Technology
Dashboards
Business Intelligence & Insights
Communication Portal
Intelligent Collaboration
All Channel Activation
Activate Media on Every Channel
Consulting
Resources
In this episode of AdTech Unfiltered, Beau Davis, seasoned mobile sales leader and co-founder of Futureproofd, shares insights into the challenges sellers face in today’s advertising ecosystem.
Davis explores strategies for overcoming these obstacles, from longer sales cycles and less face time with clients to growing skepticism from buyers. Together with host Noor Naseer, he discusses what sellers need to know before securing meetings and how to better connect with ad agencies, particularly holding companies.
Noor Naseer: Hey, this is Noor Naseer for Adtech Unfiltered. Beau Davis has nearly two decades of experience as a winning sales leader for numerous mobile ad platforms including Greystripe, Verve and Kochava. For the last seven years he's brought those skills to Futureproofd, the consultancy he co-founded to help sales organizations better achieve their sales goals.
Beau talks to me about the challenging climate in today's advertising ecosystem that sellers face when trying to sell something, including dealing with longer sales cycles, less facetime with prospective customers, and buyers questioning seller knowledge.
Beau shares what sellers can be doing better, what they need to be informed about when heading into a meeting, and more. While Beau frames this conversation around approaching ad agencies in particular, especially holding companies, a lot of his reflections can apply to anyone selling something into the advertising world. Let's dive into this episode with Beau right now.
NN: Hey everyone, it's Noor. We're about to get into a great episode but first a quick mention about the sound quality. My guest Beau sounds very good. My file could be better but it's still a great episode and we hope you enjoy it.
—
NN: Beau, I figure that there are more people who are in the ad sales business working specifically in adtech now than ever before. And you specifically being in a position where you're out there educating salespeople and sales teams, you've probably seen an evolution. The first question for you is: How has the role of the salary evolved in adtech across, let's say, the past decade?
Beau Davis: Yes. I think it's gotten harder in all honesty, Noor, and we see this quite a bit with a lot of the firms that we're working with. Primarily in the adtech space, we do some things outside of adtech but the vast majority of the problem or the pain that we're working with on sales teams is the head of sales or maybe it's a head of marketing who will come to us and say, “Hey, things have gotten harder.” Deal cycles take a lot longer. The amount of people that we have to talk to—there's a lot more people involved. Procurement gets involved. We used to just take the media supervisor out to lunch and they signed the deal right there. And so, everyone is looking for a way to adjust or honestly what we think they're looking for is to go back to the way things were: “Hey, it used to be a lot easier to do this. Can you help us make it easier?” The short answer is: No, things have gotten significantly more complex and there's a variety of different reasons for that. But I think a lot of it is that the buyers have a lot more information at their fingertips now. So it's not just the internet, there are companies and platforms that have been created so that these buyers now are very educated on your offering and the overall offering and ecosystem that you may be playing in whether you be a CDP or a DSP or just a straight up ad network. They used to have to take your word that you're better than the other one and maybe they like you more. By the way, that's still very important. Buyers come into these meetings now significantly more educated than ever before, and they have already formed opinions about those sellers which again, even 10-15 years ago, wasn't happening. Their first interaction was when you walked in the door with them, other than the emails you sent them relentlessly to get that meeting.
I think that's been really hard for a lot of organizations to wrap their head around—"How do they already know this or how do they already have an opinion about me?” And a lot of times you can't even get that meeting, because the folks have had that opinion. I'd also say that more money is being spent with fewer players and so it used to be like “Well we'll sprinkle the money around to a variety of different partners and we'll compare them against one another and then we're ultimately going to choose the winner and continue to work with one or two of those types of partners.” But the “FAANG” companies (I don't know if that's still an acronym we're using in the investing world these days) but those folks are getting, depending on what you read, like 92 cents of every dollar. So the pool and opportunity for a lot of the folks who are not in the FAANG is significantly smaller and there's a lot more people competing for those eight cents on the dollar so that makes it significantly harder.
I think the other thing that has happened is you do need to be more technical. So, I do believe relationship-based selling works, I'm not saying that it doesn't. It's just that you have to be really good at relationships and know a little bit more or a lot more about the technical side of the business because it has become significantly more technical. It has moved greatly towards software in a lot of ways where the buyer has the control and their hands are on the keyboard. And they do want to know about your algorithm and the queries per second and your first-party data and the data matching process. Whereas before, that was more or less outsourced to the vendor that you chose. Like, “Okay, I'm going to cut you an IO, you go ahead and run it on the back end for us and send me the reporting and I'll feel good about it if the results are good.” Now, the buyer is the one who's managing a lot of that technical execution. And they want to work with partners and people who are technical and understand the nuances of those little things that make a big difference in leveraging that software. I don’t think that was a succinct answer but there's quite a few ways that this has changed.
NN: I heard you mention of course a bunch of things that are visible challenges right now, where you're dealing with the fact that there's a much steeper learning curve. You're never going to know everything. There's always something else you need to learn. You're upvagainst a much more sophisticated buyer. There isn't a single buyer, there's multiple levels of bureaucracy to deal with especially in larger organizations. So just naming a couple of the things that you mentioned a moment ago, where do you primarily see buyers going wrong? You would hope that they have the foresight to appreciate some of what you've mentioned but I imagine that they're challenged by some things. People are making some mistakes out there.
BD: Absolutely. I think this goes across industries, but I think it's particularly bad in the adtech/martech industry, which is that most sellers are extremely feature-focused and not solutions- or storytelling-focused. So, the vast majority of companies that we work with, the vast majority of pitches that we've seen in our life regardless of whether we work with those companies or not, it all leans on like the what and the how of who they are. ‘Oh, our algorithm. We were founded by Sequoia Capital.” And really there's not that much difference to an algorithm unless you can explain the value and translate how that algorithm is going to make a meaningful impact on the buyer's business. The vast majority of sellers lead with stats and facts and figures of their business and why they're so great and so wonderful. And then they have a case study in the back about how they solve some business problems. I do think that's pervasive across industries, but it is particularly bad in the adtech industry.
In the several dozen companies we work with, only one has ever led with compelling insights and data about the business problem up front in their natural sales deck, their core sales deck. Everyone else leads with “Let me tell you all about us and how wonderful we are.” And then they will have some storytelling in the background, but it gets lost because you've already basically killed that buyer with facts and features and they're sitting there going, “Oh wow, your queries per second, okay,” and they've already tuned out. So, I think that's one of the biggest issues we see across the board.
Then, it depends on if you're going client direct or agency, and I think there's a lot of talk on the type of agency you're going to. So, whether it's a holding company or some of the smaller more independent shops and then the clients themselves, people do not customize their approach for the individuals that they're speaking to. Holding companies care about very different things than independent agencies, which care very differently about what the client directs care about. They all ultimately have the same goal: “Oh, I want to be able to buy media more effectively and efficiently and get the best rates and I hope you're not marking things up.” But the general pitch and the lack of customization for understanding who is sitting across from you and what that individual person—not the company—thinks about and cares about and the pain that person is trying to solve; very rarely do we see organizations customize it for that individual. Maybe they throw a logo of like the person they're talking to or the agency but they're not thinking about the problems that a holding company has versus independent versus a marketer direct and so I think that's the other big thing.
Again, you would think that this would be something that everyone's doing because this is not impacted by the changes in the martech ecosystem. These are things that you think we would have been doing for the last 20-30 years, it's just that people forget that and I think because of the commoditization of advertising and the competitiveness, they want to start with themselves and say, “This is how we're different than so and so because we already know you're working with this direct competitor and I want to explain to you how we're different.” You still have to hook them up front on the business problems and challenges that you solve for them and the pain that that individual is facing and buying and selecting media vendors.
NN: I'm surprised that this is still such a big issue. I think back—just to contextualize my own experience—being someone who's sat on the buy side for a decent period of my own career. I remember specifically 2016, ’17, ’18, ’19, ’20, when I was sitting in a lot of those types of meetings, exactly what you described, where somebody is taking up over 50% of the meeting of a lunch and learn and going on and on about the history of their company and not getting to the meat that people are actually concerned about. And they will not derail from their plan of action which is to talk about that. Maybe that comes from their history working in the business. Maybe they've been advised to get into that because there's this lack of commitment to understanding exactly who it is that you're talking to. So that feels crazy, but maybe also shouldn't be surprising because there's so many people in the business and they're being instructed in different ways in how to approach those initial overviews or calls with prospective clients.
BD: Just to add to that, if we wanted to add another problem—and it's a general problem, but not a new problem—people stick to their decks for the most part: “This is the script I've been given. This is where I feel comfortable.” You, Noor, were a great media buyer. You were smart, savvy. You may ask something that is three or four or 30 slides ahead because some people have way too long decks for a 30-minute meeting but they will not deviate. So that's another thing we see over and over again is this inability to pivot and think on your feet, and I think some of that is lack of education. ”Oh they asked me a technical question that I don't know the answer to. I will ignore that and hope that it doesn't come up again” I also think there's just too many people who are not comfortable being able to think on their feet and address things in real time. So, I highly recommend taking an improv class at Second City where it does make you think on your feet, listen in real time, and adjust on the fly versus being so stuck to a script.
NN: Do you think a part of that has to do with the lack of technical knowledge that people can't break away from because they can't think about things? They're not able to zoom out and see the big picture and say you're curious about this thing and that relates to something? Do you think that's what the struggle is?
BD: I think that's a big part of it. I will say I think people who are starting in ad sales and media sales today may have an advantage over the old dogs. They don't have the Rolodex. They don't have relationships; which again are probably the most important part of it because it's your ability to get in the door. However, the old guard didn't have to be technical because things weren't as technical.
