Google sent the online ad ecosystem reeling a week ago with the news that, upon reflection, third-party cookies will not be deprecated for the entire browser.
But what about the ad tech vendor partners that committed serious energy and resources to test Chrome’s Privacy Sandbox proposals? Vendors like Criteo, RTB House, Raptive and MiQ placed meaningful bets on Google’s vision for what it calls the sustainable, cookie-free future of the web.
If the news was a moment of vindication for ad tech companies like The Trade Desk that dug in and opposed the Privacy Sandbox proposals and the plan to deprecate third-party cookies, was it a cruel blow to partners who bought in and showed good faith?
We asked them.
A reversal, but a good one?
Despite what seems like a major setback to the Privacy Sandbox, the closest vendor participants say they are enthusiastic about the change and their commitment to the Privacy Sandbox remains unaffected.
“Whether Chrome hits a button that goes to 100% cookie deprecation or gives consumers a button that brings it to 60% or 80% deprecation, in a sense that’s a distinction without a difference for us,” said Michael Lamb, chief commercial officer at RTB House, an active Sandbox tester.
Some vendors might conclude it’s not worth investing the time if Google is less committed to removing third-party cookies, Lamb said. “But I think that would be the wrong choice.”
MiQ also remains committed to its Sandbox testing and product development, assuming it will be an important part of targeting and attribution without cookies, according to John Goulding, MiQ’s global chief strategy officer. “Until then we’re going to stay the course.”
If anything, vendors expect cookie deprecation to speed up if the consent mechanism shifts from Chrome, gradually reducing cookie tracking over time to users blocking cookies one by one.
“We believe that users will overwhelmingly opt for the private choice,” said Andrew Pascoe, VP of data science engineering at NextRoll, another active Sandbox tester. “This means that our investments are more important than ever. This change in direction is likely to usher in a lack of third-party cookies sooner, rather than later.”
AdExchanger Daily
Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.
Daily Roundup
Although Criteo is in a quiet period before it reports earnings this Thursday, the company said, “Based on our Privacy Sandbox testing results published recently, we welcome this news on behalf of the entire ecosystem. We look forward to continuing our partnership with Google.”
Last December, Criteo Chief Product Officer Todd Parsons, who heads up Criteo’s extensive efforts in the Sandbox, said the time and effort spent on the new Chrome tools represented a serious commitment of engineering resources, and a reversal of the proposed policies would be a real setback.
The real problems in the Privacy Sandbox
While the ad tech vendors AdExchanger spoke to were generally positive about Google’s reversal, they admit the Privacy Sandbox does have serious problems.
There’s a high level of hubris behind some supporters of alternative IDs and first-party data, Goulding said. But Chrome could easily reach 75% or more cookie-free users, he added, and “then the larger industry players would be foolish not to swallow their pride and take the Privacy Sandbox much more seriously.”
This attitude underscores Chrome’s cosmetic problem: This is Google, after all, and the Privacy Sandbox requires adoption by many DSPs that are not inclined to help Google.
There are structural issues with the Sandbox, according to Raptive Chief Strategy Officer Paul Bannister. But those are mainly resolvable.
For one thing, Bannister said Google needs to open up what Chrome calls the “top-level seller,” which is currently just Google Ad Manager. Otherwise, publishers and advertisers see no API data on how audience segments are being targeted.
“That is mainly responsible for the lackluster enthusiasm from sell-side participants,” he said.
And if the supply is there, DSP will follow.
Lamb said that if anything surprised him during RTB House’s most recent Privacy Sandbox tests, it was the degree to which the Google ad exchange alone is an insufficient supply channel.
Google AdX, as it’s called, accounts for about 30% of RTB House’s typical supply, he said. Via the sandbox, campaigns are almost 90% AdX supply.
The other structural problem is latency, Lamb said. Right now, cloud infrastructure and massive server farms power the data and bandwidth required to process billions of ad impressions per day, while pinging many different servers and vendors within milliseconds. With the Privacy Sandbox, a lot of that effort is in-housed to the device.
Someone using a new iMac may not notice. But it’s a burden on the Chrome mobile app.
Aside from the structural issues, though, the Privacy Sandbox still must secure the buy-in of antagonists and holdouts.
“Whether companies were confused or attempting to torpedo the Sandbox in order to keep cookies, a lot of people didn’t show up,” Lamb said of the vendor ecosystem. “Which meant the Privacy Sandbox got a lot of ‘no’ votes due to nonparticipation.”
