Home Data-Driven Thinking Which Kind Of Buyer Gets The Most Out Of Programmatic TV?

Which Kind Of Buyer Gets The Most Out Of Programmatic TV?

SHARE:

jimcarusoData-Driven Thinking” is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media.

Today’s column is written by Jim Caruso, vice president of product strategy at Varick Media Management.

In digital media, change is constant, and in the past five years we’ve seen radical shifts in how ad impressions are bought and sold.

That’s not the case with TV, where airtime has been bought and sold with so little variance over the decades that change is often met with resistance. It’s no surprise then that programmatic TV has been slow to catch on with traditional TV buyers and planners.

But perhaps that’s the problem. Programmatic TV is being sold as a disruption to the old model, when in fact it should be aimed at brands that lean heavily on digital in their media mix. Right now, programmatic TV is a far better tool for digital extension than it is as a replacement for the traditional way of buying TV.

Like any emerging technology, programmatic TV is confusing, and even its sellers have difficulty articulating its value proposition. Part of this stems from two buzzwords driving the innovation in TV buying: “programmatic” and “addressable.” Often, they are used interchangeably and incorrectly, complicating the matter.

Programmatic TV can be better understood as “data-driven TV,” and can be delivered for addressable or linear consumption. There are many programmatic TV platforms that operate in the linear or addressable spaces, with some crossing both. Some providers repurpose existing technology from AudienceXpress, Clypd or Admore, while others have direct access to remnant TV inventory from multichannel video programming distributors.

For digital buyers who’d like to experiment with TV advertising, programmatic can offer similar targeting parameters and efficiencies they are used to seeing in display. Available inventory is opportunistic, remnant airtime, meaning that pricing is cheaper than it would be for upfront or scatter buys. While this type of buying doesn’t necessarily guarantee prime dayparts or programming, it can be a low-cost segue into television for a digital marketer. Best of all, it offers a more cost-efficient and targetable solution compared to traditional TV buys.

While TV is still the dominant media channel for delivering ad messages, digital is growing, necessitating hybrid video strategies that span programmatic TV and digital video for some brands. By leveraging programmatic TV, advertisers can tie their video ad buys together across screens, creating a fluid marketing message.

Think about it: In an era where many younger consumers are cutting cords and doing away with traditional TV, it makes sense to buy video across desktop, mobile and tablet. But just because some consumers are eschewing traditional TV in their homes doesn’t mean that all are; no audience is comprised solely of cord cutters. A video campaign tied together across screens hits an audience wherever they are consuming video content.

Programmatic TV makes much more sense for brands that are focused on digital and want to combine their reporting in one place. Programmatic TV offers more comprehensive reporting and cheaper costs than direct TV network buys. Programmatic platforms also aggregate inventory from multiple networks, which facilitates the buying and planning for those who are used to using a programmatic platform to handle their digital media spending.

With more consumers watching programming on connected devices or video on demand, one can expect more precise data targeting and efficiencies from programmatic TV. That will only continue to grow since connected devices remain a cheaper alternative to most cable offerings. As marketers move more money to programmatic platforms, they’ll begin to see more bang for their buck.

Follow Varick Media Management (@VarickMedia) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

Tagged in:

Must Read

Omnicom Investors Cheer IPG Sell-Off, Despite Weak Ad Spend In Q2

Omnicom is halfway through a major sell-off of IPG agencies. Its future looks healthier as it prunes lower-growth firms, including eliminating certain specialist firms and overlapping agencies in certain countries.

Hundreds of emails, depositions and other documents have been unsealed in the lead-up to the Google antitrust trial, providing a fascinating look at how Google talked about its own products when no one else was watching – especially tools to counteract the rise of header bidding.

Why PubMatic Ditched Its Prebid Web Wrapper, But Never Its SDK

Earlier this month, PubMatic shelved its Prebid integration wrapper, known as OpenWrap Web, and announced it would begin recommending Playwire as an offloading-onboarding partner for the 250-odd publishers that use its wrapper.

Gareth Glaser, Co-Founder & CEO, Gamera

Google’s Buyer Direct Could Beat Agentic Ad Tech At Its Own Game

Agentic AI shows promise for direct deals. But if Google has its way, Buyer Direct could put an end to all sorts of agentic direct sales opportunities while they’re still in the cradle.

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

How Warner Bros. Discovery Is Creating Value Out Of Dead Air With Pause Ads

Streaming publishers are banking on pause ads to bolster revenue with a more user-friendly ad experience. With programmatic standardization still pending, Warner Bros. Discovery is taking a stab at advancing the capabilities behind its own pause ad formats.

Peacock Hits Profitability As Comcast Prepares To Spin Off NBCU

Peacock hit what Comcast Co-CEO Mike Cavanagh called “meaningful profitability” for the first time in Q2, just as Comcast decided to let it leave the nest. 

Comic: It's Coming For You

Programmatic Platforms Champion Transparency, But Not If It Means Giving Activists Access

A DSP refused to give ad industry watchdog Check My Ads a seat on its platform, even after both parties cosigned a master service agreement, citing concerns about “protections” for “vendor and supply partners.”