Comments on: Your DSP Has RTB http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/ Digital media optimization news and discussion website. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:33:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Real-Time Selling: Your Buyers Know How Much Your Inventory Is Worth – Why Don’t You? « Yieldex http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-16888 Real-Time Selling: Your Buyers Know How Much Your Inventory Is Worth – Why Don’t You? « Yieldex Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:43:23 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-16888 [...] first to introduce you to the hot new TLA (three-letter acronym) for 2010: RTS. 2009 brought you RTB done by DSPs. On the other side, we’ve just been introduced to SSPs, so that means they should do – you [...] [...] first to introduce you to the hot new TLA (three-letter acronym) for 2010: RTS. 2009 brought you RTB done by DSPs. On the other side, we’ve just been introduced to SSPs, so that means they should do – you [...]

]]> By: Triggit Is Looking for Serious C / C++ / Hadoop Devs in San Francisco http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-8391 Triggit Is Looking for Serious C / C++ / Hadoop Devs in San Francisco Tue, 06 Jul 2010 13:01:09 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-8391 [...] is one of a group of recently emerging companies called demand side platforms (DSP) that provide technology to advertisers enabling them to buy display media across millions of [...] [...] is one of a group of recently emerging companies called demand side platforms (DSP) that provide technology to advertisers enabling them to buy display media across millions of [...]

]]> By: Demand Side Platform (DSP) And Why You Should Care | Marc Porcelli http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-6212 Demand Side Platform (DSP) And Why You Should Care | Marc Porcelli Wed, 05 May 2010 19:33:24 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-6212 [...] are many definitions of what a DSP is. The one I like the best comes from Zach Coelius, CEO of Triggit, “At its core, a DSP is software for transparent automated media buying across [...] [...] are many definitions of what a DSP is. The one I like the best comes from Zach Coelius, CEO of Triggit, “At its core, a DSP is software for transparent automated media buying across [...]

]]> By: Oxyfish » Blog Archive » Real-Time Selling: Your Buyers Know How Much Your Inventory Is Worth – Why Don’t You? - Yieldex CEO Tom Shields' Blog http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-5149 Oxyfish » Blog Archive » Real-Time Selling: Your Buyers Know How Much Your Inventory Is Worth – Why Don’t You? - Yieldex CEO Tom Shields' Blog Tue, 09 Mar 2010 05:25:49 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-5149 [...] first to introduce you to the hot new TLA (three-letter acronym) for 2010: RTS. 2009 brought you RTB done by DSPs. On the other side, we’ve just been introduced to SSPs, so that means they should do – [...] [...] first to introduce you to the hot new TLA (three-letter acronym) for 2010: RTS. 2009 brought you RTB done by DSPs. On the other side, we’ve just been introduced to SSPs, so that means they should do – [...]

]]> By: Mike On Ads » Blog Archive » Everybody’s a DSP, wait, what’s a DSP? http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-5006 Mike On Ads » Blog Archive » Everybody’s a DSP, wait, what’s a DSP? Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:43:23 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-5006 [...] try to define DSPs as “not a network”. You can read two examples on AdExchanger here: Zach Coelius @ Triggit, Nat Turner @ [...] [...] try to define DSPs as “not a network”. You can read two examples on AdExchanger here: Zach Coelius @ Triggit, Nat Turner @ [...]

]]> By: Cogblog » Blog Archive » Why Are Legacy Ad Players Losing the DSP Wars? http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-4835 Cogblog » Blog Archive » Why Are Legacy Ad Players Losing the DSP Wars? Sat, 13 Feb 2010 03:08:47 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-4835 [...] was reading Zach Coelius’s article defining DSPs the other day and it made me wonder, why does it seem like new companies, generally, are winning [...] [...] was reading Zach Coelius’s article defining DSPs the other day and it made me wonder, why does it seem like new companies, generally, are winning [...]

]]> By: Earl Weaver http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-4809 Earl Weaver Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:00:10 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-4809 zach- great! anyway.... Vapor Ware DSP (VWDSP). Best term of the year. e dub zach-

great! anyway....

Vapor Ware DSP (VWDSP). Best term of the year.

e dub

]]> By: Zach Coelius http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-4800 Zach Coelius Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:06:20 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-4800 Earl, The big difference is that in order to do what you are describing your tag has to be on those publishers sites. With RTB I can see and buy billions of impressions a day across 100k+ sites with out having to negotiate to get my tag on a single site. Earl,

The big difference is that in order to do what you are describing your tag has to be on those publishers sites. With RTB I can see and buy billions of impressions a day across 100k+ sites with out having to negotiate to get my tag on a single site.