Even in today's modern sales environment, if you're working for a company, luckily working for a company that has subject matter experts, sellers rely too heavily on these folks who are the subject matter experts on data, the subject matter experts on the DSP UI. I guarantee you that Basis has those folks in-house. Basis has subject matter experts because I do believe and we at Futureproofd – Carrie, my partner and I – you should have one to two layers of knowledge on the technical side. So, if you're talking about an onion the outside layer maybe one layer deep because it builds credibility you're not going to be like “Oh, let me get back to you. Oh, let me get back to you.” We've all been in those meetings. The deal's done if the buyer can't get the information that they need out of the meeting. They took the time to meet with you and they finally want to be able to say, “I'm going to make notes on whether or not this is an organization I want to be partnering with and consider for my media buys.” And if you can't give them information in that 30-minute meeting it's kind of a waste of their time; however, I don't think you need to know the queries per second and all the integrations and how the technical backend works. But it's one of two things that either don't want to learn like I'm a relationship person, I'm just going to go in there and open doors and bring in my subject matter expert or they rely too heavily on those folks and you can see the confidence and that actually breaks relationships down where the buyer’s going “Why am I even talking to this individual who set the meeting up? I'll just go talk to the subject matter expert because this person is worthless.” They literally don't know any of the questions so they ultimately end up not trusting that individual, they may trust the organization and we've seen it. I've worked at places where the subject matter expert is the reason deals get done because they're so good and they can save it but it's not enough. People need to get a layer or two deep and when it gets so technical just say, “Hey I can't go to this level but I can set up a follow-up meeting.”
The only other thing I will say, Noor, is most sales reps instead of having all of that knowledge because again I don't think they need it they should be able to ask, “Why are you asking these questions?” Most salespeople are trained (and there are rubrics we work with companies that have like objection handling) – if they say this you say that, there's some “if statements” like in Excel, if this then that. It's a Nancy Drew or Hardy Boys book like “Oh, Choose Your Own Adventure: but they've memorized it very much like they've memorized their sales pitches where “Oh, they said CDP. Yes, we have integrations with these four CDPs.” They don't get to the why of it. “Why do you need this CDP?” And if you start peeling that back and that's their real value is getting deeper and getting to that emotional rationale for the buyer why do you need this?’ “Oh it's the only one that we have integration with.” ‘’Oh so you can't work with other CDPs?” “No, we can't work with other CDPs.” So I can't work with you if you don't have this integration. “Okay that's interesting, why did you choose that partner?”
You get into those details as a seller then you're going to be able to move the conversation a lot more and at least go back to your organization and say, “Hey it's make or break for us” versus “Oh yes we have that.” “No, we don't have that.” And then the conversation's over and the seller may not know it but the buyer's like “Oh you don't work with ours. It's over.” But they just take things at face value. They don't do enough empathetic listening. They don't prod a bit more. And whether they want to use Chris Voss's book of Labeling and Mirroring which by the way we highly recommend and train on because it does get to that deeper level – that’s the real value sellers can have in addition to being able to have one to two layers of technical capabilities to build that trust with that buyer.
NN: I was thinking about that kind of rigidity of only knowing frequently asked questions and bringing those up or trying to back into a space around what you know about as opposed to actually answering a question. And going back to your analogy of knowing at least the outer layers of the onion, so that you can build that rapport with somebody. I think that can also become inevitably a challenge when you're trying to build that relationship where the person, especially if they're savvy, they'll say, “Actually I think I kind of don't like you because you're not bringing a lot of value to this meeting” then you're setting the wrong tone for future interactions with that team.
BD: 100%. And I mean it's a million years ago, Noor, that I was a buyer but I had enough of those meetings where what's the point of this. You email me 12 times to get this meeting. I finally relented and said yes because I did see something. “Okay maybe there's something here” and then you waste my time for 30 minutes shoving the history of your company and the algorithms that you built down my throat versus answering the questions I have. And actually helping me understand whether or not you can make a meaningful impact on the client that I represent business. And it happens all the time and I wish it wouldn't but it's just the nature of a lot of the sellers that are out there today – (they’re) very rigid, very focused on if this, then that, and they can't deviate and improv on the fly.
NN: Let's say you're a little bit more of a sophisticated seller, you've been around for a little bit, you're putting in the time and energy to be agile in the presence of these different potential buyers or clients. You're still going to face so many objections. Going back to so many of the points that you made earlier on. What are some of the key obstacles that people are encountering the most regularly in the adtech space?
BD: The number one, in my opinion, is when folks are trying to get in with “hands on keyboard” teams. The number one objection they hear is - because they're used to this old way of like “Well where's the IO? Like let's do an IO. Send me an RFP, we'll get an IO.” And the vast majority, particularly at the holding co, but certainly coming from the independent agencies as well, the vast majority of media buying today is done programmatically where an individual has access and hands on keyboard and they want to do it through a PMP, programmatic guaranteed, you name it. If you do not have those capabilities, that to me, we hear this all time, “How do we get out of this PMP?” Because we have no control over it. People spend a dollar, then they spend $50, then they spend $500. Then they turn us off. How do we get them spending?
The margins a lot of times on those businesses aren't as high. and so that's where a lot of these other adtech companies are now really looking at saying, how do we afford all this because the margins aren't what they used to be when we're getting these PMPs that are not the same spend as a guaranteed IO for $50,000, $500,000 whatever it may be. So that to me is one of the biggest challenges.
The other thing we hear all the time is just we work with three to four vendors. Goes back to the agencies having less time than ever and client directs. A lot of the in-housing with clients they don't have the staff that agencies do. They in-housed to cut costs so they're not going to go replace it with the same number of people that they're outsourcing to. So, they work with FAANG or they work with three to five vendors and those are the ones that perform for them and they don't have the bandwidth to add new partners and test them and see if they work. So that comes up all the time like “They've got their tried and true and they just want to give me a chance.” And so that's a really, really hard thing I think for people to get their heads around. There's not a ton of things you can do to coach other than continuing to show, work with those three to four. If you add us we're additive when you get those responses. It's not you versus them, you're never going to win that game. It's “yes and.” It's absolutely keep working with those three to four, most clients we work with are working with those three to four and they should be. They've added us to the mix and we perform XYZ better or we're driving more registrations or better you know viewability. Whatever the KPIs that you're talking to you have to be able to justify and have proof by the way that you are additive to the mix, and you're not taking away from those core vendors. So those to me are some of the biggest.
Then the last one I'd say, particularly at the holding co, is unique to holding cos and maybe some of the client direct is they're doing deals at a macro level across the holding co and it plays very much into we only work with three to four vendors. But if Publicis or Omnicom or WPP has a holding company agreement with certain partners and a lot of times those are the FAANG companies. There are a ton that are outside of FAANG that they have those relationships with. And it's an apples-to-apples comparison but one has a relationship at the holding co and the other does not – that spends going to the (partner) that they have the relationship. So you need to have sellers that can get in at a certain level at the holding co and do deals that are valuable and the holding cos want to do with you where again you're additive but you're guaranteed a certain amount of money. And then you can break through that barrier of “Oh, we have a holding co relationship.”
NN: I see there being once upon a time it was the challenge of saying, “tell me what campaigns you're working on and make me one of the line items on that plan.” And now it's very much moving so I also need to understand, what is moving you? What is your incentive to work with any partner? And it may not be your personal choice to your point earlier if you're working at a holding company or whatever institution you're working for, there may be these internal deals that are also not being brought up in the meeting. You kind of slowly have to figure that out by talking to the right stakeholders inside of that organization and having that uncovered. There could be plenty of people in the meeting who either don't really think about it, don't really think that that's valuable for you to know and they also don't feel incentivized to share that information with you. So I think that that's another really complex challenge.
So maybe to push harder into that specifically as a follow-up: What do you do when you're in that meeting you're having that conversation but you feel like there is a wall between you and the people that you're talking to? It sounds like they're listening, that they're seeing an advantage, but you sense that there's a lot of information that's being concealed. What does that secondary conversation look like that goes beyond the scope of maybe what intended to present about your offering?
BD: I think you have to be bolder. I think a lot of sellers take things at face value like we discussed and then they go back to their organization like, “Well they're not going to work with us. I don't really know why but it's very clear they don't want to work with us.” You have to, in that meeting, if you sense it say it, or challenge, where it's like “I'm going to challenge you” because it's exactly what you said, Noor. It's not being said it's what's being unsaid but you can sense it you feel it say, “Is there a holding co deal here that I'm not aware of?” Come out with it because you finally got the meeting it took 12 emails to get it which by the way that's the other thing we hear all the time is like “If no one wants to meet anymore I used to send four emails.”
The average by the way to get a meeting at this stage post-Covid is like 12 to 14 touch points. You finally get that meeting and you're not going to ask them whether or not there's a real opportunity here. You're going to present do your whole dog and pony show and feel really good that they're nodding their head but not ask the fact when you sense like there's something that they're not telling me, you need ask it. Literally say, “is there a relationship that you have existing for a partner that's similar to us that we should know about? Because I'm getting the sense that no matter what we say you like the offering but it's not going to happen because it seems like there's something else here.”
I also think you need to start asking—this is another challenge that we're seeing is that the holding co have bought their way into technology. It's less so at the independents but certainly there are some independent companies that maybe outsource their buying. But the holding co have their way into these technology – they’re actually technology companies – now. At Publicis we hear all the time (sorry for all my Publicis friends) but people are like “They only work with Epsilon. I can't work with them because they want to send everything through Epsilon.” Well yeah, it makes a ton of sense they spent billions of dollars on a technology. They want to make sure that their client's media spend is going through that because they make more money when it goes off of their technology. But you have to be able to ask it and just put it out there.
