The Archives

Browse the content below to find what you're looking for.

Euro Round-Up: Publicis And Dentsu Split With Buyback; Google Safari Tracking Muddying The Privacy Debate; And Skype Inventory In The Microsoft Ad Exchange

Tuesday, February 21st, 2012

Publicis Buyback Ends Dentsu Partnership

French advertising group Publicis has bought back 18 million of its own shares from Japan’s Dentsu for €644.4m, bringing an end to their nine-year partnership that analysts say has yielded little value.

The companies had been partners since the Japanese agency – the country’s largest marketing services group by revenues – teamed up with Elisabeth Badinter, a member of the founding family and the biggest shareholder in Publicis, to act in concert.

The buy-back strengthens Ms Badinter’s hold over Publicis, the world’s third-largest marketing services group. The daughter of the founder now owns 11 per cent of the shares and 20 per cent of the voting rights.

She will play a key role in appointing a successor to Maurice Lévy, the Publicis chief executive who was due to retire last year but was asked to stay on to see the company through the global economic downturn.

Mr Lévy said the relationship with Dentsu had been “amicable and exemplary” and that he would carry on with the two Tokyo-based joint ventures with the Japanese firm, Beacon Communications and Dentsu Razorfish – in which Publicis owns 66 per cent and 19.35 per cent respectively.

Dentsu said it would book an extraordinary gain of Y2.1bn ($27m) in its consolidated accounts in the financial year to March as a result of the share sale. Its president and chairman will resign from Publicis’ supervisory board.

The ending of the Publicis partnership had been predicted for more than a year after Dentsu sold down a portion of its stake in 2010. Mr Lévy has also stated previously that he needed to preserve funds in case Dentsu decided to sell its stake in Publicis.

Google+ On A Tracking Safari

Google and other advertising companies have been following iPhone and Apple users as they browse the Web, even though Apple’s Safari Web browser is set to block such tracking by default. How have they been able to do it?

By default, Apple’s Safari browser accepts cookies only from sites that a user visits and generally blocks cookies that come from elsewhere. However there are exceptions to this rule, including if you interact with an advertisement or form in certain ways, it’s allowed to set a cookie even if you aren’t technically visiting the site.

Google’s code, which was placed on certain ads that used the company’s DoubleClick ad server, was uncovered by Stanford researcher Jonathan Mayer, took advantage of this loophole.

The code was part of a Google feature that allows its “+1” button to be embedded in advertisements which users would click to indicate that they liked the ad. However, Google faced a problem: Apple’s Web browser Safari blocks most tracking by default and is the most popular browser on mobile devices.

To put cookies onto Safari, Google’s ads used an “iframe,” an invisible container that allows content from one website to be embedded within another site, such as an ad on a blog. Through this iframe window, Google received data from the user’s browser and was able to tell whether the person was using Safari. If s/he were, Google then inserted an invisible form into the container. The user didn’t see or fill out the form – in fact, there was nothing to fill out. But the Google code submitted it automatically.

The cookies were temporary; the blank one was set to expire in 12 hours, and the cookie for logged-in users was set to expire in 24. Google said the company tried to design the +1 ad system to protect people’s privacy and did not anticipate that it would enable tracking cookies to be placed on user’s computers.

Google’s Rachel Whetstone said the temporary cookie served to create a “temporary communication link between Safari browsers and Google’s servers”. She said the goal was to ensure that information passing between the user’s Safari browser and Google’s servers was anonymous – effectively creating a barrier between a user’s personal information and the web content they browse.

But even the blank cookie could then result in extensive tracking of Safari users. This is because of a technical quirk in Safari that allows websites to easily add more cookies to a user’s computer once the site has installed at least one cookie. Safari allows this so that sites such as the Facebook and Google+ social networks can install cookies in widgets they place around the Web, as long as the user has visited the original site.

