Introduction
In display, it is commonplace for publishers to plug into more than one automated monetization channel
to liquidate unsold inventory. How prevalent is this in video, and what does it mean for brand advertisers?
Methodology
TubeMogul examined pre-roll inventory across its breadth of supply sources, including the Web’s top
private networks, platforms and exchanges - click here
for a full list of partners. The sample spans 266.7 million auctions for ad space over a five day period.
From there, overlapping sites were reviewed and prices of winning auctions compared by both sites
and volume.
To control for differences in price by audience demographic, only campaigns without third-party
data targeting were used. Not included in the scope of this study is to what extent publishers distribute
different inventory slices to different liquidation sources, and how natural marketplace fluctuations
contribute to pricing disparities over time, making this more of a market barometer than
"buying guide."
Results / Analysis
The bulk of pre-roll volume available for real-time media buying comes from the small percentage of
publishers (13.7%) that monetize on multiple platforms.
By volume, then, most pre-roll is on sites that monetize on multiple platforms. But why would it matter
where duplicated sites were purchased, so long as each ad had a measurable impact and ran in a safe environment?
Where the exact same sites are purchased has a sizable impact on price. CPMs differ by $6.10, on average.
This number is lower for comScore 100 publishers, likely due to the fact that many of these sites have
higher average CPMs and more competitive bidding.
Partnership limitations restrict what can be revealed by inventory source, but it is worth noting that no
single platform stands out as more or less expensive than another -- price varies both within and between
platforms. The broader point is simply that price varies.
Conclusions
Here are several conclusions from an advertiser's point of view, but we obviously bring our own perspective.
We welcome your feedback.
- Publishers are plugging into multiple supply-side partners to meet their needs and maximize profits –
even in video.
- The market is still highly variable and not yet equilibrated – even for identical sites. Demand side platforms
(DSPs) plugged into the most video advertising partners are well-positioned to gain visibility
into true supply/demand conditions and purchase accordingly.
- A demand side platform might pay for itself purely on the basis of price, given its position to optimize across
duplicated sites. Since DSPs charge negotiated, transparent overhead (TubeMogul does, for instance),
the calculations are straightforward.
TubeMogul examined pre-roll inventory across its breadth of supply sources, including the Web’s top private networks, platforms and exchanges - click here for a full list of partners. The sample spans 266.7 million auctions for ad space over a five day period. From there, overlapping sites were reviewed and prices of winning auctions compared by both sites and volume.
To control for differences in price by audience demographic, only campaigns without third-party data targeting were used. Not included in the scope of this study is to what extent publishers distribute different inventory slices to different liquidation sources, and how natural marketplace fluctuations contribute to pricing disparities over time, making this more of a market barometer than "buying guide."
Results / Analysis
The bulk of pre-roll volume available for real-time media buying comes from the small percentage of
publishers (13.7%) that monetize on multiple platforms.
By volume, then, most pre-roll is on sites that monetize on multiple platforms. But why would it matter
where duplicated sites were purchased, so long as each ad had a measurable impact and ran in a safe environment?
Where the exact same sites are purchased has a sizable impact on price. CPMs differ by $6.10, on average.
This number is lower for comScore 100 publishers, likely due to the fact that many of these sites have
higher average CPMs and more competitive bidding.
Partnership limitations restrict what can be revealed by inventory source, but it is worth noting that no
single platform stands out as more or less expensive than another -- price varies both within and between
platforms. The broader point is simply that price varies.
Conclusions
Here are several conclusions from an advertiser's point of view, but we obviously bring our own perspective.
We welcome your feedback.
- Publishers are plugging into multiple supply-side partners to meet their needs and maximize profits –
even in video.
- The market is still highly variable and not yet equilibrated – even for identical sites. Demand side platforms
(DSPs) plugged into the most video advertising partners are well-positioned to gain visibility
into true supply/demand conditions and purchase accordingly.
- A demand side platform might pay for itself purely on the basis of price, given its position to optimize across
duplicated sites. Since DSPs charge negotiated, transparent overhead (TubeMogul does, for instance),
the calculations are straightforward.
Here are several conclusions from an advertiser's point of view, but we obviously bring our own perspective. We welcome your feedback.
- Publishers are plugging into multiple supply-side partners to meet their needs and maximize profits – even in video.
- The market is still highly variable and not yet equilibrated – even for identical sites. Demand side platforms (DSPs) plugged into the most video advertising partners are well-positioned to gain visibility into true supply/demand conditions and purchase accordingly.
- A demand side platform might pay for itself purely on the basis of price, given its position to optimize across duplicated sites. Since DSPs charge negotiated, transparent overhead (TubeMogul does, for instance), the calculations are straightforward.