There are going to be times where you are literally going to be stonewalled, and you are not going to be able to work with that individual brand within that company and that's okay. That's another thing I think a lot of sellers do not understand that it is better to hear no in a “hard no” way—not like, oh the thing that you sense but you didn't say and you don't really get the no. Ask and be told no, “We're never going to work with you all because we have to run anything Epsilon or we have a partnership with a direct competitor of yours and we're not going to do additional partnerships. We will never work with you.” Get that, cross them off your list and move to the next one. There are a ton of other companies to go call on. So many sellers, it takes them so long to get to this meeting, they're emotionally invested into it and they have to get the buy and they'll keep chasing a deal that will never happen. So, ask the question, be bold about it and then if you get that hard no, and you got to make sure it's a hard no walk away from it and say, “Okay this is never going to happen” go report it back to your CRO. You know, plenty of fish in the sea go to the next one and there's opportunities there.
NN: It sounds like selling is kind of like dating. To your point you're not just wasting their time trying to make something happen that may not flourish. You're wasting your own time that you could be spending elsewhere. And as we all know, like sellers they're on the clock and there's an expectation that within a very certain time frame that you're turning around dollars and all of your explanations for why those dollars have not come to fruition only lasts so long. You're on kind of a short leash.
BD: 1000%. I'm kind of smiling because we have a whole slide about how sales is like dating and swiping and then you obsessively stalk them, and text them too much and share too much information, then you freak them out and they're like “Whoa, whoa you came on way too strong.” A lot of sellers try to close on the first night and basically get too excited they're and that's really intimidating. But you're 100% right Noor, if you see that the date isn't going well where the person's not interested in you why would you continue to text them after. Just get it over with. Like life is short. Move on with it.
I laughed because it is based regionally like the Midwest. God bless us midwesterners, but we are way too nice and the buyers especially it's like “You know this is really interesting thank you so much for coming in and presenting to us.” Why would you say that if you have no intent? New Yorkers will let you know pretty upfront “Yeah this is never happening bro we've got a relationship with someone else. See you later. Bye.” But even they have gotten a little nicer, believe it or not over the years. So you need to ask those questions and your time as a seller is every bit as valuable as the buyers. Most sellers feel subservient to the buyer and that's just like a weird relationship thing. There could be a really interesting sociological experiment around the way sellers feel indebted for the buyer meeting with them. But your time is super valuable. So if that person isn't going to give you the time or it's a one-and-done date, move on to the next one, tie that bow finish it off and say, “Doesn't seem like this is going to be a fit for us.” If they give you the head. “Yeah we're never going to be able to work.” You: “Cool. Appreciate it.” Literally go down the hall to the next team within that organization because again it's just one team saying that and see if you can get something going with another team within the holding co or within another independent partner of that agency.
NN: There's a ton of EQ work that any seller needs to do and that clearly is such a big part of being successful as a salesperson. I wanted to bring it back to something we lightly talked about earlier. We want you to know about your product, where it is thinking about it at a higher level and somewhat in a more detailed way, but you know you have your limitations. You're not going to be a technical expert, you're not a SME.
What about other things that are happening in the industry? Right now, AI is obviously super hot in ‘23 and ‘24. We've been talking about AI technically in the adtech space because of machine learning, algorithms, and any ways in which we may want to frame AI being relevant for adtech. How important do you think it is to be talking about AI right now if you're an adtech seller?
BD: So I think if you want to be buzzy and sell shiny objects (which I love)—I love the hype and things to come—by all means you should know quite a bit about it and what the potential impact will be. I think that's more on the solution side of what AI will do for automation and machine learning around media and advertising campaigns.
I do believe wholeheartedly that in a very short future (this is not five years away) all those optimizations that take place where a lot of times human beings are logging in and they're dialing the knobs , going to be automated by a machine. You have to program it ahead of time and prompt it to say, “This is the outcome I'm looking for so make sure you're optimizing it.” And that's going to come to any DSP and I think we all can agree to that and that is going to cost jobs. You're not going to need as many analysts on the hands-on-keyboard side logging in and doing that. You could argue that's a good thing because then people can do more strategic work and they don't have to do the minutiae of logging in and doing that.
I think like from a business solution standpoint you should be talking about the ability to leverage AI in the future of advertising to drive outcomes for your business. Sure there's other parts about varying creative, that's another big hype around like “Oh, we can create 1 million versions of the same ad based on human intent whether it's the green dress or the red dress.” That's been around for a while but really that is more automation and I think you want to get clear on that. There's a very big difference between automation and artificial intelligence, and so that applies on understanding it on the business side like well what is automation? What is actual machine learning you're leveraging artificial intelligence to automate or and enhance campaigns? But I also look at it on the tools that sellers can leverage to get smarter about sales. And that's a big focus for what Carrie and I do at Futureproofd is like understanding the technology that's out there today. Can you leverage it from a salesperson? Can it help you enhance your prospecting, your objection handling, your email writing? And there are a lot of tools that exist today that I'd say are more on the automation side than on the true artificial intelligence side; however, you're quickly seeing a lot of artificial intelligence integrate into these automation tools.
Everything, Noor, from understanding people's personalities that you want to email so you literally know how to pitch them and they'll auto-write an email for you based on that—maybe you're a motivator, Noor, you're gonna speak to Noor very differently than you're going to speak to Beau because we care about different things—and it will auto-write an email based on your persona. Those are really interesting things that a lot of adtech sales companies don't know about.
Our theory, (and it's not necessarily a theory anymore because we've seen it) is that adtech companies, in general, not all, but adtech companies are three to five years behind true SAAS software companies in leveraging tools and technology to enable their sales forces to be smarter and automate a lot of the manual tasks of sales. So getting really smart about what tools enhance and make your small teams much more mighty are really important for startups whereas like the bigger companies like on Meta or Amazon, they're already leveraging tools. They understand, they're using artificial intelligence in their core platform. So they probably don't need it as much. But if you're a startup, you have to punch above your weight class. There are tools out there that will help you automate as well as leverage artificial intelligence to make you smarter about it.
I think it's twofold, Noor. It's what's going to do for the industry but then what's it going to do for your sales business.
NN: I see to your point being the two sides to it. There's a ton to know out there and there's a lot of curiosity. But there could be a much bigger world in terms of how much a potential buyer wants to learn about adtech that goes beyond the scope of what it is that you're offering and then pulling it back to what are internal tools you can use that really your client does not care about and you will not talk to them about. And then what actually shows up inside of your technology itself that you could justify as being some derivative of AI which I think is probably the fair way to position it. Most tech companies (and I'm sure some people would disagree) they're purporting that they're offering something that's truly AI and really it isn't. I think slowly but surely we're going to see more organizations come out and say like “Yeah whatever we were talking about back then is not exactly AI.”
We have some AI in the language of some product marketing that we're doing these days. Again, it can be justified, but is it going to be the AI that we're going to see in the next couple of years? It's not. It's just not.
BD: Completely agree, I think that's why sellers again going back to one of the things I said earlier like they need to ask the question, “Well why are you asking this?” There's always going to be that person in a meeting that throws the bomb like “So what do you think of Sora's new large language model?” It's like what, why? Why are you asking? Like what's the relevance to this there's always people who want to throw their grenade into the meeting and walk away but really understand at the core like well why are you asking this are you leveraging AI? Are you curious about AI? Are you trying to automate things or are you actually trying to leverage a large language model to create ad copy? There's so many different use cases. And I highly recommend having a growth mindset and taking some of these free online courses. Google has a really great one which by the way is like super-super hard and I could barely get through it. But if you're nerdy about it and you want to learn things at a surface level to understand the difference between neural networks and large language models and all of these different things, you should at least again have a surface to two layers deep of what is it out there in general, and then how can you apply it to the advertising and media world, and how can you apply it to your sales practice, and what tools exist there.
NN: So final question: We talked about the obstacles that inevitably you face as a salesperson or any salesperson faces but then there are also objections that sometimes are not fair. You're dealing with somebody who believes, “if it ain't broke, don't fix it.” How do you deal with somebody who has misconceptions about what it is that you're bringing to the table? How would you advise a salesperson to overcome those misconceptions from somebody who's really deeply rooted in believing something that isn't true about you and your organization?
BD: It's really hard to change someone's preconceived notion. It happens and you have to be very thoughtful and pragmatic about the way you go about it. And as we talked about earlier, Noor, you as a seller should be walking into every meeting thinking that you're a step behind or you have to dig yourself out of a ditch; I do not think that's the case 10 years ago. I literally think 10 years ago you knew more about the space as a seller than the buyer in front of you. But like we said, the democratization of the internet and data and information is everywhere now.
So those buyers already have a preconceived notion of who you are as an individual but particularly about the company and the offering that you have. It's a lot of reasons by the way why you never get the meeting in the first place because like “Ah I read about this company. I looked them up on seller crowd. I read about them in G2 and they have low-star rating. I'm not going to even take a meeting with them because they can't do the things I need them to do.” And that is a fact.
The reality is like you need to ask them why they think that way. You need to be able to use social proof so case studies but like real world results on how you have overcome those obstacles. Like, “Yeah we totally hear this all the time everyone thinks we're this we're not this but let me explain to you a couple of clients that gave us an opportunity and how things changed.” It's the reason that there are these—everyone's like, “Oh you know it's so hard Facebook, Amazon, Google they get all the money.”
There are competitors that come up every single day that make tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars because they do have something unique to offer or their story is unique enough to offer maybe the same thing in the back end as everyone else. So, you should walk into every meeting thinking that that person knows more or they think something about you that is not necessarily true.