An update to the software that underlies Safari has closed the loophole that allows cookies to be set after the automatic submission of invisible forms. Future public versions of Safari could incorporate that update. Paradoxically, the people who handled the proposed change, according to software documents, were two engineers at Google.

Does anyone really care? The WSJ tried to blow the story up but so far the mainstream media hasn’t really piled in. Maybe privacy fatigue has set in or the realisation that privacy is effectively dead anyway. Maybe. On the consumer front there seems to be little damage, but the fall out with regulators could be disastrous. We as an industry are already up-to-our necks in draconian legislation around privacy. This certainly hasn’t helped the cause for self-regulation.

Are Skype Ads Heading For The Microsoft Ad Exchange?

Microsoft Advertising will begin selling Skype advertising on PCs and mobile devices in international markets, including France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, Taiwan, the UK and on PCs in Russia. Advertisements in Skype will first appear in the U.S., the UK and Germany next month, with initial advertisers including Groupon, Universal Pictures and Visa.

Microsoft acquired Skype in an $8.5bn deal that closed in October 2011. Microsoft Advertising is still working to determine what kind of advertising works best within Skype. It is now testing in-call advertising with several advertisers and getting feedback on user experience.

In a blog post, Skype assured users its plan was to only show ads from just one brand per day in each market where advertising was sold. It also said the ads would not disrupt users’ Skype experience with pop-ups or banners in the middle of calls.

The announcement will also see the roll out of mobile advertising, with sponsored ads appearing at the top of Skype’s home and message screens. Audio-in-call advertising is a new format being tested for roll out in new markets – ads will appear on Skype’s home and message screens during a one-to-one Skype-to-Skype audio call.

Andy Hart, general manager, advertising and online at Microsoft UK, said, “Skype is an exciting addition to the Microsoft Advertising portfolio. From today, our customers will be able to target more people in new ways, delivering innovative digital storytelling at a vast scale. Skype’s platform supports rich, interactive brand ads at the same time as giving advertisers a broad reach: combined with MSN homepage advertising, brands can now reach 18.4m or 43 per cent of the total UK online audience.”

The real question though is whether or not Microsoft will make these Skype ad impressions available through its ad exchange. That’s a lot of inventory for the European market, and would solidify Microsoft’s position as number one brand inventory source in the automated channel across Europe.

Jason Bigler Discusses Google’s Bespoke Approach In Europe, The Cross-Channel Opportunity And How We Get To $200 Billion In Display

Wednesday, February 15th, 2012

Jason Bigler is Director, Product Management at Google and is the point man for all of the company’s display products in Europe. Here he discusses Google’s European display strategy, the bespoke approach that is required, the cross-channel opportunity, and how we get to that $200 billion figure.

We hear lots about Google’s display strategy in the US. Can you give some overview on the approach to Europe’s fragmented display market?

Our general approach actually isn’t very different on the core issues. Publishers look to us to help them maximise the value of every ad impression while advertisers look to us to help them achieve the best ROI on their advertising spend. If we aren’t delivering on either of those core concepts then we don’t have a business in any market.

However in Europe, as you point out, the market is more fragmented and each country can be in a different phase of product adoption. You really have to apply a country-specific lense when examining the best approach. As an example, we are seeing tremendous growth on the DoubleClick Ad Exchange in Europe. Spend has increased more than 130% year on year and the number of buyers and sellers has increased more than twofold over last year. This is going to be a big year for programmatic buying across most of the region. But is it exactly the same in every country across Europe? Not a chance. So in some countries we’re in full commercialisation mode and in others we’re still in the evangelising phase.

Will it be more of a bespoke approach given the huge differences between markets like the UK, France and Germany?

Much of the reason I’m here is to ensure we’re taking into account all of the nuances within each country when it comes to our overall display strategy. So yes, we’re most certainly going to tailor it to individual market needs by applying that country-specific lense I was talking about a moment ago.

