Home On TV & Video The End Of The SSP Era

The End Of The SSP Era

SHARE:

mannypuentes-tvvideo-updatedOn TV And Video” is a column exploring opportunities and challenges in programmatic TV and video.

Today’s column is written by Manny Puentes, chief technology officer at Altitude Digital. 

The ad tech LUMAscape has long been contracting, but one categorical staple of the cluttered landscape is now in danger of disappearing entirely.

The supply-side platform (SSP) was once the only way for a publisher to access the open auction engine and connect to demand-side platforms (DSPs). But SSPs haven’t been evolving fast enough to meet the needs of the market, particularly in an era where quality video inventory is always in short supply and publishers are becoming more technologically savvy.

Verification issues and Deal ID inefficiencies are just a few signs that the SSP era is coming to an end.

Increased Verification Pressures

As concerns about fraud and viewability have grown, the use of Integral Ad Science, Moat and other third-party verification companies have become a common required addition to media buys. Unfortunately for publishers, much of the verification happens after a campaign has completed, meaning publishers have to make good on impressions that were determined to be nonhuman or unviewable. In an age where video impressions are already limited, this puts undue pressure on publishers to tighten the control over their inventory.

Different verification partners also look at different data points to determine these factors, naturally giving a varied statistical set based on each partner. This makes it especially challenging for publishers to effectively manage their inventory in advance. SSPs might work with a single specific verification partner, but the advertising side only wants to transact based on data with their preferred partner. While publishers may have once been able to rely on their SSP to provide a high return on investment by exposing their inventory to multiple demand sources, that value is being chipped away by these common claw-backs.

Publishers are now going straight to the verification partners and creating relationships so they can take back control, understand their inventory and manage it more directly than they could with an SSP. Publishers are also pushing for the implementation of pre-bid technology within the programmatic pipes, so they can funnel the right inventory to campaigns marked for viewability or brand safety based on the right partner without waste.

Inefficiencies Of The Deal ID

In addition to incorporating additional third-party verification vendors, advertisers increasingly have looked to buy inventory, particularly video inventory, through private marketplaces and through Deal IDs. However, with every hop that has to occur between publisher, SSP and DSP, the Deal ID data becomes cumbersome and a workflow liability, leading to publishers losing out. SSPs also haven’t done a good job at successfully leveraging first-party publisher data through this mechanism, so they’re also sacrificing higher CPMs when they can’t effectively pass in-depth user information.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

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

Rather than using an inefficient deal ID through their SSP, publishers are better off striking direct deals or integrating directly with DSPs in order to effectively share data and provide the highest return for their inventory.

Future Business Models

Many companies in the industry, particularly SSPs, have long transacted on a revenue-share basis, as a percentage of overall media spend. As publishers become more experienced with programmatic and increasingly work with advertisers directly through programmatic pipes, SSPs and this pricing model are being phased out.

Publishers are looking for solutions to meet their programmatic problems. They want to work directly with advertisers and leverage their own first-party data – completely outside of the traditional supply-side chain. By advocating for the true market value for their inventory, publishers will drive the creation of new technologies and define a brand new programmatic landscape.

Follow Manny Puentes (@epuentes), Altitude Digital (@AltitudeDP) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

Must Read

Wall Street Wants To Know What The Programmatic Drama Is About

Competitive tensions and ad tech drama have flared all year. And this drama has rippled out into the investor circle, as evident from a slew of recent ad tech company earnings reports.

Comic: Always Be Paddling

Omnicom Allegedly Pivoted A Chunk Of Its Q3 Spend From The Trade Desk To Amazon

Two sources at ad tech platforms that observe programmatic bidding patterns said they’ve seen Omnicom agencies shifting spend from The Trade Desk to Amazon DSP in Q3. The Trade Desk denies any such shift.

influencer creator shouting in megaphone

Agentio Announces $40M In Series B Funding To Connect Brands With Relevant Creators

With its latest funding, Agentio plans to expand its team and to establish creator marketing as part of every advertiser’s media plan.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters

Google Rolls Out Chatbot Agents For Marketers

Google on Wednesday announced the full availability of its new agentic AI tools, called Ads Advisor and Analytics Advisor.

Amazon Ads Is All In On Simplicity

“We just constantly hear how complex it is right now,” Kelly MacLean, Amazon Ads VP of engineering, science and product, tells AdExchanger. “So that’s really where we we’ve anchored a lot on hearing their feedback, [and] figuring out how we can drive even more simplicity.”

Betrayal, business, deal, greeting, competition concept. Lie deception and corporate dishonesty illustration. Businessmen leaders entrepreneurs making agreement holding concealing knives behind backs.

How PubMatic Countered A Big DSP’s Spending Dip In Q3 (And Our Theory On Who It Was)

In July, PubMatic saw a temporary drop in ad spend from a “large” unnamed DSP partner, which contributed to Q3 revenue of $68 million, a 5% YOY decline.