if you uninstall all of Cheetah Mobile’s apps, an attribution report is generated. But by deliberately opening Cheetah Mobile’s utility apps within the simulation environment, Kochava is giving the erroneous impression that the reports generated by the third-party SDKs are related to Cheetah Mobile’s apps. Therefore, the evidence presented in Kochava’s videos is inaccurate and misleading.
2. Kochava has alleged that all of relevant advertising SDKs embedded in Cheetah Mobile’s products are owned and developed by Cheetah Mobile, but in fact, nearly 97% of Cheetah Mobile’s overseas utility revenue comes from third-party advertising SDKs. These third-party SDKs can be found on all of the world’s major advertising platforms and are being used on numerous mainstream global apps. The SDKs are unrelated to Cheetah Mobile.
The following statement appears in the same BuzzFeed article mentioned above:
The SDK involved in the suspect activity is actually owned and developed by Cheetah, not by third parties, according to Kochava.
Kochava’s videos show that once a new app is installed, advertising SDKs on Cheetah Mobile apps, such as Batmobi, Duapps and Altmob, report the download data to Kochava, which then determines attribution based on this data.
Cheetah Mobile cooperates with all of the major global advertising platforms. Every platform provides ads on Cheetah Mobile’s apps through their own SDKs embedded on Cheetah Mobile apps. The SDKs and third-party attribution platforms work together to determine attribution of app installations. Cheetah Mobile is not part of this process.
Kochava is an app attribution company, whose business model is based on determining installation attribution from third-party SDKs. Therefore, they fully understand that attribution is unrelated to the app itself. In their videos, they are misleading the media to believe that Cheetah Mobile is engaged in fraudulent practices.
3. The media and Kochava intentionally exaggerated the relationship between Cheetah Mobile and Kika Tech to intentionally overstate Cheetah Mobile’s influence over Kika Tech.
The article states that:
The other app is owned by Kika Tech, a Chinese company now headquartered in Silicon Valley that received a significant investment from Cheetah in 2016.
This statement is misleading. Kika Tech is just one of more than 80 companies that the Company has invested in. Cheetah Mobile owns less than a five percent stake in Kika Tech and has no seats on the board. Furthermore, the Company has zero operational control over Kika Tech.
4. Kochava has severely damaged the reputation of a public company with its unfounded claims. The Company reserves the right to take legal action against Kochava.
In the same article, Grant Simmons, head of client analytics for Kochava, is quoted as saying:
“This is theft — no other way to say it.”
The company finds this comment extremely hostile and outrageous.
Cheetah Mobile is a leading global app developer with numerous global partnerships. In the third quarter 2018, 70.31% of the company’s overseas utility revenue came from Google and Facebook’s ad SDKs, while 26.06% came from other mainstream global ad platform SDKs. These SDKs are used on mainstream apps throughout the world.
Cheetah Mobile’s success is based on long-term steady development and providing users with a better user experience. The company is dedicated to building a healthy development model. The company is also committed to complying with all relevant Google policies, GDPR, laws and regulations.
Gaia Guan, CEO of Moca Technology, a global mobile advertising platform focused on India and developing markets, said, “Cheetah Mobile is a pioneering Chinese mobile app company overseas. They are constantly focused on improving the product experience and ad experience for users, while strictly adhering to industry regulations and standards. In our many years working with Cheetah Mobile, they have always put the user and advertisers first, while treating their partnerships fairly and transparently.”
5. After investigating our third-party SDKs, the company has removed Batmobi and Duapps from its apps
Cheetah Mobile has cooperated with the third-party security firm Threat Hunter to investigate the situation, particularly regarding the advertising SDKs featured in the videos that could potentially possess attribution risks, namely Batmobi and Duapps. To be cautious, the company has proactively removed them from its updated apps. Cheetah Mobile continues to investigate, and will suspend cooperation with any SDK providers that are found to be engaging in fraudulent activities.
Kochava has a relatively small market share. In 2016, Kochava publicized its cooperation with Cheetah Mobile multiple times to raise its prestige, while seeking to expand its cooperation with the company. Cheetah Mobile ceased its collaboration with Kochava in September 2016.