The reality is this though; that individual on the buy side, they are paid to know a lot about a little. None of those buyers know as much about you and your company as you do. So you should always have the confidence and swagger to be like “I don't care what they've read on the internet. No one can know more about my solution than me because I work here and I understand it.” And your job then is to ask them why they think the things that they think, have them give you examples and then it's basically like a fact checking mission. Going back to the internet and social media like you are the fact checker—and don't be rude. I'm awful on the internet by the way on fact checking people on politics. Don't be me in a sales meeting. Try to put yourself in their shoes and why they think that way and be empathetic to that and believe it or not you'll find a middle ground most of the time as long as you are not going to be like “I'm going to win them over. I'm going to prove to them that they're wrong.” You have to understand where they're coming from, why they're thinking that way and then be able to have real life examples of how they are wrong without rubbing it in their face. And that to me goes a really long way and gets people over the hump of like their preconceived notions.
NN: Motivate them to think differently because the change in the way that they think it's up to them to make that change.
BD: You can lead the horse to water, Noor. I mean that's your job, ultimately. The biggest thing I've learned in sales over the last few years (especially now being more of a student) is people buy emotionally and they justify it rationally. So going all the way back to one of your first questions, the biggest mistake we see people make is that they rationally and go “Queries per second. We have more data partners blah-blah-blah-blah.” No one cares, like they emotionally want to know whether or not your product is going to make them look better and make their job easier, and if it does then they have to back it up with all the facts and figures. So, I'm not saying those aren't valuable but especially when someone has a preconceived notion you have to appeal somehow to their emotional mind.
People are biased. People may have had an experience or their boss had a bad experience with you and your company at your last place, and you're never going to get the deal simply because of a mistake that happened years ago. You have to be able to uncover that. Then to your point make them emotionally realize like “Oh well this person isn't so bad. Going to give them an opportunity.” And all you can ask is for an opportunity. If it doesn't deliver, you’re SOL. You're just looking for an opportunity to prove yourself. I don't think enough people think that way. I think they think like it's them against the other, and it's really just like I'm looking for an opportunity, a shot and if it doesn't work it doesn't work, and we can go our separate ways and I appreciate you giving me that opportunity.
NN: Well I love that you made time to talk us through at least a couple of different things for salespeople to be thinking about. Frankly, I think they’re things to think about even if you're on the buy side as far as how you're reflecting on how salespeople are coming and approaching you in the adtech or digital media and advertising space. So, we'll leave it at that for now but thanks for the time Beau.
BD: Thank you, Noor, for having me.
—
Thanks to Beau Davis, co-founder of sales consultancy Futureproofd for his perspective on how to better sell into agencies. As market dynamics between the buy and sell side in advertising continue to evolve it's important to have dialogue around the shifts and stay informed on smarter ways to approach asking for the business.
If you want to learn more about Beau’s organization, check him out on LinkedIn or go to his website futureproofd.com. that's the word Futureproofd with the ‘D’ on the end just a ‘D’ futureproofd.com. That's it for this episode. I'm Noor Naseer. We have another really great episode right on the heels of this one coming out in just the next few days.
2024 has been another transformative year for advertisers.
For much of the year, marketing teams braced for Google’s long-anticipated deprecation of third-party cookies in Chrome…only for the search giant to change its plans for the third time. (At least the preparation wasn’t in vain, as the pivot doesn’t actually change much for marketing teams.)
Meanwhile, generative AI took the industry by storm, and advertisers began to explore how to leverage the technology to drive real impact while avoiding its notable risks.
The TV landscape continued its evolution, with streaming dominating consumers’ (and advertisers’) engagement with the Paris Olympics.
On the regulatory front, industry scrutiny reached new heights: from the TikTok ban bill; to new regulations around consumer privacy, social media, and AI; to the continuation of antitrust cases against Google and Amazon (one of which ended with a ruling labeling Google a monopolist and prompting the US Justice Department to request a forced sale of Chrome).
And we haven’t even gotten into the marketing brilliance behind Charli XCX’s Brat campaign or Nutter Butter’s bizarre yet effective social media strategy! Truly, 2024 was one for the books.
To wrap up the year and set the stage for 2025, we’ve rounded up our most-read articles from 2024. Dive in below to revisit the stories that shaped this past year—and will continue to impact the industry in the year ahead.
From new state-level consumer privacy regulations, to the introduction of a bill that would establish a comprehensive federal consumer privacy framework, to the rise in false advertising lawsuits and regulation, to discussions over how to regulate AI, the regulatory environment evolved considerably in 2024. This comprehensive article explores these developments, as well as how they impact advertising and marketing professionals.
While the oldest members of Generation Alpha are currently only 14 years old, the demographic will outnumber baby boomers by 2025 and garner a whopping $5.46 trillion in spending power by 2029. With these digital natives set to take the market by storm in just a few years, the time for marketing teams to begin understanding them is now. Here, learn how Gen Alpha is poised to transform the ways advertisers connect with their audiences, and see what marketers can do to set themselves up for success.
In April 2024, President Biden signed a bill into law that gives TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, one year to either sell the app to a US company or face a nationwide ban. Despite the lingering risks, TikTok’s transformative impact on the advertising industry endures: Ad spend on the platform has grown 41.2% year-over-year, and it’s projected to grow by another 25.9% in 2025. This piece unpacks the app’s impact on consumers and advertisers from a variety of angles, providing a comprehensive resource for marketers looking to understand both how to make the most of the platform and to navigate the uncertainty surrounding its future.
Gartner has predicted that, by 2026, traditional search engine volume will drop by a quarter due to of the rise of AI-powered chatbots and other virtual agents. While AI is set to transform the search engine marketing landscape, uncertainty remains around just what that will look like and how advertisers can prepare. Here, paid search expert Robert Kurtz, Group VP of Search Media Solutions at Basis, explores what the future may hold and how marketing teams can set themselves up for success.
As generative AI’s use and influence continue to grow, regulators are scrambling to establish frameworks for safeguarding the public from its associated risks. This article examines the current regulatory landscape in the US and abroad and provides guidance for advertisers looking to leverage AI in ethical and compliant ways.
Advertising agencies have been through the ringer in recent years, struggling with economic and financial pressures. These challenges have been compounded by major industry paradigm shifts, like the intensification of signal loss and the rise of AI. To make sense of these evolutions and provide guidance for agency leaders looking to position their organizations to excel in the years to come, we brought together five industry veterans to share their insights and advice.
From automating content creation to optimizing ad targeting, AI is influencing how advertisers approach the fragmented social media landscape. This piece explores how to harness the technology to deliver more personalized and effective campaigns, as well as how to safeguard against the risks associated with some of these AI-driven tools.
As advertisers continue to grapple with signal loss and brace for Chrome’s forthcoming cookie-related changes, they must set up new systems and strategies for approaching campaign measurement and attribution. This article delves into how marketers must reimagine their approach to measurement and evaluates alternative strategies and tools that are better suited to a privacy-first digital environment.
Concerns about social media’s impact on online privacy and mental health have intensified in recent years, particularly when it comes to children and teens. In response, regulators have proposed a variety of new efforts aimed at mitigating these harms. This piece explores the potential implications for advertisers, as well as recommendations for how to approach paid social while staying both compliant and informed.
TV viewing has transformed dramatically over the past decade, evolving from a straightforward experience into a deeply fragmented one. Viewers now navigate a maze of devices, platforms, and content, adding significant complexity to advertisers' work. Here, we explore the rise of convergent TV, illuminating how advertisers can effectively navigate this disjointed and quickly evolving space.
—
Looking for insights into the major trends that will impact the advertising landscape in 2025, and how advertisers can use those trends to their advantage? Reality Check: The 2025 Advertising Trends Report covers everything advertisers need to know about the latest in commerce media, CTV, AI, and search.
Advertising agencies are entering 2025 with a mix of excitement and uncertainty.
Nearly two-thirds of agency professionals feel good, optimistic, and/or confident about the future of digital advertising. At the same time, more than seven in 10 say their jobs have become more difficult in the past two years, as inefficient processes, rising costs, and siloed systems hinder progress. On top of that, external forces—such as signal loss, shifting and ever-fragmenting media landscapes, and evolving audience behaviors—have added fresh layers of complexity.
Despite these hurdles, agencies are increasingly focusing on innovation as a way forward. Looking to 2025 and beyond, agencies are preparing for a future that is as much about overcoming challenges as it is about capitalizing on new opportunities. Whether through enhancing and supporting team talent, building more resilient tech stacks, adopting AI and automation solutions, or seeking opportunities for increased transparency, emerging trends are showing how agencies can drive growth and efficiency.
Talent continues to be a key differentiator in the agency world. A staggering 97% of advertisers cite access to talent as a top priority for agencies, yet only 47% feel they have the talent they need. This gap represents a growing challenge as agency leaders look to 2025, particularly as they face increasing pressure to deliver high-impact results.
To address this talent gap, agencies must rethink not only how they equip employees with tools, but also how they attract, retain, and develop their teams. With many agencies continuing to consider and implement RTO policies, creating environments where employees feel supported and empowered to focus on meaningful, high-value tasks is critical—particularly in an industry that has long grappled with widespread burnout.
Automation and AI can play a pivotal role here. By reducing the amount of time spent on low-value, manual, and redundant tasks, leaders can better engage their employees, allowing them to maximize their potential and contribute to more strategic, creative, and profitable work.
“We can use tech to really help people focus on the things that they’re excited about in advertising and to keep people in the industry,” says Michael Thill, VP of Agency Development at Basis. “The attrition rate in advertising is so high, particularly at agencies. But if we can free people up to really do what they’re excited about—to help them get back to the work that got them into the industry to begin with—that’s going to be a win across the board.”
Beyond elevating their talent through tech, leaders should consider other strategies to support and empower their teams. Providing robust professional development opportunities, committing (or re-committing) to diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts, and considering flexible work arrangements can all serve this goal.
