{"id":1374,"date":"2015-04-08T10:57:26","date_gmt":"2015-04-08T14:57:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.acaweb.ca\/en\/?p=1374"},"modified":"2020-10-29T13:40:29","modified_gmt":"2020-10-29T17:40:29","slug":"transparency-dominates-discussion-at-programmatic-trading-event","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/acaweb.ca\/en\/2015\/transparency-dominates-discussion-at-programmatic-trading-event\/","title":{"rendered":"Transparency dominates discussion at programmatic trading event"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Transparency4\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Transparency (or the lack of it) in programmatic buying was the elephant in the room last week at Marketing magazine\u2019s AD-Vantage Programmatic Trading Conference. And Ian Hewetson, VP of Client Services for ad server and demand-side platform Eyereturn Marketing, made sure to address it during his morning keynote session.<\/p>\n

\u201cYou\u2019ve got a lot of different players in almost every single programmatic buy,\u201d Hewetson (pictured, right) told a packed room on Tuesday March 31 at the Bram and Bluma Appel Salon in the Toronto Reference Library. \u201cYou\u2019ve got the site, the supply-side platform (SSP), the exchange, a demand-side platform (DSP), maybe you have a verification vendor, maybe you\u2019ve got third-party data in there, and an agency trading desk too.<\/p>\n

\u201cMore players can often equal less transparency,\u201d Hewetson added. \u201cEvery player takes a cut of that budget. And the more players there are the more budget that goes to those cuts.<\/p>\n

\u201cHow much is each cut? It\u2019s sometimes difficult to tell\u2026 because transparency is often resisted at every step of this process.\u201d<\/p>\n

Digital media transparency is a top-of-mind issue for many marketers in 2015, as more become aware that somewhere between 25 and 50% of their digital ad spend is going to waste, either through bot fraud, malware and ad-supported piracy, ad-viewability discrepancies, advertising volume rebates or arbitrage – where a media agency or network buys bulk online inventory and resells it almost immediately at a higher price.<\/p>\n

While Hewetson acknowledged arbitrage is commonplace in most industries, he reasoned that sellers who have pre-bought inventory are motivated to unload it.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you are a buyer, you could actually end up buying inventory because your seller has this on their hands and want to get rid of it,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n

Hewetson also pointed out that technology vendors that are also media owners can be problematic for advertisers, as that arrangement creates suspicion that the vendor is favouring its own impressions. Ditto for platforms that act as both demand-side and supply-side platforms, Hewetson said, since they must satisfy both the buyer\u2019s desire for low cost impressions and a publisher\u2019s demand for the maximum return.<\/p>\n

\"Transparency3\"<\/a>The transparency theme continued throughout the rest of the day\u2019s sessions, including a panel featuring three representatives for agency trading desks.<\/p>\n

Veronica Holmes, President of Digital at ZenithOptimedia, said advertisers needed to educate themselves about the programmatic process.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think the more informed advertisers are and the more questions they ask, the better,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

The ACA is taking steps to tackle the issue of transparency, working to establish guidelines and standards for safe trading that an independent third party can certify. It is also working with the Canadian Media Directors\u2019 Council (CMDC) and the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) to form an \u201conline accountability task force\u201d to assess and address digital media fraud and transparency issues.<\/p>\n

In the meantime, advertisers can help ensure their digital ad dollars are being properly invested by following these five steps:<\/p>\n