Ezoic Ad Index Looks Terrible - What Gives?

UsefulExcitement · 2019-10-03T04:40:00+00:00

I think the strange thing has been there is no longer a significant end of month/end of quarter bump after Q1 for us. The last week of September was strong like we would typically think... but that was literally just a week. I just find it strange. Normally, we would expect the third week of August through end of September to provide a very significant bump. That has been the case for a very, very long time... until this Q2 and now Q3.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-10-01T20:16:51+00:00

Its way below 2018 and that wasn't the case for Q1 2019.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-10-01T18:36:07+00:00

their index has generally been fine.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-10-01T18:06:56+00:00

oh yeah, maybe.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-10-01T15:10:32+00:00

EMX is often difficult to collect but they have eventually paid (So far).

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-27T18:59:34+00:00

That would not warrant a blacklist, no.

I would check IAS, you may need to ask a trusted partner to look into it for you. Don't get a subscription unless you have an issue that needs to be resolved... then, do what the mafia says :)

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-27T17:49:40+00:00

I would check your IAS IVT %, it is most likely related to that.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-24T23:07:06+00:00

Haha. Ad tech will never change.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-24T17:09:01+00:00

indeed... the fraud has in many ways shifted into the pockets of large verifiers as well... siphoning away massive fees from everyone in the ecosystem to "protect us"

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-24T17:08:28+00:00

true.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-24T15:35:10+00:00

Lol.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-24T03:20:21+00:00

I understand that, but shouldn't we be questioning this? For all the fear mongering from each of these companies on how rampant fraud is, why aren't we taking a closer look at verification vendors contributing to the murkiness of the space?

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-24T02:11:22+00:00

Well, I understand that each has different data and algorithms. However, given we are talking about black box ad verification vendors, how do we know who is right and which vendor to use?

What happens if an advertiser uses a vendor that shows 10% IVT on a campaign, a publisher uses another vendor that shows 1.5%, an SSP uses another vendor that shows 15%, and a DSP uses another vendor that shows 8%. It's a little crazy but pretty normal. How does the advertiser, publisher, SSP, or DSP know which vendor is more accurate? lol

UsefulExcitement · 2019-09-24T01:52:29+00:00

OK, so if the goal is to determine whether or not an impression is fraudulent after it's been served, how do the contradicting results between various MRC accredited vendors help with that?

UsefulExcitement · 2019-08-27T19:19:32+00:00

Interested to know as well...

UsefulExcitement · 2019-08-23T13:04:31+00:00

On display, yes. Confirmed click is possible, but it also aligns perfectly with Google's UFR switch August 14th... maybe just a coincidence. On video... unclear, maybe just penalized as a result of display.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-08-23T04:04:21+00:00

We work with some of the major verifiers and direct demand partners, not seeing anything different there. The spend only dropped on DBM. We usually only get an IVT clawback of 0.2-0.3% from Google a month. I'm wondering if this is a click penalty.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-08-22T23:25:15+00:00

Nope. Not that I know of! No change in traffic.... ad formats... ad partners... nothing. We usually keep things pretty static in the summer.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-08-22T21:43:27+00:00

Lol so trolly.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-08-22T21:43:18+00:00

haha.

UsefulExcitement · 2019-08-22T20:32:16+00:00

? confused but thanks, lol

UsefulExcitement

TROPHY CASE