One of the benefits of working with a large number of publishers is that we’re able to gain a deep understanding of their unique needs. As we’ve learned more about how publishers set up their ad stacks, we’ve realized that there are a lot of points that we cover over and over again.
The computerization of the finance industry began in the 1970s when they began to use computers to efficiently route orders through the exchanges. Realizing the utility of these machines, they added tasks and responsibilities to these automated systems in order to speed up processes that were traditionally completed by humans.
Have you ever wondered if the price floors and other preferences you set in your Google Ad Exchange (AdX) settings actually affect the performance of your campaigns? Well, we were curious, and so we managed to find data that indicates to what degree setting pricing rules for direct response campaigns could actually change the campaign’s performance.
The effects of implementing the Video Player Ad-Serving Interface Definition (VPAID) standard have sparked several discussions online (Reddit, Hacker News) among dissatisfied users. There have even been in-depth breakdowns of the closely related Video Ad Serving Template (VAST) standard, digging into the potentially excessive amounts of data consumed on some mobile sites using these technologies. The consensus seems to be that the misuse of technologies like VPAID or VAST drive the adoption of ad blockers, and contribute to a general distrust of web advertising.
- Refreshing an ad placement 1 time reduces CPM by almost 10% (CPM = cost per thousand impressions)
- Refreshing an ad placement 5 times reduces CPM by 25%
- Using refresh increases revenue-per-page for long page view times
- Using refresh could decrease site performance
- Using refresh could increase data usage
A few weeks ago, we contributed an article to AdExchanger’s Data-Driven Thinking column about the civil war within the advertising industry. In the article, we discussed that the industry factions could be in trouble — with the exception of Google. We wanted to expand on why and how Google became such a powerful player in the online advertising industry.
Let’s get down to business: We know what it takes to excel with Google publishing solutions
We’re happy to announce that we’ve been selected to join Google’s Certified Publishing Partners program. With our expertise in DoubleClick Ad Exchange and our experience with DoubleClick for Publishers (in fact, our platform is built on it!), we are the ideal partner to help you earn as much as possible from every impression.
In the advertising industry there are two general types of traffic that end up on publisher’s websites. They are known as unpaid (organic), and arbitrage.
Viewability has been hailed as the next great ad performance metric. It allows advertisers to determine if their ad was actually seen, and therefore confirm the performance of their display ad campaigns.
Above the fold (ATF) inventory has always been in high demand and at a premium. Advertisers want to ensure that their brand creatives are highly visible, located front and center when a visitor lands on a page. It’s assumed that these high visibility slots will also pay high CPMs (Cost Per Thousand), and publishers are often eager to stuff their pages with above the fold inventory in an effort to capture those high CPMs. But are all above the fold slots created equal? Are ATF slots the only way to ensure high CPMs? And are the ads even being seen?