• Pat Grady

    Imo, the way you’re using the term “SEM” is bound to confuse people.

  • Pat Grady

    I think the fraud (and pseudo-fraud) in RTB / DSP / “Programmatic Display” ecosystem needs taming. But the looseness of GDN keyword thematic matching, is nearly a problem on the same order of magnitude (in some cases). For ROI centric advertisers, that looseness can mean failure (or an enormous time suck). I think it’s in G’s interest (and advertiser’s and consumer’s) to finally offer keyword matching types in Display – let folks aim wide when it makes sense, but also let them be narrow when the situation calls for it. The absence of that fine contextual control is pushing us to use Programmatic Display, despite our serious concerns about its quality.

  • Adrian Huth

    I agree with the new {un}enhanced targeting there is a real opportunity to leverage the RTB world of display as a better option for our clients. The biggest issue I see though is these RTB platforms are usually managed and not self serve and still have budget entry points where GDN is open for everybody regardless of budget. I really hope this changes as there is a huge opportunity here as marketing managers like myself begin to shift budget to other platforms due to the Google changes.

  • Chris Zaharias

    DRod, unlike U of Iowa sports teams, you are getting better over time; this is a great post, and shows how well-rounded you and your team’s thinking is despite the PPC name.

    One thing I’d add is that *the* most valuable intent data is the searches that people conduct on advertisers’ websites. That data, if turned into smart targeting and ad creative decisions, makes programmatic buying work like gangbusters. When a travel site knows that someone on their site searched SFO-CDG flights departing May 15 & returning May 23, they can retarget with ads showing flights, hotels, or packages fitting that search query, and will usually have great success.

    Given how much of paid and organic search is now people navigating to known brands, this post-search query data usage is going to become critical to getting payback for the trademark toll-booth Google has set up.

  • Frost Prioleau

    David – Great article….especially the conclusion that Programmatic Display ends up the winner! (Full disclosure: As David knows, I am CEO of Simpli.fi, a Demand Side Platform that was mentioned in the article.)

    One nit on the chart: Many DSPs (including Simpli.fi) have fully functional UIs, so no API integration is required. Also, some (yes…you guessed it…including Simpli.fi) enable CPC bidding.

    Thanks for taking the time to put this together…really a great analysis!

  • http://www.stanleyoppenheimer.com searchengineman

    Once of my biggest beefs on Display Network is “Anonymous.Google” Adsense Advertisers. Web properties that don’t want sites listed to advertisers.

    Having never had the budget (yet) to work with DSP’s . (Sigh..not every client can drop 10 to 40K). I’m curious if the DSP offer full transparency site/pages/devices/TimeofDay your Ad was served.

  • http://www.facebook.com/gohawks David Rodnitzky

    Sarah, I believe that is changing with enhanced campaigns.

  • http://www.facebook.com/gohawks David Rodnitzky

    Great observation Pat. Google has gotten better with their semantic targeting on GDN – recall that they used to not allow keyword-level bidding, but now they can. So I’d say it’s a work in progress that Google is actively improving – stay tuned!

  • http://www.facebook.com/gohawks David Rodnitzky

    Adrian, great point. This is definitely true – when you add in the cost of a DSP and ad serving, the cost of RTB gets very high, very quickly. I think the RTB space still has plenty of evolution in front of it though.

  • http://www.facebook.com/gohawks David Rodnitzky

    I am going to disregard the Iowa slam (except to say – watch out for Iowa basketball next year!).

    I agree that publisher-specific search data is great if you can get it. Of course, there are a few problems with this data – in practice:

    1. You assume that advertiser can create dynamically-generated ads and landing pages that accurately mirror the content of the page. Easier said than done!

    2. Attribution is important when valuing a post-search retarget vs a search ad. If not attributed correctly, you might end up buying ads that “convert” but actually just add extra cost to a conversion that was going to happen anyways.

    3. Most advertisers don’t have enough scale (e.g. page views) to make this sort of granular retargeting a huge part of their budget.

  • http://www.facebook.com/gohawks David Rodnitzky

    Thanks Frost. I guess what I should have clarified is that the end-advertiser cannot just log-in to the ad exchange as they can with AdWords or GDN – they need to work with a DSP, like SImpli.fi!

  • http://www.facebook.com/gohawks David Rodnitzky

    Yes, anonymous is annoying. Note that you can exclude anonymous sites by excluding the specific publisher ID (e.g. anonymous.google.com/123456).

    DSPs to my knowledge offer some transparency but I don’t think it is as granular as what you are asking for above.