Introduction
Ad Networks versus Rep Firms
Networks as a Complement to Publishers
The Killer Criteria for Ad Networks
Berens: Let's talk about the difference between rep firms and ad networks, particularly with regard to branding issues. Some say that rep firms would contend that they take care of the brand propinquity problem (i.e., just where are my ads going to be and next to what sort of content?) by guaranteeing the publication and placement. Is that accurate?
Apprendi: If you’d ask five people this question, you’d get five different answers, but let me give you my stock answer.
From my perspective, the difference between a rep firm and an ad network is black and white. A rep firm represents and sells a specific site(s) individually and will provide full reporting transparency on delivery data. An ad network does not represent and sell a specific site and does not provide full transparency on reporting.
However, with inventory transparency and audience segmentation and targeting, a few ad networks are providing a nice complement to what brand marketers could only find on site-specific buys. This is a huge opportunity for publishers that want to increase the value of their remnant or unsold ad inventory without creating sales conflicts.
Once you can create value based on audiences (branding) versus only results (direct response), then you can lift yield dramatically on the same unsold ad inventory. For brand marketers, this gives them a new, efficient complement to their media plan without comprising their brand in any way.
Berens: You're coming back to ad networks after a long hiatus, having worked at 24/7 Real Media earlier in your career. How has the ad network space changed since, say, DoubleClick and CLIQNOW! launched back in 1995? And, how do your experiences with 24/7, Eyeblaster, Falk and Klipmart inform your take on ad networks today?
Apprendi: I have to tell you, I do find it somewhat surprising that I’m back in the ad network game after a five year rich media and ad serving diversion, but I simply couldn’t ignore this monster opportunity. Many of my closest and most respected industry friends didn’t get it the attraction. I would hear, “Great idea Joe. Just what the world needs... another ad network?” And I understood their perspective because they weren’t as close to the business as I was.
The last three years at Falk, having been the number one ad serving provider to ad networks, gave me insight into the ad network market as it is today, and the funny thing was that much hadn’t changed since I left 24/7 at the end of 2000.
For the most part, ad networks we’re still operating on the same value proposition, reach and efficiency, and still focused on one category of advertiser, direct marketer. With the benefit of brand advertisers spending more on internet advertising, rising CPMs on portals/publishers and strong availability of unsold ad inventory, I thought there was a great opportunity to create if you will “the luxury brand in the ad network category” with a focus on the brand marketer. Obviously, my rich media background, at both Eyeblaster and Klipmart, gave me further insight into how to custom tailor an ad network to best meet the high standards of brand advertisers and top publishers alike.
With the growing acceptance of audience targeting by context/behavior (not just by site/section), I felt there was a way to create a scaleable ad network business for brand advertisers without having to go the rep firm route. And so far, market feedback has been tremendous. I think you’ll see more ad networks attempt to re-invent themselves to tap this growing segment of online advertising, but it’s not as easy it looks.
Previous: Introduction Next: Networks as a complement to publishers
