The adage “the more the merrier” certainly applies to the world of ad tech but so too can the phrase “too many cooks in the kitchen.” More players in the game means advertisers have more options to choose from when it comes to how they manage and execute their digital marketing campaigns (which is good) but it also means advertisers can run the risk of being bogged down in inefficiency (not so good).
At present, it’s common practice for advertisers to use multiple sources, which is great. A dilemma is that, oftentimes, these supply sources do not interact with one another. In theory, more supply means more opportunities to get that conversion or click, right? Well, kind of. More doesn’t necessarily equal better if it’s not efficient. Using an exchange or two, independent of one another, just isn’t the same as employing a holistic marketing operating system that gives its users a single view into their digital media campaigns. Let’s look at some of the different ways that advertisers access supply:
• Ad Exchanges and SSPs: These are the virtual marketplaces that connect sellers (the website publishers) and buyers (advertisers). A bidder specifies the media they want and how much they’re willing to pay, while the seller specifies the inventory available and sets a minimum bid price for that inventory. Advertisers are able to bid on inventory in a real-time environment, which means that they’re paying the right price for each impression, but only within those individual pools of inventory. While taking advantage of real-time bidding is a powerful way to improve efficiency, when advertisers manage several exchanges and SSPs by hand, the purpose of using technology to automate processes is defeated. Manually ramping spend up and down between multiple exchanges based on CPAs being compared in an Excel sheet doesn’t allow for functionality such as real time optimization across those exchanges nor does it allow for true frequency capping. Those problems can be solved easily with a platform like MediaMath’s TerminalOne, which allows for a holistic view of solutions that would otherwise be managed in silos.
• Individual Publishers: I get it. RTB isn’t for every brand for every buy. For example, the makers of those really expensive sandals I have been eyeing probably want to be on carefully selected sites within hand-picked placements to maintain their brand exclusivity. That doesn’t mean that the brand’s marketing team has to drive itself crazy signing a ton of IOs with multiple publishers. Up until recently, going site direct seemed like the only way to buy guaranteed display media placements. Through Automated Guaranteed, brands that have historically bought directly from publishers due to a need of guaranteed placements on specific sites, can now can find and purchase private marketplace and direct deals at a fixed price through a single platform.
As advertising technologies developed, marketers began using disparate supply sources to manage their programmatic buying. This is inefficient, forcing advertisers to switch back-and-forth among platforms, with no way to get a complete picture as to their media and data. As a result, advertisers are likely spending more on media for sub-optimal audiences. Additionally, it’s just more complicated: Advertisers are paying and managing multiple partners. Using multiple supply sources is like a like a jigsaw puzzle with missing pieces: Your just not going to see the entire picture, as it pertains to your marketing. The marketing operating system has transformed programmatic media buying from a patchwork system of multiple touch points into a one-stop, holistic solution.
This blog post is the fifth in a series for marketers that are curious about programmatic technology and would like to educate themselves on the value it can provide.
Keep up with this series by following the Building Block Series tag on the blog.
New to programmatic? Take our quiz to find out where you stand when it comes to your programmatic prowess.