Agencies that prioritize empowering their teams through a combination of the intentional use of tech, robust training, and fostering a culture of inclusivity will be better positioned to deliver high-value work. By viewing talent not as a cost center but as a key strategic investment, agencies can foster innovation, drive profitability, and secure a competitive edge.
AI has been dominating industry conversations ever since generative AI burst onto the scene. And though the technology holds significant potential for advertisers, it’s critical to remember that AI has long been foundational to programmatic advertising. For instance, machine learning algorithms have been used for years to optimize ad targeting, enhance bidding strategies, and predict consumer behaviors.
In 2025, agencies must move beyond hype and experimentation and focus on extracting real value from AI. By pinpointing specific applications of the tech, integrating tools effectively into existing operations, and distinguishing between genuinely transformative innovations and existing tools that have simply been rebranded, agency leaders can unlock AI’s full potential.
Automation stands out as a prime example, given its ability to optimize workflows and centralize data and communications so that teams can prioritize tasks that demand creativity and strategic insights—work that AI can’t replicate. “Many leaders are looking for places where they can create operational efficiencies so that their teams can be freed up to focus on creative thinking and to look at things from a birds-eye view,” says Thill. “Every department inside of an agency wants to find AI-driven automation solutions to do low-value, repetitive tasks.”
As Mike Olson, EVP of Client Development at Basis, points out, the true value of AI and automation lies in the combination of technology and skilled talent. By reducing the time spent on routine tasks, employees are empowered to take on more impactful work that adds value to an agency’s overall objectives.
“Ultimately, it’s your people who will enable you to get the most out of this technology,” says Olson. “Even with the best AI tools, if you don’t have skilled teams to use them—or if high turnover forces you to constantly re-train people—you’ll struggle to unlock their full potential.”
Beyond embracing AI and automation tools, agency leaders need to think carefully about how they tell the story of this tech to their clients. Clients may wonder why they should pay the same fees when AI is handling more tasks, and others may be concerned about how their data is being fed into these tools (and what protections exist).
“Agencies must show clients what guardrails they’re putting in place for compliance, privacy, and security, as well as communicate to clients the higher value work they’re able to produce since their talent is free to do more challenging tasks,” says Thill.
As agencies look to the year ahead, many are focused on identifying ways to further optimize their operations by determining what tools in their tech stacks are essential, which are redundant, and which are obsolete.
Streamlined tech stacks not only improve overall efficiency but also ensure that data is clean, organized, and ready for action—which is particularly critical amidst increasing signal loss. While some agencies grapple with outdated platforms that don’t meet the demands of today’s complex digital advertising landscape, others struggle with disconnection between those platforms. Media and tech stack fragmentation is a driving force behind these problems: More than half of agency professionals juggle six or more tools to manage client campaigns, and 17.3% use 10 or more. Research shows that teams waste 13% of their time and 12% of their effort when different platforms don’t work well together, and this disconnection can lead to missed opportunities, errors, and slower decision-making.
To tackle these challenges, agencies are looking for ways to streamline their tech stacks and increase interoperability between systems. “The real challenge is figuring out how to bridge the gap between different data sources into one single source of truth that allows teams to act on data in accurate and impactful ways and deliver better outcomes for clients,” says Thill. “That allows leaders to see where they can improve their business.”
Without a single source of truth, agencies must navigate crippling fragmentation across geographies, partners, and publishers, making it difficult to operate at the speed clients demand. Solutions like automated advertising platforms can play a key role in improving interoperability, reducing repetitive manual tasks while also serving as that critical single source of truth, thus enabling agencies to better manage disparate data sources. “For billing, in particular, being able to turn to a single automated system means getting payments faster and improving the financial health of the business,” says Olson.
Amidst fluctuating economic uncertainty, signal loss, and other complexities, having a strong and resilient tech stack—one that’s designed for both the present and the future—can become a key differentiator for agencies.
In the face of a rapidly evolving industry, agencies are increasingly prioritizing resilience and future-forward strategies to stay competitive. Among these, transparency stands out as a critical trend for 2025—one that impacts both agencies’ internal operations and client relationships. This push isn’t just a response to external pressures; it’s also driven by the need to build more sustainable, profitable business models.
Agencies’ renumeration models, in particular, have proven to be a significant barrier to increased transparency. Traditional models—such as fixed time-and-materials structures—tend to reinforce behaviors that can limit flexibility and adaptability. For instance, if an agency is paid based on the number of hours worked, there is little incentive to streamline processes or invest in automation tools, since more hours worked means lower revenue. In fact, 87% of advertisers believe agencies are resistant to adopting models that require greater transparency into how they make money.
Failing to adopt such models, however, can lead to burnout, inefficiency, and an erosion of client trust—all of which are already significant problems throughout the industry. In 2024, 43.4% of agency professionals said their agency’s client relationships were more strained than two years prior, and agencies that rely on outdated or opaque pricing models risk worsening client relationships.
There’s also a misconception that embracing transparency will inevitably result in lost revenue—but that doesn’t have to be the case. “As the demand for transparency intensifies, agencies have a unique opportunity to move away from relying on hidden fees for revenue and focus on genuinely adding value for their clients,” says Olson. “The key will be educating clients on what constitutes high-value work and demonstrating how automating low-value tasks not only frees up resources, but also enables teams to engage in more strategic, impactful work that drives better results—and, for the agencies, healthier profit margins.”
Embracing transparency sets agencies up for long-term profitability by building trust, strengthening client relationships, and allowing teams to do their best work. As clients become more aware of the value they’re receiving, agencies that clearly communicate how their services contribute to business success will foster loyalty and repeat clients, cultivating more sustainable revenue streams.
Amidst increasing complexity of client demands, tightening margins, and a deeply fragmented media landscape, agencies must be intentional and proactive in the year ahead. To thrive in this environment, leaders must embrace innovation—whether by leveraging AI and automation, optimizing tech stacks, bolstering their talent, or fostering increased transparency. In doing so, they can take advantage of the opportunities presented by these emerging trends to proactively increase efficiency, improve client relationships, and drive long-term profitability.
__
Interested in exploring more of the trends that are set to impact advertising in 2025? Then check out Reality Check: The 2025 Advertising Trends Report.
From the debut of the industry's first fully AI-generated commercials to yet another dramatic pivot in Google’s cookie deprecation timeline, 2024 brought some transformative changes to the advertising industry. The theme of transformation will continue to define the landscape in 2025, with four key trends poised to have profound impact on brands and agencies:
To explore how these trends may impact brands and agencies in 2025, we brought together four industry veterans to share their insights and predictions. Their discussion covered everything from how changes in consumer behavior are driving the need for increased personalization, to how advertisers are managing fragmentation in CTV and commerce media, to the most effective applications of generative AI.
Consumers’ search habits are evolving with the rise of social search and the introduction of AI chatbots. Do these shifts illuminate any broader trends advertisers should look out for in 2025?
Amy Rumpler | SVP, Search and Social Media Services, Basis: I think one of the broader trends these new search behaviors demonstrate is the importance of personalization in media and content. What’s interesting about social search and AI chatbots is how precisely they deliver information: Whether you’re seeking inspiration, a product, or an answer, the information returned can be incredibly exact. As consumers get used to that level of specificity, I think that’s going to drive a new era of urgency around personalization in media strategy, targeting, and content.
Additionally, these evolving search behaviors could reshape the customer journey across media channels. With search becoming increasingly accessible across various environments, the once-complex path to purchase is changing. The ease and availability of these new search experiences—from inspiration to purchase—may lead to a more consolidated customer journey, with less context-switching and more time spent in a single environment. If this shift continues, it could impact how advertisers approach media planning, frequency, and touch points, as they’ll need to adapt to a seamless, all-in-one search-to-purchase experience.
April Weeks | Chief Investment & Media Officer, Basis: I agree with Amy: Personalization is growing more and more critical. As marketing and media become more personalized, I believe we’re going to see the customer journey condensed, because it’s going to be a more relevant journey. And as advertisers increase relevancy through personalization, they may see the impacts of consumers searching less broadly and less comparatively, because the message that’s received by the consumer is more tightly aligned with what they searched for.
I would also say that these shifts underline the broader trend of advertisers needing to view performance and brand marketing more holistically. The value of brand is coming back in a much bigger and more meaningful way, and advertisers need to start asking themselves how they can successfully incorporate and balance brand and performance across campaigns. I believe we’re going to see this with search, and especially with social search. That’s where personalization comes into play, because you’re reaching consumers in an environment that’s relevant to them, and it’s an opportunity to share a brand message while also driving the call to action.
Katie McAdams | Chief Marketing Officer, Basis: To April’s point, the term “brandformance” has been popping up in a lot of my conversations lately. (Our industry just loves to create these buzzwords, don’t we?) Brandformance highlights the idea that treating brand and performance marketing as separate areas isn’t the most effective way to approach your strategy, especially when budgets tighten. Advertisers need a more integrated approach. For example, in the search space, budgets once focused solely on bottom-funnel KPIs can now support broader brand-building goals. Rather than reserving digital display for brand awareness and search for conversions, marketers should consider how paid search can contribute to brand-building too.
This shift raises the question: What metrics should we use to measure the effectiveness of a brandformance approach? Advertisers will need to reevaluate the metrics they use to ensure they align with both brand and performance objectives.
AW: I agree—those metrics will certainly evolve. We’ll likely see engagement and attention metrics play a bigger role, serving as potential proxies for conversion. For instance, if engagement or attention increases over time, how does that impact the path to conversion, whether it's a purchase, sign-up, or another action?
What trends do you expect to see in the CTV space in 2025? What challenges are advertisers looking to solve when it comes to CTV?
Grace Briscoe | EVP, Client Development, Basis: We’ve seen a significant increase in buying CTV through private marketplaces (PMPs), and I think that will continue. One reason for this is the confusion that surrounds CTV inventory: The same ad slot can be sold by multiple vendors, and often through five or six different channels, which leads to a lot of duplication and sales channel confusion. As a result, advertisers are focused on deduplicating and determining which inventory is unique and valuable.
In addition, many brands and agencies are working to align their linear TV and CTV investments to maximize reach and manage frequency across both channels.
In terms of challenges, measurement and attribution are major concerns. Brands are eager for better systems to evaluate the effectiveness of their CTV investments.
Overall, while I don’t anticipate any radical shifts or dramatic new capabilities in connected TV in 2025, I do think we’re seeing true evolution and maturity in the channel. As that continues, it's just going continue to drive more adoption.
AW: I agree with Grace: 2025 is going to be the year when advertisers begin to figure out how to use CTV and linear together. Marketers will develop an understanding of how the two channels can complement one another, as well as how to evolve measurement. Measurement is a huge challenge because of fragmentation, but the industry is starting to make good inroads.
Fragmentation is still part of the CTV ecosystem, but I believe the industry is becoming more aware of the benefits of coupling CTV with linear, and the opportunities to manage frequency and creative sequencing. Advertisers are starting to see how the interplay between the two can create a better advertising experience for consumers.
What will it take for CTV to reach its potential?
AW: Right now, there’s just too much inventory in too many places. With linear TV advertising, things are pretty simple: If you want to buy Fox, you know where to buy; if you want to buy CBS, you know where to buy. To Grace’s point, the fact that the same inventory is available through many different outlets creates a lot of confusion. For CTV to really capture its full share of spend and potential, it’s got to get a become cleaner and easier from the supply side, which will also help streamline measurement.
What are the main sentiments you’re picking up on in your conversations about AI with brand and agency leaders?
AR: Many of the people I’ve been speaking to have been expressing a strong sense of fear. There’s fear around giving up control over parts of the campaign process that AI can automate, and I think in some cases that fear is very real and valid. This is particularly true in highly regulated industries like healthcare, where advertisers must navigate strict regulations when interacting with consumers. Clients worry that generative AI could create content that not only feels off-brand but could also conflict with legal requirements. I think a lot of advertisers still feel considerable hesitancy around giving up that element of control.
And content generation is only one part of that: There’s also apprehension around the AI embedded in advertising networks, like Google’s PMax and Meta’s Advantage+, where AI decides which audiences see ads. This shift—moving from hands-on, granular targeting to relying on AI for audience selection—is a big leap that many advertisers aren’t fully comfortable with yet.
AW: Everyone likes the idea of generative AI in terms of what it can do to produce large amounts of content or creative very quickly and, potentially, more cost effectively. But advertisers are concerned because AI models are only as good as the data that's going into them, and there's a lot of uncertainty around the quality of data that's feeding these models. It’s likely going to take time to develop models that can be fully trusted, and then fears will lessen over time. But right now, it’s still fairly early to be relying solely on generative AI to produce materials that could potentially have a notable negative impact to a brand if the targeting's off the mark or if the content doesn't strike the right tone.
AR: I do think advertisers are still willing to test these applications of AI, and I think most brands are testing them in some form or fashion. But to April’s point, I agree that most advertisers aren’t ready to go all in on AI quite yet.
KM: On the creative side, I wonder if there’s going to be a perception shift around the quality of AI-generated creative. For me personally, when I see an ad that has some elements that were obviously AI-generated, my first thought is that the marketing team cut some corners to create it. I could see a consumer perception issue emerge where leaning too much into genAI (rather than investing in real photographers and other creative professionals) could potentially weaken a brand’s image or reputation.
AR: I was in a call with a creative vendor last week and they made an interesting point about that. They showed us some more subtle applications of AI for creative content generation, like an ad for an auto brand that featured a real photo of a vehicle but used AI to place the car in various settings. I thought that was an interesting way to think about how to test and utilize genAI in ways that help to scale out and personalize creative assets, rather than using it to generate creative assets from scratch.
KM: Totally—my team did a similar thing with a campaign we have running right now. We’re using generative AI as a tool, not a replacement, to our existing creative resources. It’s a way to help scale the creative.
AW: To bring it back to the trend of personalization that we talked about in the context of consumers’ search habits, personalization has historically been very expensive for brands. This is one area where AI could be really helpful when done correctly—you can strike the right balance of delivering that personalized experience that helps deliver better outcomes, but more effectively and efficiently from a cost standpoint.
How would you predict advertisers’ sentiments around AI will change from now through the end of 2025?
AW: As an industry, we are often quick to hype up anything new. After the hype-up period, we go through a time of learning, testing, and seeing the results. Then, once we understand the efficacy of whatever the new thing might be, it often gets woven into the campaign process and becomes part of the industry ecosystem.
If I were going to make a prediction about where advertisers will be in that cycle in 2025, I think there'll probably be more openness around testing of AI applications—especially with brands needing personalization within their marketing—because brands are still going to be pressuring their agency partners, particularly their creative partners, to find cost-effective ways to deliver at scale. So that's where more agencies may want to lean into generative AI: to help satisfy the volume of creative needed, but also try to do it in a cost-effective way.
The rise of retail media networks (RMNs) and commerce media in general is introducing even more fragmentation and complexity into an already fragmented and complex digital advertising landscape. How do you think this will impact how advertisers invest in RMNs in 2025?
AR: Commerce media operates differently from CTV, where inventory is widely available in various places, as Grace mentioned before. Accessing RMN inventory is much more complex, especially with well over 100 major RMNs now in operation. For brands with products on multiple physical and digital shelves, navigating which RMNs to partner with, how to access their inventory, and whether to use self-service or managed services is a significant challenge for both agencies and advertisers.
This complexity impacts advertisers' ability to invest in these networks effectively and influences their media planning strategies. Some brands aim to be present across numerous networks to maximize reach and drive sales, while others are consolidating their efforts into two or three networks that offer the most value—not just in ROI, but also in added benefits like in-store experiences or exclusive ad products.
I also think it’s impacting how advertisers are thinking about media planning. Do brands need to be in 15 different places because these networks exist, or should they pick the three that are going to give them the most incremental sales when it comes to moving product? We’re seeing a mixed bag of advertisers going one direction versus the other: Some that want to be everywhere, and make sure they’re taking advantage of the broadest reach possible to move sales. Others are starting to take the opposite approach, consolidating their efforts into the two or three biggest networks that can give them the most value.
Take Walmart or Target, for example. These networks leverage both in-store and online channels, offering a growing suite of ad products, including in-store experiential options. This aligns with the 'brandformance' approach, as these networks create omnichannel ecosystems that go beyond bottom-funnel objectives. By tapping into their customer base and delivering personalized ads across various touchpoints, RMNs support advertisers in engaging customers throughout their journey. This shift reflects broader trends toward personalization and full-funnel strategies, with many advertisers beginning to embrace these holistic opportunities rather than focusing solely on point-of-purchase ads.
AW: I think advertisers should ask themselves, “What is a retail media network?” Over the past 18-to-24-months, there's been such a proliferation of these networks that almost any entity that has first-party or CRM data is throwing itself into the RMN ring. It reminds me of the very early days of ad networks, where new ad networks were springing up overnight, but the quality of the targeting and the audience varied greatly.
To Amy's point, I think a true RMN looks like more of the full advertising experience offered by networks like Walmart and Target. As the proliferation of these networks increases, it’s going to be critical for advertisers to discern between networks that can deliver real value and consumer experience and those that can’t.
GB: I also think that with this explosion of retail media networks and the fragmentation we’re seeing in that landscape, we are going see some winners and losers. Advertisers are only going to have so much tolerance for buying across all these separate walled garden platforms, so the smaller ones are going to get cut off of buys eventually as advertisers start consolidating to the ones that have the most sophisticated capabilities and ROI. I just don't think the marketplace can tolerate that kind of fragmentation for very long.
Would you say the same considerations are true across all verticals and industries in commerce media, beyond retail media?
AR: Yes, the same considerations will hold true outside of retail media. Just in terms of the measurement aspect of fragmentation in general, the more networks and properties you buy across, the more pressure you put on your measurement framework to make sure you have consistency in how you’re looking at performance and the customer journey across those various partners. As you start to consolidate and understand those handful of partners that are truly providing the most incremental value to the brand, that takes a bit of pressure off the measurement side of things.
I think we’ve seen a similar thing in social. When social exploded five years ago, there were eight or nine major networks and apps that developed. But today, most advertisers only invest in two to three at the most as part of their core media strategy. Because the more you invest in, the more you have to have a really good understanding of how customers are moving between one property to the other. Generally, I think that’s why even in social we’ve seen a bit of contraction in partner mix on plans recently, and folks are only investing in a couple of key platforms. They’re still seeing other options as opportunities to test and learn, but not necessarily as mainstays of their marketing plan.
AW: I think it comes down to effectiveness versus efficiency and finding the right balance. As Amy mentioned, advertisers put a lot of pressure on their measurement frameworks by investing in all these different platforms. At some point, the question is, “Are you effective when you’re over-rotating on your investment?” Probably not.
It’s critical for leaders at agencies and brands to have a thorough understanding of how these four trends are likely to develop over the next year. Check out Reality Check: The 2025 Advertising Trends Report for more insights advertisers can use to gain a competitive edge.
Heading into 2025, more and more marketers find themselves looking past the hype and the upside and, instead, asking that age-old question: “Oh yeah? Prove it.”
The industry is still grappling with a host of challenges that have frustrated advertisers for years—things like addressability, measurement, streaming activation, and new opportunities for reach and incrementality— and advertisers are eager to find real solutions that drive tangible results, and to thread the needle between promise and practicality.
