For publishers, navigating programmatic monetization can be challenging. The technology is complex and the market offers many options to monetize mobile inventory.
For example, there are at least three ways of conducting programmatic monetization. And each of them can deliver different performance results.
Publishers can work with one SSP. It means connecting Ad Server to just one supply side platform and receiving the winning offers from the DSPs connected to it through the RTB marketplace. In this case, it is technically simple to organize, and the amount of impressions which inevitably gets lost with the data processing will not exceed 0.5%. On the other hand, the pool of demand will be smaller than when working with several SSPs, which may result in smaller fill rate for the publisher.
To ensure that they monetize inventory to the fullest, publishers can include more than one SSP into the process. They can work with several SSPs at the same time or in turns.
In the first case, publisher will access larger demand pool and better prices, as a result of the competition among all the DSPs. However, this setup is more difficult to manage, as the publisher’s Ad Server will have to process requests from many SSPs at the same time. Additionally, with the technology involved, up to 10% of impressions will be lost on the way to the publisher. It happens because of the complexity of the technology stack. Some impressions, or data associated with them, will not be transmitted from DSP to SSP due to the technology deficiencies and incapacity to process 100% of data without losses.
In the second case, publisher’s Ad Server sends requests to several SSPs one by one. If there is no ad that would match the request, Ad Server will continue reaching out to more SSPs. This solution provides access to a larger pool of demand, but at the same time, requires an advanced technological stack to manage all the bids and ads. Another downside is the overlapping demand. It means that different SSPs that connect to the publisher’s Ad Server can work with the same DSPs through the RTB marketplace. If this happens, it makes the complex setup obsolete, because in the end, the demand pool is not getting bigger. However, even with this risk, “waterfall” monetization is rather effective in terms of fill rate.
Overall, more complex solutions provide better fill rates and more opportunities for effective inventory monetization. But should you use them?
Find below the infographics detailing on the process of mobile inventory monetization, following three different patterns.