The Unique Position of Hyperlocal Publishers in a Real-Time Bidding World | Street Fight

Commentary

The Unique Position of Hyperlocal Publishers in a Real-Time Bidding World

3 Comments 29 April 2013 by

your_ad_hereReal-Time Bidding (RTB) has been a rapidly growing phenomenon in the digital media market for the past few years. According to eMarketer, RTB by definition is a digital advertising technology that lets marketers buy and publishers sell display ads dynamically, in real time, on an impression-by-impression basis — it is truly getting down to the atomic level of digital media buying. This display advertising buying technology has grown from a $396MM market in 2010 to a projected $7 Billion in 2016, representing 28% of digital display advertising.

A major impetus of this new technology was the vast supply of publisher ad impressions and the need for publishers to monetize ad impressions beyond what their own selling efforts could achieve. Traditionally, ad networks filled this need by clustering relevant publishers together, allowing marketers to more efficiently reach their target market segments. But, the revolutionary introduction of ad exchanges (Right Media was the first ad exchange and invented the segment) and data targeting companies like Bluekai and Exelate paved the way for marketers to examine publisher ad inventory at the impression level and match it to a target profile they created from the use of first and/or third party data.

In this rapidly evolving world, publishers become relegated to a supply of cookies for marketers to target versus an audience targetable through the association of the publisher’s content and audience profiles — like, for example, reaching sports enthusiasts via a sports site. The net effect is a decidedly buyers’ market where the advertising value of a publisher’s content is diminished.  It is leaving many publishers scrambling to develop strategies around how best to play in this market by protecting their data and maximizing revenue.  Further, it has put significant downward pressure on publisher CPMs along the way.

What Are The Implications For Local/Hyperlocal Publishers?
There has been little speculation on how RTB could play out in the local (or even hyperlocal) level for publishers. Marketers can currently use geo-targeting data (mainly through a user’s IP address) as yet another data overlay for a geographically desirable audience. However, most sophisticated marketers know the downside of IP-based geo-targeting: relying on a user’s IP to determine location can produce inaccuracies of as much as 30-50 miles from the real location. The tighter the geography you are looking to target, the more amplified this problem becomes.

Advances in mobile GPS technologies have honed the accuracy of location based targeting, but this represents a different market segment altogether, and is different than targeting local markets based on where people live.

These IP-based targeting challenges represent a unique opportunity for local and hyperlocal publishers. After all, by definition, hyperlocal (community-based) publishers represent audiences within extremely tight geographies. As a result, they can be a highly effective way to target users that IP-based geo-targeting could miss. This dynamic gives local and hyperlocal publishers unique leverage in a world that uses data over publisher content for targeting.

Another big rallying cry in the RTB market is for more transparency, so that the marketer can know what exactly they are buying — especially as it relates to the content surrounding their ad message. The consistency of local content can help deliver more transparency to these buys.

In order for local publishers to unlock more value of their ad inventory in this real time bidding environment, three things are needed:

1. Aggregation: Most of the RTB buying now is by national brands. They require scale for an offering to be worth their while. Thoughtful aggregation and organization of local content and websites can deliver this for national brands looking to target multiple markets.

2. Greater Efficiency: Executing local ad buys across multiple websites can be extremely inefficient for media buyers. RTB is all about efficiency. Buyers need to be able to buy multiple markets with potentially different ad messaging for each market more efficiently than talking to multiple publishers, negotiating rates, issuing insertion orders, et cetera. Today’s RTB world enables this to happen.

3. More Transparency: Marketers and media buyers want to know what they are getting for their investment.  In this quantifiable world of RTB, it is easy to report on the numbers (impressions, clicks, conversions) but marketers want to know what is behind those numbers and they have been consistently beating this drum.  For example, exactly what websites did my ads appear, who responded, et cetera?

The above dynamics need to be in place for local/hyperlocal publishers to participate more effectively in this rapidly growing world of RTB.

Dick O’Hare is the CEO and founder of Local Yokel Media.

  • Rob Friedman

    Dick, great article!

    One thing, and not to make this a targeted advertisment for us(!), but IP targeting has gotten much more granular and accurate in recent years, thanks to the introduction of NetAcuity Edge. Most major publishers and ad networks are customers of Digital Element and rely on this technology as the new standard for targeting in the ad space.

    Edge uses traditional infrastructure techniques (which DO have the inaccuracies you mention) but also combines this data with verified anonymous user-supplied postal code data world wide. [see: http://www.digitalelement.com/images/pdf/net_acuity_product_sheet.pdf

    Using these new techniques, we’re able to produce much greater accuracy for the ad space in general.

  • http://www.arlnow.com/ ARLnow.com

    If you’re an actual hyperlocal publisher and you’re relying on RTB for revenue, you might as well just burn your money. The only thing that makes hyperlocal work is direct-sold ads and sponsored content to local businesses and organizations.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dick.ohare Dick O’Hare

    I couldn’t agree more, ARLnow. The best thing a hyperlocal publisher can do is sell their own ads to local business at truly premium rates (truly premium rates are the operative words here as I haven;t always seen that). However, my points about RTB above relates to how valuable hyperlocal content is..and there is strength in numbers. Delivering scaled hyperlocal targeting to larger advertisers looking for this kind of solution is what we specialize in. And, it delivers much more premium rates than generic, data driven RTB ad flow.

Nov. 4th in NYC: Local in the City!
Click here to register.

Newsletter

Get hyperlocal industry headlines in your inbox every morning. Subscribe to the Street Fight Daily newsletter.

Follow Us

Get the latest Street Fight news, information and analysis via Twitter and Facebook.

The Commerce Graph

The “Commerce Graph” is a new framework we have developed to think about the future of physical exchange. The model offers an alternative to the dominant narrative about the commerce landscape that frames digital networks as an adversary of physical exchange.

The $20 Billion Mobile Marketing Opportunity

Strategies and insights into the landscape of targeting options and how they deliver foot traffic and sales for SMBs.
Check out our 2013 report and get your copy today!

When the ‘Pop-Up’ Store Sticks Around

Retailers have started to rethink their sprawling storefronts. Instead, companies are turning to smaller, more specialized locations that that can adapt to declining store revenues while addressing some new opportunities in selling to a connected consumer.

Twitter

© 2014 Street Fight.

Powered by WordPress. Hosting by Page.ly