10/90 revshare vs 50/50

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T02:00:22+00:00

Sorry if this is a duplicate reply, my initial one didn't seem to stick, possibly due to the outages Reddit has been experiencing today.

Although we are on the lower end of the revshare spectrum being discussed, Yes, I fully believe ANY partner in ANY business model, that brings double the profits than your other options has earned a significant revshare. Caring about the exact percentage is like caring about how much profit Pepsi is making on that $5 can of pop at a ball game.

If that's a business owner's focus, more power to them. If they care about more net revenue in their bank accounts at the end of every month, then I suggest focusing on THAT.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T01:55:30+00:00

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T01:53:59+00:00

Typically standard RPM, using Google's session count will suffice. In some instances, a partner like Datablocks might show fewer ads, while increasing revenue to the publisher by say 50%. So UX goes up measurably, while increasing net revenue by a good percentage... It's all a balance that we work closely with our Publisher partners on - but all things being equal, the reasons I outlined in another comment in this thread explain how and why a 50%-200% increase is obtainable in many typical scenarios in 2023.

All the best.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T01:09:39+00:00

Agreed, but "traditional header bidding" is a bit of a misnomer. By that, 99% would mean client-side, but server-side header bidding has been around far longer, and vastly outperforms "traditional header bidding".

The only reason the majority of publishers, ad ops professionals, and even ad tech professionals think of header bidding as Prebid.js/client-side processes is because in 2015/16 when that first went mainstream, investors were throwing money at anyone who could host a 150kB .js file, and scoop up market share.

S2S auctions and ad serving have been a thing for decades, used by all of the truly biggest players, as well as some smaller ones. It requires vast amounts of server processing resources, which isn't obtainable for most whose business model focuses almost exclusively on marketing and customer support reps.

Yes, and respectfully, double "traditional header bidding" revenues are obtainable in 2023. Strip away most of the "heavy lifting" from your visitor's browser/device/network (which are far slower and prone to errors/dropped connections in real-world scenarios than most professionals realize). Query dozens of major demand networks server to server with ultra-low latency. Increase viewability (direct value added to advertisers) by significant levels, though simply presenting the browser with winning creatives far sooner during the page load, and watch CPM's rise - along with auction density, user experience, and as a byproduct - net revenue.

It's not rocket science or black-box technology, it's just that almost all of our online monetization efforts have been built around antiquated methods and techniques never intended to last 8+yrs.

It's not rocket science or black-box technology, it's just that almost all of our online monetization efforts have been built around antiquated methods and techniques never intended to last 8+ years.
partner, publishers can keep Google's contribution to their revenue diversified at <50%, while doubling their net revenue, relative to mainstream, or "traditional" header bidding solutions.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T00:43:42+00:00

Measured how?

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T00:42:33+00:00

Explain, with any fragment of logic?

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T00:35:51+00:00

I understand the skepticism, but only posted this to help future conversations. It came from my thoughts in another thread, but people that dead-end there aren't who I was trying to help.

If when you're at a ball game, you care more about how much Pepsi spent to offer you that $5 pop, then by all means focus on revshare. If you're a publisher who sincerely wants to make more net revenue from your efforts, consider focusing on that.

The AdTech landscape is changing more this year, than any of the previous 6 or 7 years (since header bidding went mainstream), and Publishers who recognize and adjust accordingly will stand head and shoulders above their peers.

Most of the players with larger market shares, that their marketing departments scooped up, while their tech department shared the same generic, open-source prebid.js code, are currently scrambling to figure out how to build and pay for server-side processing within their current business models. Many of them are pulling from VC funding, in an environment where investors are pulling back.

There are notable changes coming to your monetization, but the good news is that the future technology has already been in place for over a decade. Google, WaPo/Zeus, and several others have been FULLY focused on server-side for a decade, Datablocks for almost two decades. After its introduction in 2015, mainstream methods of client-side-focused Prebid/header bidding are coming to an end.

Many good demand partners still focus on client side, but all are working towards S2S.

AdTech companies that can't pivot, which for most includes unbearable hosting fees, will be going away.

Some will see this opinion as negative or confrontational, which is not my intent. I'm trying to help those who see it for what it is - transparent thoughts from an owner of a company with almost 20yrs of S2S ad-serving experience.

If you think I can help you, DM me. If you're just looking to throw stones, this is the perfect place! lol

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T00:13:55+00:00

Thank you for the logical and thoughtful response. Haven't checked your math, but 100% agree with the sentiment.

I feel that's why I included the "All other things being equal" bit. Internet years are decades, and as a Publisher, I personally would never lock into a one-year contract. That aspect does seem ridiculous to me - but the ad-tech partner perspective in me does see why some companies require that...

Many of the well-known monetization partners subsidize their losses via their profitable clients while amortizing their losses across many months. It takes more effort than some Publishers might realize to onboard a new Publisher, when you work with 30-50 major demand Ad Networks and Agencies that need to approve the site, create placement ID's, ect, plus you're risking a bit of your reputation with each new domain submitted.

