Home TV PremiumMedia360 Aims To Help Sellers With Their Ad Revenue Leakage Woes

PremiumMedia360 Aims To Help Sellers With Their Ad Revenue Leakage Woes

SHARE:

The best-laid media plans of mice, men, buyers and sellers often go awry.

On Tuesday, advertising data automation company PremiumMedia360 launched a solution that reduces revenue leakage, payment issues and general reconciliation-related agita for broadcast advertising buyers and sellers.

Ad tech middlemen and agencies know the pain of slow payment. They place ads for their clients and get busy waiting, often as long as 120 days for advertisers to reconcile bids and, hopefully, pay up.

But that headache isn’t exclusively the buyer’s dilemma. TV and radio stations also feel the effect on their bottom line when errors and inconsistencies prevent buyers from paying on time.

“Before they issue an invoice, media companies make sure the ad inventory in the invoice actually ran. However, just because it ran doesn’t mean it followed the ad agency’s business rules,” said Joan FitzGerald, SVP of advanced TV global partnerships at PremiumMedia360. “That’s where reconciliation comes in: Ad agencies interrogate the invoice line by line to find ‘discrepancies’ – ads that they won’t pay for because of errors.”

PremiumMedia360 estimates that revenue leakage costs local broadcast TV companies between $600 million and $1.5 billion, and local radio between $300 million and $825 million.

“Broadcasters want to get paid for 100% of the invoice, [but] today they get paid for between 92-97%,” FitzGerald said. “Keep in mind, broadcast television is an $18 billion industry, and radio is a $16 billion industry, so 3-8% revenue leakage is a lot of revenue.”

Discrepancies are an even bigger problem for digital and over-the-top, FitzGerald said.

“Several ad agencies have reported to us that over 90% of digital invoices have discrepancies,” she said.

There are many opportunities for errors to creep in. The wrong ad might run in a time slot or two ads could run too closely together in succession. An ad may hit the air during the incorrect daypart.

In some cases, broadcasters might preempt a previously scheduled ad to run something for a higher-paying advertiser – a common and accepted business on the sell side, but a headache for buyers trying to ensure they get what they’re paying for.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

“From a buyer perspective, we want to make sure that our advertisers’ slots run as originally scheduled, but if there is a preemption, that results in our client’s spot needing to get rescheduled in the form of a makegood,” said Kevin Gallagher, EVP of media and managing director at Spark Foundry, which is evaluating PremiumMedia360’s reconciliation solution.

“The best solution for us would be to change that business practice, but until we get there, we want to use automated processes to better manage this,” he said.

PremiumMedia360’s solution, dubbed CLIR, automatically ingests, combines and compares a seller’s transactional data with the data provided by the ad agency and runs interference between the two. CLIR automatically identifies any differences between the data sets.

Tracking this is usually a drawn-out, manual process with lots of back and forth.

The technology can also help broadcasters find and fix discrepancies before a campaign makes it onto the air and an invoice is even issued, which could remove the need to chase a makegood altogether. The broadcast is notified of any red flags through a dashboard and given potential solutions to fix the problems before they spiral. A buyer, for example, can be informed in advance that an ad will be preempted.

“The reconciliation process is time consuming on both sides of the desk,” Gallagher said. “Synching records electronically on the buy side and the sell side would really help eliminate some of that.”

Must Read

The FTC's latest staff report has strong message for social media and streaming video platforms: Stop engaging in the "vast surveillance" of consumers.

FTC Denounces Social Media And Video Streaming Platforms For ‘Privacy-Invasive’ Data Practices

The FTC’s latest staff report has strong message for social media and streaming video platforms: Stop engaging in the “vast surveillance” of consumers.

Publishers Feel Seen At The Google Ad Tech Antitrust Trial

Publishers were encouraged to see the DOJ highlight Google’s stranglehold on the ad server market and its attempts to weaken header bidding.

Albert Thompson, Managing Director, Digital at Walton Isaacson

To Cure What Ails Digital Advertising, Marketers And Publishers Must Get Back To Basics

Albert Thompson, a buy-side veteran with 20+ years of experience, weighs in on attention metrics, the value of MFA sites, brand safety backlash and how publishers can improve their inventory.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters
A comic depiction of Google's ad machine sucking money out of a publisher.

DOJ vs. Google, Day Five Rewind: Prebid Reality Check, Unfair Rev Share And Jedi Blue (Sorta)

Someone will eventually need to make a Netflix-style documentary about the Google ad tech antitrust trial happening in Virginia. (And can we call it “You’ve Been Ad Served?”)

Comic: Alphabet Soup

Buried DOJ Evidence Reveals How Google Dealt With The Trade Desk

In the process of the investigation into Google, the Department of Justice unearthed a vast trove of separate evidence. Some of these findings paint a whole new picture of how Google interacts and competes with its main DSP rival, The Trade Desk.

Comic: The Unified Auction

DOJ vs. Google, Day Four: Behind The Scenes On The Fraught Rollout Of Unified Pricing Rules

On Thursday, the US district court in Alexandria, Virginia boarded a time machine back to April 18, 2019 – the day of a tense meeting between Google and publishers.