App Store Review & Rejection Recovery Consulting

No. If your app breaks a rule, you'll need to change the app. I can help with that.

No. Nobody can. What I can guarantee is that you'll go into the submission with the objections pre-answered, the reviewer notes written, and a recovery plan if the first round doesn't pass.

That's the most common entry point. Send me the rejection history and the current metadata. A one-day review usually surfaces the pattern. It's almost always the same underlying issue rephrased as different guideline citations.

4.3 is almost always about perceived category saturation, whatever guideline text the rejection cites. Recovery hinges on figuring out what the specific reviewer saw that triggered it, and what to change so the next reviewer doesn't see the same thing. Usually faster than teams expect, once the trigger is diagnosed.

2.1 is Accuracy, which almost always means the reviewer could not get something to work in their two-minute pass rather than anything wrong with your build. Most 2.1 rejections clear without shipping a new binary once you find what they missed and why. That diagnosis is the engagement, and it is faster than teams expect.

Yes. Metadata rejections almost always come down to a mismatch between what your listing claims and what the current build does, and the fix usually lives in the code rather than the metadata the rejection cites. Quick to diagnose once you know where to look, and quick to fix before resubmission.

Same day for a pre-submission audit. For rejection recovery, the response plan and binary diff are usually ready within 48 hours, with the resubmitted build going out inside the first week of your 14-day window. The faster the turnaround, the better the chance of catching the reviewer who flagged you.

This is what reviewer notes are for: the field in App Store Connect most teams fill in with one sentence. Done right, a good set walks the reviewer through the exact path to your feature, gives them the credentials and account state to see it, and pre-empts the next question they'd reach for. A 3-round rejection loop often becomes first-pass approval once this is rewritten properly.

This is Apple's 2.1 'Information Needed - New App Submission' request, rolled out heavily in 2026 after the wave of AI-generated app submissions. Apple now wants a specific bundle of artefacts: a screen recording, a purpose statement, test credentials, an external services and SDK list, regional notes, and regulatory credentials if applicable. Getting this right on the first reply is the difference between a same-week approval and weeks of back-and-forth. I handle this as part of pre-submission audits and rejection recovery.

Directly - you're hiring me, one senior iOS engineer who writes the code, rather than an agency that routes you through a project manager and a team you never meet. For a lot of my clients that's the whole point: one person who owns the work end to end.

A quick call can happen within days. For project work I usually need 1-2 weeks to clear the calendar, though I keep some buffer for urgent firefighting.

Yes, from pre-seed to Series C and beyond. For very early teams, a short advisory engagement often makes more sense than a full build: you get the architecture guidance without committing to a large piece of work before you've validated the product.

Everything: code, architecture decisions, code review, documentation, async Slack availability during working hours. No surprise add-ons. I bill for time spent working on your project, not for "thinking about it in the shower."

I'm currently in Vancouver (PST), with full overlap for North American teams. For UK and Europe, I'm online by their afternoon. For Gulf or APAC, we'd agree on overlap hours and handle the rest async. I've worked with teams from San Francisco to Dubai.