Unbelievable: 2 App Store rejections, ZERO uses of our app's main feature. What would you do - appeal or resubmit?

anybody had something similar happen?

It has happened to many people because Apple, Inc. has been on a peudo-spam-combat crusade based on falsehoods for the past several months. I get a spam call every single time I submit a new app to App Store Connect these days. We are all little people and powerless individually. I encourage you to file a complaint with FTC ( https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/ ).

Update: Still nothing, no contact from Apple or even anyway to contact them.

I can understand why apple is cracking down on a lot of apps because they must get thousands of spam trash apps submitted every day..

But its pretty clear that currently they haven't figured out the best way to do this and genuine developers/apps unfortunatley are getting caught in the crossfire.

Unfortunately with the amount of apps now submitted daily I would have to guess it will be at least 6 months before they can figure out the best thing to do.

I don't know what to do...

Since you have already filed an appeal, I would add a concise evidence supplement to that appeal rather than withdraw it and immediately resubmit.

Build a timestamped table for each review attempt showing the reviewer’s sign-in, the exact steps available to reach the core feature, generation requests, credit changes, errors, and session end. Include the relevant time zone and make sure the records can be tied to the submitted build and review account without exposing user data.

Also verify that the review account had enough credits, that the feature was enabled for that account and storefront, and that no onboarding, consent, network, or server-side restriction could prevent a generation. Provide a short, uninterrupted recording with numbered reproduction steps and working credentials. If the feature depends on a backend, keep the test environment available and explain what a successful request should look like.

For the 4.3(b) concern, map the app’s distinctive user outcome to the exact workflow the reviewer can test. Ask App Review to identify which existing apps or specific functionality it considers insufficiently differentiated, if it can provide that information.

In your appeal supplement, you could write:

“Our review-account logs for build [build] show a successful sign-in at [time and time zone], but no generation request or credit consumption during the review session. We have checked that the feature was enabled and the account had the required access. Attached are a timestamped event summary, a short recording, and numbered steps that take the reviewer from sign-in to a completed generation. Could you please confirm whether the core workflow was reached and clarify which part of the product you consider insufficiently differentiated under 4.3(b)?”

Keep the logs focused on the review session and redact unrelated account or customer data.

I can understand why apple is cracking down on a lot of apps because they must get thousands of spam trash apps submitted every day..

According to the App Store Transparency report for 2025, Apple got 25,000 submissions per day in 2025.

According to one report I've seen on the internet, from an industry journal, not Reedit, AI slop has increased submissions by 84% in 2026.

Average 2-3 days for Review in 2025, so maximum (with 84% up) 4-6, not several weeks/months.

It's not a linear scale. For one thing, Apple is now using AI for reviews.

I have no idea how Apple manages App Review, but I do have a (conspiracy) theory. I think that Apple is slowing review times for new developers and developers with rejections. I've seen people quote messages from Apple confirming the first part. The second part is my speculation.

This allows reviewers to approve more apps in the same amount of time. So the average review time is likely going down, not up. Rejections are time consuming and wasteful. Neither the developer nor Apple gets anything out of it. So rather than waste time rejecting apps, clogging up the expedited review queue, and clogging up the appeal queue, Apple just identifies those submissions that are more likely to be approved, and approves them quickly.

When you think about it, that's really the only logical explanation. Why else would some developers wait for minutes and others wait for weeks?

Don't use the comments feature. That hides your replies. And ideally, add a @Cam_3344 tag to trigger an e-mail notification.

apps in certain categories are getting auto rejected and some good apps (I include my app) are getting auto rejected without being looked at properly.

That's certainly true. But developers need to be pro-active. Certain app categories are extremely high risk. Why put in any effort, even vide-coding, in a category that's already saturated?

One problem is that developers are focused on thier own apps. Maybe they've used a certain app category before and they think they can do better. Maybe they can. They did some research (not enough, though) and found some existing apps. So they throw their hat into the ring. What's the worst that can happen?

But Apple's ~500 app reviewers are looking at 25,000-45,000 apps every day. That's 92 apps per day per person. Even with any amount AI or clever scheduling, app reviewers are still seeing all the apps. They don't look at any of the apps properly! They check for obvious scams, obvious malware, obvious policy violations, obvious crashes, and that's it. Next! But in the case of that 4.3(b), they don't have to do any of that. You're saving them time because they've seen literally thousands of such apps. One look at the metadata and screenshots is all it takes for the fastest possible review and rejection.

So why give them that? No amount of documentation or feature list is going to change their minds. It's Apple. If Apple thought the app idea was worthwhile in the first place, they would have already included it in the operating system itself.

I've been there myself. I've submitted an app, literally thinking to myself "what's the worst that could happen?" It's worse than you imagine. Don't put yourself in that spot. Write a different app. Don't give them any reason to reject it. Take the money and run.

Oh I didn't know the comment feature hides replies.

I am at a loss what to do - The only thing I can think of is potentially try buy an app in the existing space that has already been approved then updating it to be more like my idea.

Although that once again comes with it's risks, what if I update it and it gets rejected.

Thoughts?

@Cam_3344 I'd keep the appeal running and add evidence to it like GetResubmit said, rather than withdraw it. A couple of things on top of that.