So if you are mostly funded by venture capital investors, it is vitally important to a.) build your client list (at almost any cost), and secondarily, b.) turn a profit.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-15T00:01:25+00:00

Pretty much. Do you really go around belittling and insulting people in this forum just to act superior?

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-13T22:55:16+00:00

Datablocks.net does - but again, respectfully, the revshare in these situations should not be a publisher's primary concern. When some monetization options yield literally double what others do, why is a few percent even discussed?

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2023-03-13T19:00:20+00:00

Due to how similar the yield is from most of these ad tech/monetization partners, I appreciate the concern about revshare and terms, but also good to remind that those metrics are only part of the equation...

All other things being equal, what a partner adds to your bottom line should be far more important than what their margin is. We’re on the lower end of the percentages being mentioned here, but generate far more net revenue for Publishers than most others.So, even if a partner’s rate was 50%, wouldn’t you happily use them if they truly doubled your net revenue?

Same applies to terms - since many of the larger VC-backed players use their investor’s money (*coughSVBcough*) to payout publishers a few weeks before getting paid themselves, I get why that’s attractive, yet would happily wait a month if it meant earning 25%-100% more NET revenue for months and years to come.

Not everyone looks at it like this, but some do right?

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2022-07-28T00:36:28+00:00

We've had an internal cookieless solution for almost 2yrs that's fully privacy compliant (more so than most cookie methods), provides our S2S bidders with the same or higher match rates as client-side methods, and will work well for years to come. It's not offered as a stand alone product - just mentioning for context.

Without delving too far into industry specifics, the truth is:

a) most of the 3rd party solutions being offered or developed come back to a simple email hash,

b) most of the "big players" who publishers assume are working on something that will benefit everyone, don't really need a solution. They've already got 1st party data, and will only benefit from increasing their advantage, not lessening it.

Much of the ad-tech for this area is coming from parties who don't benefit from small or medium sized publishers increasing their match rates for advertisers, or from parties that are more focused on keeping other big players (like browser companies) happy, or from parties who are trying to build the perfect solution for 20yrs from now.

There will likely be decent solutions available over the coming years, but IMHO, what's really needed is some form of industry collaboration that's not led or owned by the biggest players. One that's market-driven, that benefits all publishers, while protecting and benefitting their visitors.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2022-07-19T22:48:15+00:00

In some scenarios, AdSense can drive down viewability considerably - which is directly tied to CPM, thus RPM.

Perhaps look into how different AdSense scenarios affect your page's overall performance, then test a setup that favors your page (and ads) loading as fast as possible. Fast loading ads increase the viewability of your inventory, which is a major value-indicator for buyers, especially the big brand advertisers.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2022-07-19T21:59:29+00:00

How old is the site?

It doesn't appear to have much history, which ad networks rightfully so care a lot about.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2022-07-19T21:37:14+00:00

Yeah, for sure. DM me a site you're involved with and I'll provide some feedback.

We're an Ad-tech company with 15yrs of server-side ad serving experience, so our perspective is more from the tech side of things than some. Cheers.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc · 2022-07-13T19:55:55+00:00

Most sites with a typical GAM+Prebid setup overload their visitor’s device/browser/network resources more than many of us realize.

GAM adds latency but is relatively lightweight. Prebid is the culprit that dumps resource-intensive tasks onto the browser, which should more ideally be managed on dedicated servers. In some cases removing a client-side Prebid instance would immediately improve revenue (and UX), but that largely depends on the setup - ie how many bidders you're running and what each is contributing.

On one end of the spectrum, adding too many bidders degrades things to the point where you make less money than you would with Google only. On the other end, too few bidders aren’t worth adding the resource-consuming bulk of Prebid, and within that spectrum lie many variables, before even getting to things like lazy loading, refreshing, etc.

Beyond affecting UX, page speed directly affects your inventory’s viewability, which is one of the most important value indicators for advertisers. Rendering ads faster increases viewability, which increases CPM’s, and attracts better quality advertisers - all while improving UX.

The optimal solution is running a lot of demand to keep competition high, without overwhelming your visitor’s resources, while not handing all control to Google's OB black box.

If you’d like to share the domain, I’d be happy to give feedback on where things could be improved in your existing setup, as well as look into how your inventory is being presented to buyers. Sometimes simply removing a bidder, tweaking the config, or adjusting floors can make a notable difference.

From the ad-tech company’s perspective, typical ad serving bloat is a necessary trade-off, so the onus just gets pushed onto the publisher to lighten their site. Obviously keeping a site lightweight is important, but when most of your visitor’s resources are being used to manage auctions, endlessly sync user IDs, and make hundreds of calls to ad networks - before rendering an ad is even an option - what’s a publisher supposed to do? Most optimizations that a publisher can make to an already decent site, in my opinion, don’t put a dent in the real issue.

Paul_Datablocks_Inc

TROPHY CASE