The Trade Desk's recent earnings report higlighted its shift in focus from the "open internet" to the rebranded "premium internet." With CEO, Jeff Green, emphasising the distinction between the two. The company has traditionally positioned itself as a champion of the open internet, but now it’s drawing a distinction between spammy content on the open web and high-quality content it wants to offer advertisers. Green noted that there is growing awareness about the role of walled gardens in distributing low-grade advertising inventory and the brand suitability risk of user-generated content. Is he right to highlight the ad-to-content ratio across walled gardens being "through the roof" and brand safety concerns around user generated content? You bet he is…. But not all walled gardens are the same and certainly it’s hard to argue the open web doesn’t have its own set of problems. The Trade Desk's focus on the premium internet aims to differentiate high-quality content from low-quality content and provide advertisers with more effective and safer ads, with The Trade Desk repositioning itself as a champion of high-quality, which is absolutely the right path to be taking in my view. https://lnkd.in/ejYcSYdB
Edward Bristow
9mo
Really pleased to see this coming from the top at TTD. It’s why we’re doubling down on making activating against premium, outcome driving inventory in TTD even easier https://www.adelaidemetrics.com/blog/attention-metrics-in-the-trade-desk-notes-from-the-field
Koen Smeets
9mo
It is a bold statement but it is a bit cynical coming from a company that has been thriving for years on the cheap spammy stuff. For many years they have been (and still are) servicing the big agencies that are looking for the lowest CPMs to be found on the internet. And now they are going to be hollier than thou.... The proof is in the pudding and all that. Let's see if they are going to stop selling the cheap stuff. And are willing to loose some of their clients because of that. If they do, I will applaud them wholeheartedly! If not, I will classify this under 'greenwashing' of the ad industry...
Ben Cudmore
9mo
Hey Nic - We really appreciate you taking the time to provide this feedback, great to see our approach and focus is resonating with our important clients.
Interesting move. Definitely make sense in this market. Though I see one caveat: there is quite a bit of controversy between terms "premium internet" and "ads". It used to work for some time in the past with "premium publishers", but with increased erosion in cpms + 3PC deprecation there is quite a high chance that "premium" will become "paid, no ads". Which makes a lot of sense for "premium audience". But might get tough for "premium only" buying platforms.
Robert Webster
9mo
I think he is 100pc right. The open Internet has failed on self regulation. We need some level of walls to keep out the bad actors.
David Spon-Smith
9mo
Agreed Nic Travis. Premium publishers provide us with quality journalism which plays a vital role in holding our elected politicians and institutions to account. If brands are struggling to articulate a purpose, then why not start with supporting premium publishers and the journalism they create.
Tara Naipaul
9mo
Thank you Nic Travis and echoing what Ben Cudmore said we really appreciate the feedback and recognising this distinction as a valued customer. Looking forward to catching up soon...
Arpad Maksay
9mo
Sholto Maud
Media / Programmatic / MADTech / SaaS / ID / Audience Insights
9moTotally agree and as a premium publisher with a very low ad volume to content ratio my only question is around what is the deciding factor? Yield for publishers continues to be eroded because you can "find the same audience elsewhere for less". Which and especially after the Forbes scandal, has been proven to a) be incorrect - something that this article covers and b) a race to the bottom on yield. The problem as I've seen it over the years is that buyers and marketers sometimes tend to forget that the context - how we used to sell media and that which is coming back into fashion, certainly as a signal post 3PC gets lost in the desire for cheaper CPMs. But ever decreasing CPMs, such as the 1% impact that has already been seen, will kill premium content. You cannot afford to sustain good content with those engaged, hard to reach audiences at sub $1. And simply adding more ad slots in the hopes of more revenue ultimately erodes your audience trust and engagement. So it's a rock and hard place unless you have a differentiated revenue stream such as subscription, which we do. But a lot don't. But we also still need to see proper - by which I mean greater than $1 - CPMs to truly reflect these audiences in their right environment.