Why did you make the move to Europe, and what experience have you of building products for European clients?

It’s certainly a great challenge for me personally. I’ve been in the display advertising technology business for over 10 years now and for a good portion of that time I was at DoubleClick leading our buy-side platform product, DoubleClick for Advertisers. That role was inherently a global role and I spent quite a bit of time in Europe making sure we were building a relevant product for the region. Recently, I also spent time at Collective Media as their head of product and strategy. During my time there, we not only launched Collective UK but we also acquired Web TV Enterprise, a UK-based video ad network. From a strategic perspective I was very much involved in the formation of their approach to the UK market. However, I think more than anything the scope of the role is what drew me back to Google. Our display ads business just hit a $5 billion run rate and as you can probably imagine the contribution from the European region to that number is not insignificant.

You recently released a report on publisher success on AdX. Can you give some insights on how European publishers are benefiting from automated selling compared to other sales channels?

In this particular report we demonstrated that for European publishers who make their inventory available in the Ad Exchange, automated selling beat competing sales channels 1 in 4 times. The competing channels included direct sales, other networks and backfills. And where it won over those alternatives, the revenue uplift was 73% higher. It also ended up delivering a fill rate greater than 90% for inventory where there was no other demand. I think this report demonstrates the importance of having a platform that can dynamically allocate across all types of buying relationships and deliver the best possible yield to the publisher.

How is the Admeld acquisition going to help European publishers? Can you outline some tangible benefits? Does the acquisition result in more Google-powered private exchanges popping across the continent this year?

It’s still quite early in this process to get into specifics here. We expect to be able to make Admeld’s services available to our DoubleClick Ad Exchange and DFP customers over time and to add to our publisher suite the functionality and services that Admeld provides. This will give publishers more control and flexibility in the way they manage their inventory and maximise their returns. However, it’s important to note that we will continue to invest in and evolve the current Admeld offering as we finalise our integration plan.

Google owns a DSP, an ad exchange, an SSP and both a buy-side and sell-side ad server. How do you respond to this “conflict of interest” argument – and the vagaries of the “end-to-end” ad stack?

The reality is we’ve built an open platform that we feel is the best in the business. For publishers, it helps them maximise the value of every single ad impression. For advertisers, it helps deliver the best ROI on their media spend. Long before today’s “app marketplace” plays and “neutrality” rhetoric we’ve had a platform where customers can integrate their own technologies or utilise their own point solutions should they make that choice. In fact, quite a few of our customers have made that choice. It is this inherent openness that makes the “conflict of interest” argument fatally flawed.

Your role at Google covers several channels, including video, display, rich media and mobile. How does this cross-platform perspective help Google’s clients in the European market?

At Google we have plenty of folks who are laser-focused on ensuring each of these channels is a best-of-breed solution, but I think it’s critical that we also have people thinking about how these channels can impact one another, how we can build complementary cross-product offerings, and most importantly, how these combined solutions can benefit our clients. In my role I’m certainly going to be influencing how we develop and commercialize these cross-platform solutions across Europe.

Your boss, Neal Mohan, reckons display could go to $200 billion in a matter of five years. Is this really possible, and how are we as an industry going to get to that figure?

What we know for certain is that there is still a significant imbalance between the amount of time users spend in a particular form of media and its associated ad spend. We’re betting that this imbalance is going to correct itself over the next several years while consumer consumption of digital media will continue to accelerate. As the line between online and offline blur, eventually we’ll see an entire reclassification of spend where there is no more offline versus online, it will simply be digital spend. That’s how we get to $200 billion.

In terms of how we’re going to get there, I don’t think it’s rocket science. Consumer behavior is what is driving the success of the industry and will continue to do so for the next decade. Think of all the types of devices/services we use today that didn’t exist 10 years ago. Think of what will exist a decade from now. That’s what makes our industry such an exciting place to be. Our goal is to help grow the industry to that $200 billion number.


Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin