16 responses

  1. Gourav Chindlur
    November 28, 2011

    I completely agree with Rob and Zach. Yahoo is just making things harder. By imposing restrictions on buyers, its only reducing liquidity and demand which will result in a negative impact on yield. Instead, they should focus on how to make things easier for buyers to ensure as many as possible participate.

  2. Alex Andreyev
    November 28, 2011

    I think this brings Yahoo back to the discussion table with advertisers and gives them the ability to come up with creative solutions around their inventory, which in turn creates an upward pressure on CPMs. Good for advertisers, good for Yahoo. The timing might be questionable though, not much turnaround time.

  3. Mike A
    November 28, 2011

    I would argue that advertisers do not need "universal buy side technology" instead they need universal attribution modeling/technology. Some of the most sophisticated buy side technology does not fit inside the confines of a DSP, and a marketer loses if they work with a DSP as a universal buy side platform. A DSP should be one of the efforts, not THE effort.

  4. Larry T
    November 28, 2011

    A smart move by Yahoo. Getting the advertisers to engage with them directly will allow them to foster those relationships. If the other vendors can offer a value ad to the transaction they'll need to prove that directly with the advertisers rather than just take a percentage of a transaction acting as a broker.

    Too many middle men have created a confused and convoluted market. There are only so many advertisers after all so it makes perfect sense that the middleware brokers are mad at this move. They just lost access to the pantry that they've been raiding for the last few years.

    Yahoo is correct in doing this its just crazy they took so long to finally act.

  5. James Lee
    November 28, 2011

    Great move by Yahoo!... if this were 8 months ago.

  6. Rob Leathern
    November 28, 2011

    I don't buy it. Yahoo already has all the tools needed to solve this problem in this system without creating this additional friction during the business ad time of the year.

    Yahoo approves every single ad we submit from every one of our clients. Yahoo gets a report sent to them every day from the Right Media system (which they own), from our account that shows how much every account has spent, how many clicks etc. it has. They have visibility into every single creative, and every single advertiser that is running.

    All that is changing is that perhaps they'd have to look in a different report in Right Media to see who's buying this inventory - the Right Media team at Yahoo! would still be the one having the primary direct relationship with the advertiser.

    The biggest difference probably is that now these advertisers have to fulfill Right Media's minimums and be subject to (non-bulk probably) pricing from them.

    We can easily configure our system to manage multiple API keys or account credentials from Yahoo, but it just seems silly to suddenly do this without much warning.

    Facebook's approach is informative by comparison - our optim.al system manages the advertiser's ads account, there's an account for every advertiser which is directly authenticated to our "app" (which can be revoked at any time of course) and everything is transparent to all three parties. And if vendors run things on a CPA, if the advertiser requests it of Facebook, the vendor is REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE ACTUAL MEDIA COSTS to the advertiser. We are 100% behind that level of transparency and flexibility in management.

  7. Zach Coelius
    November 28, 2011

    I love the astroturfing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing) on this post about how wonderful and smart this Yahoo move is.

    What no one has explained is how thousands of customers are going to set up direct seats with Yahoo. Can someone explain how that will happen when it currently takes six months to negotiate a seat with Yahoo?

  8. Tom V
    November 28, 2011

    There are far too many businesses out there who simply provide retargeting, and nothing else. Yahoo makes a lot of bad moves, but this is a good move. Retargeting is a tool, not a business, and Yahoo is smart to cut out those middlemen.

  9. Katelyn
    November 29, 2011

    I agree with Zach too, and as a brand advertiser want to take my business elsewhere. I don't think Yahoo is such a big powerhouse that I can't, either.

  10. Gourav Chindlur
    November 29, 2011

    Its great if yahoo can cut out the middle men. All for it - only creates efficiency in the system. But why force it? If advertisers believe there is no value add from the middle men and find it every so easy and efficient to just get a seat on RMX and start buying, they will do so automatically. Yahoo only needs to make things easy and provide the option - not enforce it.

  11. Chris J
    November 29, 2011

    As have always said, Yahoo always finds a way to conflict with itself and resist change. All ad dollars currently flowing through RMX for Yahoo remnant inventory is Yahoo money. The reason why it exists in the first place is because their direct sales channels couldn't sell it. In an era where technology is only growing and programmatic buying is only increasing and where unemployment is high, having bloated sales departments and resultant employee costs would seem like one of the dumbest business decisions in recent times. If Yahoo were so worried about CPM pricing declinging or being blind then do what the SSPs do with some inventory in having price floors and making it blind to which part of Yahoo things are running on.

  12. Josh Dreller
    November 29, 2011

    Feels like a classic move from someone high up that doesn't get the landscape. "What? We're letting people buy our inventory from 3rd party tools? No, no, no, no, no. That has to stop NOW."

    Get Kawaja on the phone...this guys needs a Lumascape ASAP!!!

    That beings aid, I can definitely can understand why Yahoo would want the first party connection and it's probably the right choice in the long run. So it's actually probably a good move...

    But [especially based on the reactions and comments] it seems like they might be going about it the wrong way. Why a six day turnaround? Seems pretty ridiculous. Makes me think there's something else going on that we're not all privvy too. A big merger? A buyout?

  13. Ohad Gliksman
    November 29, 2011

    I think the real story here is a bit different.
    While DSP technology has been bringing more and more demand to Yahoo, they have also started direct competition with Yahoo direct sales over larger accounts. The way I see it, this move by Yahoo is only intended to keep DSPs from reselling Yahoo inventory to customers which would have bought directly otherwise from Yahoo. Long term, I think it will be up to the different DSP players to show their true benefit to customers but I am not sure on the short term, there is reason to buy premium inventory through an intermediary.

  14. Zach Coelius
    November 29, 2011

    Ohad, the problem with that argument is that if buying Yahoo directly actually worked customers would do that. It is that value that DSPs add that we can turn remnant leftovers into results for our clients where Yahoo and others can't.

  15. Alex Andreyev
    November 29, 2011

    @Zach to those who have managed a relationship (or a seat) with Yahoo prior to them cutting everyone else off, they win (at least for 6 months).

    @Katelyn I think you're underestimating the amount of data Yahoo has. Also, they perform quite well.

  16. Ohad Gliksman
    November 30, 2011

    @Zach, You are right when thinking of customers looking for performance or measurable campaign results but I think some DSPs have been reselling of plain Yahoo inventory and not bringing any value to the food chain. I know a lot of smart people in the DSP business and I am sure they can do great things for their customers that a single publisher no matter how large cannot which is what I think a DSP is all about. Reselling premium publisher inventory with little or no targeting is not contributing any real value to their customers or their partners.

Leave a Reply




Back to top
mobile desktop