On buying an existing app: I wouldn't. Every update is reviewed against the guidelines at the time, the same as a new app. If they think the concept is in a saturated category, an update that turns the bought app into yours would likely get the same 4.3(b), and you'd have paid for the app on top of that.

On the zero usage: I think Etresoft's point explains it. For 4.3(b), a reviewer can make the call from your screenshots and description before ever reaching the main feature, which fits your logs showing a login and nothing else. So for the appeal and any resubmission later, make the difference obvious before anyone opens the app:

• the first two screenshots show the personalised result, the thing competitors don't do, not the home screen
• the first line of the description says what's different in one sentence.
• the top of the review notes has 3 numbered steps from login to a finished generation, with a demo account that already has credits.

While the appeal runs, you can also book a 30-minute app review appointment through Meet with Apple (Tuesdays and Thursdays, over Webex). It won't change the decision or speed it up, but you can ask directly which apps or features they think yours is too close to, which is the one thing the rejections haven't told you.

I am at a loss what to do - The only thing I can think of is potentially try buy an app in the existing space that has already been approved then updating it to be more like my idea.
Although that once again comes with it's risks, what if I update it and it gets rejected.
Thoughts?

I think that would be the least of your worries at that point.

If there exists a marketplace of similar apps, that should be a Big Red Flag, complete with klaxon alarm. I say cut your losses. I know it's painful, but you gotta move forward. This app is a dead end.

Not enough developers consider the business issues. Or at least, not enough legitimate developers. That's one of the ironies of this "review crisis". I think most of the people posting these complaints are honest, but unaware of business issues and the broader market.

For professional scammers and fraudsters, the app is irrelevant. It's only about the money. These people aren't getting rejected. They're professionals. They know how to work the system. Unlike all these people in the forums asking "has anyone ever encountered this before?", seemingly ignorant of the previous 10,000 identical posts, professional scammers are well aware of what Apple's doing. They stay on top of these things. Apple's new review regimen is not a barrier or blocker for them. But it does raise their costs, and that's a problem because, for them, it's only about the money. It makes the web and other mobile platforms more attractive.

There is a happy medium. Developers can build innovative, new apps and make money with them. Users will love that. They'll pay for it. Apple will love that because they'll make money too. It's a win for everone. But it's not easy. And it takes time. For all these people complaining about weeks of waiting, just wait until they find out how long writing a decent app takes!

Unfortunately, it seems that lots of developers have only put in the technical effort, neglecting the business research. They've written a great app. But that's irrelevant. The market for those apps is saturated. No one's ever going to see that great app. The Big Players have cornered the market and they're advertising. You're simply not going to break into that market with any level of technical expertise.

To quote an old fight between my parents, "If Howard Horton could've made any money on that chicken farm, he wouldn't have sold it to you". My mom's logic is still valid in the age of AI.

(name changed to protect business-savvy chicken farm seller.)

@Etresoft

I know what you mean and agree with all of it.

What annoys me is that this app was specifically made with the "business" in mind - This isn't some app I randomly thought of and vibe coded in a week - It's actually been in planning for nearly 2 years now.

It was created in a certain way to be the only version of this type of app that actually works correctly and is user friendly and completely different than what anyone else has done before - But the issue is on the surface it may look similar to other apps, but I can say for a fact it categoricaly is 10x better than any app in that industry at the moment - but the reviewers won't even use the app lol... and may think other apps do what mine does, but they don't do it properly.

It was created in a certain way to be the only version of this type of app that actually works correctly and is user friendly and completely different than what anyone else has done before - But the issue is on the surface it may look similar to other apps, but I can say for a fact it categoricaly is 10x better than any app in that industry at the moment - but the reviewers won't even use the app lol... and may think other apps do what mine does, but they don't do it properly.

How would reviewers know any of that? Even if they had approved the app, they wouldn't have ever "used" it. It's simply not that kind of review.

It's actually been in planning for nearly 2 years now.

I've got one that I've been working on for over 10 years. But I finally made the difficult realization that my current app, which I would dearly love to abandon, has some tiny bit of market presence. The new app would be starting from zero. In financial terms over the next two years, I can make more money with the current app, due to nothing more than its existing market presence. So I put the old one on hiatus and I'm updating the current one to make it even more marketable.

this app was specifically made with the "business" in mind

That's not necessarily a good thing. Businesses are awful customers, just awful. In theory, there are other avenues that you could take to market to these customers - consulting, white label, unlisted, etc. But I wouldn't recommend it. They don't care that it's 10x better than other apps. They only care if it's 10x cheaper. And even if it were cheaper, they would only use your app as a bargaining chip to get a 10% better price from their current vendor, and maybe a free round of golf at the club.

That's the reality here. You're offended that Apple has rejected your app. You think it could be successful. Have you considered the possibility that Apple actually understands all of this a lot better than you do? My current app was once rejected from the Mac App Store (ejected, actually) on far flimsier criteria than 4.3(b). But in hindsight, I wish I had never added that feature that Apple demanded I remove. In the new version, I have removed it. Apple already knew then what has taken me 5 years to figure out myself.