Reality Check: The 2025 Advertising Trends Report provides keen perspective on the trends set to shape 2025, exploring the ways advertisers can bridge the disconnect between expectations and reality while maximizing the potential of new innovations to drive impact across their campaigns in the year ahead. This Executive Summary examines the core themes and trends outlined in the report, providing actionable insights for marketers and advertisers looking to thrive in the evolving digital landscape.
Commerce media is exploding, leveraging the vast potential of first-party data to create new ad networks tailored toward industries of all kinds. As third-party cookies fade and privacy concerns mount, reflects a broader shift in digital advertising where data collaboration and non-traditional vendors/publishers play a significant role in reaching target audiences.
CTV is finally delivering on its long-promised potential, offering advertisers cost-effective, high-quality inventory and precise targeting capabilities. And while CTV’s measurement shortcomings remain, marketers nevertheless have several solutions that can help them piece things together.
With the initial AI frenzy steadily subsiding, marketers are adopting a more pragmatic approach, identifying practical applications and integrating AI into core systems and everyday workflows. The goal, as with all things AI, is not to replace human expertise, but to augment it—giving marketers the tools to ask better questions and get more insightful answers.
Search behavior is transforming, with generative AI starting to syphon off meaningful search traffic and younger generations increasingly relying on social platforms like TikTok and Instagram for discovery. While Google remains an essential channel, marketers can benefit from experimenting with allocating portions of their search budget to places like TikTok, Amazon, commerce media, and elsewhere.
The 2025 advertising landscape presents both opportunities and challenges. By embracing data-driven strategies, leveraging emerging technologies responsibly, and adapting to evolving consumer behaviors, marketers and advertisers can achieve impactful results.
Download the full report to get deeper insights into the trends poised to shape advertising in 2025.
In recent years, the advertising industry has been abuzz with the promise of "game changing" developments. From the potential of Web3 and blockchain to AI, AR/VR, and beyond, marketers and advertisers have fallen and fallen hard—sometimes in love, sometimes right on their faces.
But even optimists and futurists can have their limits, and at a certain point, that curiosity begins to morph into skepticism. Heading into 2025, more and more marketers find themselves looking past the hype and the upside and, instead, asking that age-old question: "Oh yeah? Prove it."
The industry is still grappling with a host of challenges that have frustrated advertisers for years—things like addressability, measurement, streaming activation, and new opportunities for reach and incrementality— and advertisers are eager to find real solutions that drive tangible results, and to thread the needle between promise and practicality.
This report provides actionable insights on the trends set to shape 2025, examining key ways advertisers can bridge the disconnect between expectations and reality, while maximizing the potential of new innovations to drive impact with their campaigns in the year ahead.
Explore trends including:
Uncover the trends and opportunities that will shape advertising in the year ahead: Download Reality Check: The 2025 Advertising Trends Report today!
Over the past several years, connected TV adoption and usage has skyrocketed, as people increasingly turn to CTV as their viewing device of choice. How can advertisers embrace this growth and ensure they’re effectively connecting with consumers where and when they’re watching video?
In this guide, we analyze the latest data, trends, and research to help advertisers uncover everything they need to know about CTV advertising.
In it, you will learn:
Ready to make the most of your CTV ad spend? Download your copy of the guide today!
Digital audio is everywhere: from the podcasts we download for our morning commute, to the tunes we blast at the gym, to the live radio programs we stream while doing the dishes. For marketers, the channel provides an opportunity to connect with consumers when and where they’re listening—and to foster meaningful, personal connections in these moments.
Until now, digital audio’s power has been largely underutilized by advertisers. But the tides are turning, and with people spending more and more time with digital audio, a wave of audio ad spend is cresting on the horizon.
In this guide, we explore how savvy marketers can embrace this unique opportunity to connect with consumers. We analyze the latest trends, insights, and research to help advertisers harness the power of audio in their campaigns.
Ready to level up your audio advertising expertise? Download your copy of the guide today!
As advertisers lose more and more classic signals like cookies and MAIDs, adopting effective alternatives for targeting and attribution is more crucial than ever.
In this episode, Vince Voiro, Sr. Director of Connectivity & Ecosystem at LiveRamp, shares the latest on one of these alternative solutions: identity resolution. Together with host Noor Naseer, Voiro explores what identity resolution is, what data is needed to enable it, how it can improve activations and measurement workflows, and more.
Noor Naseer: Hey, this is Noor Naseer for AdTech Unfiltered. Regardless of what Google says, the cookieless future is still knocking on every advertiser's door demanding the adoption of alternative pathways for campaign success. With classic signals continuing to fade fast, Vince Voiro—Head of Agency and Brand Demand Connectivity & Ecosystem at data onboarding and collaboration platform, LiveRamp—says there's never been a more important time to secure new solutions for addressability and measurement. Vince speaks to me about what people know LiveRamp for and what else they need to know about the long-standing adtech and martech solution provider. We discuss what advertisers can do to prepare for a future where addressability as we know it won't look the same anymore and important steps they can take to test, learn and find what works best for their unique needs. Let's get into this episode on planning for the future of addressability and measurement with Vince right now.
__
NN: Vince, thanks for joining me today to talk about all things LiveRamp. There's been a ton of activity going on in the addressability space in a cookieless future that we're still looking forward to. So, appreciate you making time to talk about it.
Vince Voiro: Yeah, thanks for having me. Happy to be here.
NN: There are probably still folks out there who don't even have a baseline premise of LiveRamp. I know it's shocking—if you've been working in the adtech space, it's very likely that you do, but do you want to give me like your 30 second introduction to LiveRamp?
VV: Yeah, I think a lot of people who do know us know us as like an onboarding company. So, we take data and connect it with the platform that they're looking to send it to. But LiveRamp in itself does a lot more than that. We have a collaboration platform where we're working with brands and other partners to be able to share data in a privacy-safe, compliant way. We have measurement solutions that we help to support. So, LiveRamp does a lot of things in the ecosystem, but mainly you can view us as the connective tissue. We're helping to drive connections whether it's for collaboration, measurement, or activation across the ecosystem with all the different partners that are out there.
NN: So, the latest that people are primarily concerned with as we think more and more about the cookieless future is what should I be doing differently and how might I be approaching solution providers, including LiveRamp, differently. So, I think the big thing that we've been hearing from you all more recently has been about identity resolution. Do you want to tell me a little bit more about identity resolution as a mechanism for the cookieless future? Let's just start there and get that framework going.
VV: Yeah, so I think the idea of identity resolution, connectivity, and addressability all play really well together. The basics behind identity resolution is understanding who those consumers are that you're looking to target, regardless of which identifier you're trying to find them using.
So, traditionally, identity resolution for us was understanding who the offline individual is then connected to the online version. And obviously the focus there was cookies and MAIDs and other identifiers. The focus for us today in addition to cookies and MAIDs is using the Ramp identifier to understand who those people are. And the way we think about identity resolution is it's not just who is that person as an email, but it's collectively what are all of the email addresses? What is the first name and last name and postal address that's tied to that person, and how can we connect all of that to a single identifier where possible to allow you to address that person regardless of what information you come to us with it and what information they're providing to the end provider?
So, ultimately we want to generate the connection that allows you to address that individual, even if you may not have collected the same information as the partner on the other side.
NN: How often are you finding that advertisers are prepared to bring those different data elements to the table to build a really robust identity resolution system for themselves?
VV: I think obviously what vertical you're in and what type of data you have access to dictates the quality that you're able to present to us, but I also think that there's a misconception of what data is best suited for identity resolution.
The backbone of what we do at LiveRamp is really rooted in offline to start off with. So: first name, last name, postal address and the 50 plus years of data that's tied to that, but if you're coming to us with just email that's okay; that is definitely something we can work with. So, I think understanding what data assets you have as a brand or as a partner and then how you can utilize them is really the first step before you even jump into the idea of identity resolution, because the quality of your input is going to directly dictate the quality of the output. So, we want to understand what you have at your disposal and then we can come to you and let you know how that plays into what we do at LiveRamp.
NN: How do advertisers that have known LiveRamp historically think about what they can do with identity resolution differently than what they could have done with a LiveRamp let's say five, six, seven years ago?
VV: I think we've transformed the way that we connect data to the open web. So, a lot of the social platforms that we work with, things aren't changing as signals go away. We've always used our connections with them based on PII to allow us to generate who is this individual that the client is sending us to who that individual is on the platform. I’d say identity resolution has changed in the open web when it comes to who is this person that the client has to which cookie is that individual - obviously that's going away. What we've done is we've embedded our IDs and the Ramp IDs into each of the partners in the ecosystem. We've also provided that technology to the publishers in the ecosystem to allow everybody to resolve back to a people-based-identifier rather than relying on these disparate signals of cookies and MAIDs.
I think it's similar concepts, it's just done in a slightly different way and we actually believe it's an improved way of doing it. There's a lot more fidelity in those signals and less data loss. The concept is the same. It's very similar but I think how it has its practical application is maybe a little bit different.
NN: Then something that advertisers are looking for is for maybe in many cases a holy grail solution that's going to fill the void that cookies are going to leave. What won't we be getting from identity resolution? What's impractical for advertisers to be expecting no matter how robust of a data profile they're able to offer to you all in the utilization of your solution?
VV: I think the spirit of the changes really dictate the capability changes. The idea that cookies could passively track somebody across the internet is no longer a thing. We're not looking to recreate a solution that mimics a cookie. We're using authentication, consent-based workflows to generate that connectivity moving forward. I think the major change there is that that individual has to have a relationship with both sides of the equation for us to be able to generate those connections.
I'd also say the gap is, if I go and I create a brand-new Gmail account as an example, it takes time to resolve that data back to the rest of the touch points that we have in our ecosystem. It also takes time for clients of ours to have access to that data whether it's for registration or signups. I think that there is inherently a gap that happens in that type of scenario, but more broadly our ability to connect multiple emails to the same Ramp ID, to the same identifier, allows us to really have a good opportunity to continue to connect at a really high level.
