Home The Sell Sider Publishers And The Hidden ‘Ad Tech Tax’

Publishers And The Hidden ‘Ad Tech Tax’

SHARE:

scottgatzThe Sell Sider” is a column written by the sell side of the digital media community.

Today’s column is written by Scott Gatz, CEO and founder at Q.Digital.

I recently read about a study finding that only 40% of digital ad spend actually goes to working media. The rest is eaten up by agency fees and the tech that agencies use to buy digital media.

But this study didn’t take into account the “tech tax” that publishers must pay in order to service clients. We have to pay invisible fees each and every day to stay in business and compete with other publishers.

Even as direct-sold CPMs are decreasing, agencies ask publishers to pay serving fees, viewability-tracking fees, brand safety-tracking fees and even brand lift study fees.

So many metrics, so many added taxes we gotta pay.

So Many Questions

I’m not sure whether advertisers know the trade-offs up-and-coming publishers make to service their increasingly specific needs. If I want to add a data management platform (DMP) to my mix, for example, I face several questions. Do I take the cost out of my marketing budget? If so, I’m trading between better targeting the audience I have versus growing the reach I can provide.

Other questions: Is it better to hire an additional political reporter or launch an initiative to improve viewability? Do I build a new user first-party data collection tool or add a new feature to improve stickiness and engagement? Is there any way to build my own solution for a fraction of the cost of a well-known and well-trusted DMP?

The Struggle Is Real

Beyond the fees listed above, there are hidden costs and trade-offs that publishers weigh to provide robust offerings. Each fee means evaluating the cost vs. benefit, finding solutions or losing more revenue.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

There are several tricky issues on the brains of today’s publishers. There is viewability waste, for example. We don’t know beforehand if an ad will be viewed or not, so a healthy percentage of impressions – anywhere from 20% to 50% – go unpaid. Result: The money a publisher may have made in the past is now – poof! – gone.

There’s also viewability tracking. Should we pay MOAT, Integral Ad Science or DV to give us insights into our own viewability stats so that we can decrease our viewability waste and make our partners happier? Result: more money out the door for reporting.

Don’t forget the long-standing issue of agencies and publishers reporting different numbers, even when we are all on DoubleClick. Say goodbye to another 5% to 10% of hoped-for revenue. Result: slimmer margins.

To DMP or not to DMP? There are some great DMP choices on the market with first-party data targeting. A DMP becomes a strategic initiative balanced against other strategic priorities. Does the revenue justify it in the next few months? In a year? Two? Result: The average price for a good DMP starts in the high five figures, plus staffing to get it running well.

Another challenge: third-party data targeting. Everyone wants to target users on advanced criteria. We can buy the data to do this, too. Result: less money.

Finally, there is audience extension. Once we refine the targets so much, we might not have the reach. Result: Let’s go out and buy those users elsewhere (cutting our profit further).

Quality Costs

As a publisher, I am not in this alone. As CPMs shrink and demands grow, all publishers are forced to raise CPMs and educate agencies and clients on the costs of their demands. In the spreadsheet-based world of media buying, that doesn’t often line up with their “target CPM” way of thinking. It seems that some folks forget to layer in these hidden costs that quality publishers absorb.

Marketers would do well to remember that they have much higher-quality impressions – that is, more viewable, more data-targeted – than even a year ago. It’s a vast improvement in reaching the right customers. Brands and agencies should not expect this increase in value to be free. It’s only natural that CPMs should go up.

To help educate agencies, publishers should add and label incremental CPMs for viewability, third-party data targeting and even for first-party data targeting. Publishers should start to get agencies used to seeing these added to line items.

Since publishers love clarity, marketers and agencies should be clear about what their goals are. Is it more important to have a smaller but much more targeted audience, which is therefore more expensive, or is it more important to hit the “best CPM” across previous campaigns?

While I understand it’s the cost of doing business, only the biggest publishers can “do it all.” Everyone else must find a way to juggle the needs of marketers and their audience.

Follow Scott Gatz (@sgatz), Q.Digital (@WeAreQDigital) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

Must Read

Google Ads Will Now Use A Trusted Execution Environment By Default

Confidential matching – which uses a TEE built on Google Cloud infrastructure – will now be the default setting for all uses of advertiser first-party data in Customer Match.

In 2019, Google moved to a first-price auction and also ceded its last look advantage in AdX, in part because it had to. Most exchanges had already moved to first price.

Unraveling The Mystery Of PubMatic’s $5 Million Loss From A “First-Price Auction Switch”

PubMatic’s $5 million loss from DV360’s bidding algorithm fix earlier this year suggests second-price auctions aren’t completely a thing of the past.

A comic version of former News Corp executive Stephanie Layser in the courtroom for the DOJ's ad tech-focused trial against Google in Virginia.

The DOJ vs. Google, Day Two: Tales From The Underbelly Of Ad Tech

Day Two of the Google antitrust trial in Alexandria, Virginia on Tuesday was just as intensely focused on the intricacies of ad tech as on Day One.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters
A comic depicting Judge Leonie Brinkema's view of the her courtroom where the DOJ vs. Google ad tech antitrust trial is about to begin. (Comic: Court Is In Session)

Your Day One Recap: DOJ vs. Google Goes Deep Into The Ad Tech Weeds

It’s not often one gets to hear sworn witnesses in federal court explain the intricacies of header bidding under oath. But that’s what happened during the first day of the Google ad tech-focused antitrust case in Virginia on Monday.

Comic: What Else? (Google, Jedi Blue, Project Bernanke)

Project Cheat Sheet: A Rundown On All Of Google’s Secret Internal Projects, As Revealed By The DOJ

What do Hercule Poirot, Ben Bernanke, Star Wars and C.S. Lewis have in common? If you’re an ad tech nerd, you’ll know the answer immediately.

shopping cart

The Wonderful Brand Discusses Testing OOH And Online Snack Competition

Wonderful hadn’t done an out-of-home (OOH) marketing push in more than 15 years. That is, until a week ago, when it began a campaign across six major markets to promote its new no-shell pistachio packs.