]]> By: Zach Coelius http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-4799 Zach Coelius Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:04:11 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-4799 Michael, Thanks for the great comment; I really appreciate it coming from someone with your experience in space. I think you are absolutely correct that defining a "true" DSP is an exercise in futility and I doubt any of us are planning on building to anyone else's definition. But, I do think there is some value in spelling out the value that DSPs as a class can provide to our customers that is very different that what is available from the other players in the market at the moment. By defining our strengths we can show the market how much we have to offer in terms of things like scale, transparency, accountability and performance. As far as I can tell the winners in this market will be the companies that can live up to that standard and provide value to our customers. Zach Michael,
Thanks for the great comment; I really appreciate it coming from someone with your experience in space.

I think you are absolutely correct that defining a "true" DSP is an exercise in futility and I doubt any of us are planning on building to anyone else's definition. But, I do think there is some value in spelling out the value that DSPs as a class can provide to our customers that is very different that what is available from the other players in the market at the moment. By defining our strengths we can show the market how much we have to offer in terms of things like scale, transparency, accountability and performance. As far as I can tell the winners in this market will be the companies that can live up to that standard and provide value to our customers.

Zach

]]> By: Michael Walrath http://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/your-dsp-has-rtb/#comment-4790 Michael Walrath Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:30:36 +0000 http://www.adexchanger.com/?p=15437#comment-4790 Zach - This is a nice outline of your vision for a platform/service that the market needs. It provides a good sense of how you view the market and the articles from others on the site this week do the same. However, I think all of these articles are making the same mistake. You guys are focusing on a moot argument (What is a "true" DSP?) instead of some of the much more interesting questions facing your segment of the market. This urge to debate over what is and isn't a DSP is part of what happens when a market gets crowded and noisy. Customers want to cut through the clutter and there's a temptation to try to create clarity through segmentation of the market. I've been through this. There was a time not so long ago that everyone and their brother started calling themselves an exchange. Did I agree that all of these offerings (or even most of them) were exchanges? Absolutely not. But to waste the kind of energy it takes to standardize around any one definition - that's a huge cost in time/energy that none of the companies in this space can afford. Not to mention that the outcome of such a debate is worse than the debate itself - which is to say that the best case scenario of arguing over the definition of a DSP is to get everyone to agree to a watered down definition that will leave everyone unsatisfied. This will only lead to more confusion. Next thing you know we'll have 10 more acronyms. With tongue firmly planted in cheek, I offer you: Service Oriented DSP (SODSP) Technology Oriented DSP (TODSP) Network Conflicted DSP (NCDSP) Vapor Ware DSP (VWDSP) If we're not careful, we'll wind up spending countless hours debating these topics when we should be focused on the larger issues. Where is competition coming from? When about commoditization of these offerings? Is that coming? How will the market evolve, and how will that force the players here to evolve? I know a lot of the folks behind this DSP debate personally - there's some real brainpower at work here. How about taking on some of the harder and more interesting issues here? Zach - This is a nice outline of your vision for a platform/service that the market needs. It provides a good sense of how you view the market and the articles from others on the site this week do the same.

However, I think all of these articles are making the same mistake. You guys are focusing on a moot argument (What is a "true" DSP?) instead of some of the much more interesting questions facing your segment of the market.

This urge to debate over what is and isn't a DSP is part of what happens when a market gets crowded and noisy. Customers want to cut through the clutter and there's a temptation to try to create clarity through segmentation of the market. I've been through this. There was a time not so long ago that everyone and their brother started calling themselves an exchange. Did I agree that all of these offerings (or even most of them) were exchanges? Absolutely not. But to waste the kind of energy it takes to standardize around any one definition - that's a huge cost in time/energy that none of the companies in this space can afford. Not to mention that the outcome of such a debate is worse than the debate itself - which is to say that the best case scenario of arguing over the definition of a DSP is to get everyone to agree to a watered down definition that will leave everyone unsatisfied.

This will only lead to more confusion. Next thing you know we'll have 10 more acronyms. With tongue firmly planted in cheek, I offer you:

Service Oriented DSP (SODSP)
Technology Oriented DSP (TODSP)
Network Conflicted DSP (NCDSP)
Vapor Ware DSP (VWDSP)

If we're not careful, we'll wind up spending countless hours debating these topics when we should be focused on the larger issues.

Where is competition coming from?
When about commoditization of these offerings? Is that coming?
How will the market evolve, and how will that force the players here to evolve?

I know a lot of the folks behind this DSP debate personally - there's some real brainpower at work here. How about taking on some of the harder and more interesting issues here?

]]>