Cheetah Mobile rejects Kochava’s accusations as baseless. The company will continue to place even more value on advertisers’ rights and making sure the industry develops in a healthy way. As one of the top publishers in the world, Cheetah Mobile pledges to redouble its efforts towards monitoring and detecting potential issues within third-party ad SDKs and its own products in order to ensure maximum benefits for advertisers and users alike.
Most business owners treat their working capital limit like a safety net. It sits there, attached to their current account, ready to be drawn on whenever cash gets tight. And for routine operations, that arrangement works fine. But there are specific situations where a lump-sum loan disbursed quickly into your account is the smarter financial move. Knowing when to pick one over the other can save you real money and keep your business from getting stuck.
The Fundamental Difference People Overlook
A working capital limit, often structured as an overdraft or a revolving credit facility, gives you access to funds up to a pre-approved ceiling. You draw what you need, pay interest on what you use, and replenish it as receivables come in. It is designed for short-term, recurring needs like paying suppliers or covering payroll gaps.
A term loan disbursed quickly, on the other hand, drops a fixed amount into your account. You repay it in instalments over a set period, with a clear end date. The interest rate is typically fixed or at least predictable. These two products solve different problems, and treating them as interchangeable is where businesses get into trouble.
When Speed and Certainty Matter More Than Flexibility
Here’s a scenario that plays out constantly. A retailer gets an opportunity to buy inventory at a steep discount, but the supplier wants full payment within 48 hours. The retailer’s working capital limit is already partially drawn. The available balance might cover part of the order, but not all of it. Requesting a limit enhancement takes days, sometimes weeks, because the bank reassesses your financials.
An instant business loan solves this cleanly. You apply, get approval quickly, and the full amount lands in your account. You buy the inventory, sell it at full margin, and repay the loan over the next few months. The cost of interest on that loan is far less than the profit you would have lost by passing on the deal.
This pattern repeats across industries. A logistics company needs to repair a critical vehicle immediately. A restaurant has to replace kitchen equipment before the weekend rush. A manufacturer lands a large order but needs raw materials upfront. In each case, the need is urgent, specific, and finite. A revolving facility wasn’t built for these moments.
The Hidden Cost of Over-Relying on Working Capital Limits
There’s a psychological trap with revolving credit. Because it’s always available, business owners tend to lean on it for everything, including expenses that really should be financed separately. When you use your overdraft to fund a one-time capital purchase, you reduce the buffer available for daily operations. Then, when a genuine cash flow gap appears the following week, you’re scrambling.
Worse, many working capital limits come with annual renewal. If your financials have dipped, the bank can reduce your limit or decline renewal altogether. If you’ve been using the facility for purposes it wasn’t designed for, your utilisation patterns can actually work against you during the review.
A distinct term loan keeps your working capital limit clean. Your revolving facility handles day-to-day operations. Your loan handles the one-off expense. This separation makes your balance sheet easier to read and your banking relationship easier to manage.
Interest Rate Math That Favours Term Loans
Working capital limits often carry floating interest rates pegged to the bank’s benchmark. The rate adjusts, and over time, especially when monetary policy tightens, your cost of borrowing can creep up without you noticing because you’re only looking at the small daily interest debit.
A fixed-rate term loan gives you certainty. You know exactly what each instalment will be, which makes cash flow forecasting more accurate. For a specific expense with a known amount and a defined payback period, this predictability matters. You can map the repayment against the revenue that expense is expected to generate.
A working capital loan structured as a revolving facility makes sense when your borrowing needs fluctuate week to week. But when you know exactly how much you need and roughly how long it will take to pay back, a term product is almost always cheaper in total interest cost. The discipline of fixed repayments also prevents the slow balance creep that plagues overdraft users.
When Your Facility Is Maxed and Opportunity Knocks
Perhaps the most compelling case is the simplest one. Your existing limit is fully utilised. Business is good, money is coming in, but right now the account is stretched. A new opportunity appears. You can either let it pass or find additional funding fast.
Waiting for a limit increase is not a strategy when timing matters. Applying for a separate short-term loan, getting approval the same day or the next, and funding the opportunity directly is a concrete action with a measurable return. You are not adding long-term debt to your balance sheet. You are financing a specific transaction that pays for itself.
The smartest business owners don’t treat all credit as the same. They match the product to the need. Revolving facilities handle rhythm. Term loans handle moments. Getting that distinction right is one of the quieter advantages a well-run business holds over its competitors.