NN: Are there ever scenarios where you know that you suggested that identity resolution can use this myriad of different types of data points and then a client turns back to Vince and says, “But how do I get all this?” Is that ever a question? It's not really your job but that's a part of the earlier part of the relay race but do you ever have to answer that type of question?
VV: Yeah, we do because I think a lot of clients assume that this is like something additional that they need to layer on to what they're already doing and maybe there's a gap in their understanding. They don't necessarily know that this is inherently what you get as part of partnering with LiveRamp.
Our identity resolution is the backbone for our basic products of data onboarding and activation so you're already going to gain access to all of those benefits. What we're then trying to do is extend those benefits across all of the different partners and all of the different workflows. So, you may be using them in an activation workflow, but what about all your measurement workflows? How can you benefit from identity resolution when it comes to measurement? I think that's where we spend a lot of time is refocusing and letting them know that this is something you already have access to. There's just more ways you can use it, more ways you can benefit from everything that you already are contracted for.
NN: Are there any other solution providers that fall into a space that also is qualified as identity resolution?
VV: Yeah, you know there's other partners out there like the Experians, the Axioms, the Transunions of the world. I think a lot of those other partners have similar elements to the way that they do things, but everybody has different data assets, different processes and different rules that underlie the setup and what that they provide.
I think for us, one of the major differentiators is that we have the ability to do identity resolution as an input, but then we have such strong connective tissue as an output for activation that ultimately that makes a major difference in the way that we can interact with our clients. I also think our network is really strong. From a collaboration standpoint we have environments that we can support collaboration in. We also are interoperable with outside environments if that's the way that brands choose to collaborate.
We're agnostic to the way that they go about doing these things and, ultimately, I think that provides a ton of value. You come to us with a solution you've already built. We figure out a way that we can integrate with that rather than forcing you into a more narrow solution. I think that's one of the real benefits of LiveRamp.
NN: Just to expand on something-- I heard you say something like this; as far as having a sort of an expansive network or many different ways to work with you, what have you had to do internally to make yourself so accessible and flexible to work in different ways? Is it building a lot of different types of partnerships, integrations? Can you just expand on what labor you all have done so that you can be easy to work with?
VV: Yeah, so I put it into three buckets, and you listed two of them. I think the partnership element of it is huge: Partnering with Snowflake and AWS and all those cloud providers to allow us to gain access to their platforms. The integrations to build our technology natively into those applications and to allow our brands to directly connect to things that they're using within our platform today. And then I'd say acquisition is the third part. Our recent acquisition of Habu allows brands to expand those use cases. So, if you were using Databricks and we didn't have an integration with them, Habu does. So, it adds in these additional elements that maybe we hadn't generated the partnership or generated the integration yet. They may have some of those, which actually allows us to be more flexible. So, I'd say those are the three ways that we're going about doing that.
NN: I'm going to bounce back to asking about the data piece. There are advertisers out there that really struggle with the collection of first-party data. It's just not as natural for them to be doing a lot of collection, especially if they've historically been using third-party cookie data or other types of data sourcing that has helped them do some really precise types of targeting. How do you help those kinds of advertisers that are just never going to have this really robust profile of first-party data, but are still looking to understand how to work with you?
VV: Yeah, I think we are trying to reset the expectation of what first-party data is and how you can collect it. Everybody assumes that this means you have to generate a login when somebody visits the website for the first time; and sure, that will help but we also understand the downside of doing it. So, we try to present them with a large number of different ways that they can generate authentications whether it's whitepapers or blogs or downloads.
Then the other thing for those that have a ton of trouble is, can you present the consumer with an ‘or’ scenario? And what I mean by that is, they can access this whitepaper or you can have it emailed to you. So, it doesn't necessarily blockade any information. It gives the consumer options, but it also presents the opportunity for the brand or the client to generate some first-party data. I think knowing that we've seen different ways it could be implemented, and then relying on information back to brands who are having a tough time implementing strategies, is definitely something that we try to do. We work with four or 500 different brands, so we see a lot out there. I think a lot of these brands are very focused on what they're doing. We can provide some of those consulting ideas as well.
NN: Vince, what does LiveRamp bring to the table for aiding with measurement, specifically for understanding conversion metrics?
VV: We do a lot with measurement as part of our connection with the end platform for activation. We can also bring data back into our platform and deliver it to whatever measurement partner or environment that brands are looking to do that with. So, converting all of your data to a single identifier, the Ramp ID, and doing measurement. So, you pull in your conversion data, you pull in your impression data, and you join those together in that privacy-safe way, and it gives you the flexibility to understand how well your media is operating—but also to generate new audiences to then connect that data back out for activation. So that's kind of full funnel. Where that's not possible, we've generated partnerships with the different conversion APIs to allow brands to share their data with those partners in a privacy-safe way.
We're going wherever the partner needs us to go if the client is interested in doing that but we're also trying to provide the flexibility to do more individual measurement where possible.
NN: Holistically speaking, where have you observed advertisers being overall too casual or too optimistic about the cookieless future? When I ask that question, what I mean is they're just waiting for things to sort out and may not be doing a lot of exploration with you and/or other partners to really prepare themselves for what the final flicker of that cookie full light is bringing to them and their media plans.
VV: Yeah, I think there's a couple of thoughts that brands bring to us and it's like you know, is this actually going to happen? Do we really need to worry about this because we don't know if the end is actually going to happen? We think it is. We think that each delay makes that a little bit more challenging to convey that, to have that brand have faith in the end result here, but we do think it's going to happen. We think that the more work a brand puts in up front to set up all those workflows and better understand what the impact is going to be, the better off they are in the long run. Not to mention the fact that there's benefits in the near-term. Fifty percent of the web is already cookieless. You're already missing out on a relatively large section of the internet today.
So how can these different products or partnerships benefit you in the now, while also setting you up for the benefits in the future? I think that gets lost in a lot of those thought processes. We definitely try to push that agenda. We obviously make sure that that's clear in the conversations. We also let them know what the near-term benefits are as well as the improvements they can make in their overall processes for when the cookies actually do fully go away.
NN: I want to also ask about just knowing that you all have a lot of solutions and we're not going to cover in detail on all of them, but I'm sure that plenty of advertisers are curious about what that suite looks like. How do you help any advertiser make sure that they understand at least from a top-level what they may want to get more informed on so that they are taking advantage of the solutions that would be most helpful for the type of work they want to do in the digital advertising world or advertising world at-large?
VV: I think it comes down to generating just that overarching partnership. We don't want to be viewed just as a vendor. We want to be viewed as someone who can come in and understand your business, understand what the challenges are, and then present to you products that fill those gaps.
Yes, we do activation, yes we do measurement, and yes we do collaboration; but we have a data marketplace, we have other measurement solutions we've built in-house. Not everything is a good fit for every client that we work with. So, we want to come in and we want to understand where your pain points are. We want to understand how we can help to fill some of those voids, whether it's through connecting you with a partner of ours or providing a solution of our own. We're happy to do both of those things because we're looking at this as much more of a long-term relationship than we are something that's very transactional—trying to generate those relationships that allow you to feel comfortable with the products we're presenting to you, and then ultimately making sure you're using those products so you see the value, because shelfware is not something that we're looking to provide.
NN: You mentioned data collaboration a couple times now in our conversation. Where are there misconceptions about what data collaboration is? What do you want to clarify about how data collaboration is integral to what you offer and what advertisers should know more about it?
VV: Yeah, data collaboration comes up in all the different workflows that we've talked about. From an activation standpoint there can be collaboration with first and third-party data. There can be collaboration across two marketers. I think the easy example is a retailer and a CPG that want to work together. Collaboration also takes form in measurement, too; so, it's understanding how your media is effective with some of the social partners that may be working with us.
I think the biggest thing that we like to convey is LiveRamp has a collaboration platform and we're happy to work with you within our platform but, like we've talked about previously, if you're already working in Snowflake, we can help to support collaboration and Snowflake-- we can help to support that elsewhere. I think there's just more flexibility to it than brands may give it credit. They may think of it as very much a retail media-focus, but there's a lot of different ways that brands are coming to us looking to collaborate. Whether it's loyalty programs to, you know, let's say an airline with a hotel program or maybe a rideshare program that wants to do things.
There's a lot of different ways that you can look at this, but I think the benefits are the same. You get more access to data, you do it in a privacy-safe way, and it also allows you to do the activation at the end of the day, too, and that's the biggest piece on the LiveRamp side in my opinion. I think allowing you to connect that data to the partners that you can then serve media too is something that is missing from some of the other solutions that are out there.
NN: How do you really inform conversation about the points of separation between authenticated identity versus identity resolution, since they're both mentioned so often in the marketplace?
VV: Identity resolution kind of underpins the whole scenario. Authenticated identity is an example of you go to your favorite news website and you're logging in to gain access to content; that to me is authenticated identity where there's an opt-out that's available for that consumer to be able to remove their data—and we are using that as a piece of the puzzle. But the connectivity that brands are looking for requires the authenticated ID but the identity resolution bolsters that authenticated ID. It makes it so that we're more flexible on what data you can send to us. It makes it so that we can expand where we know that that individual has more than one touchpoint that's out there in the ecosystem. So, these two things are independent, but they also work together to allow us to provide kind of a stronger solution. Especially when it comes to cookieless where we're going to be so reliant on consented data and authenticated data, you want to have the flexibility and the improved match rates wherever possible.
NN: Do you think the industry anticipates that authenticated ID is going to face similar pressures that third-party cookies currently are?
VV: I don't think so. I think that there's a lot of alternative solutions that may be posing as authenticated IDs but aren't really. There's definitely a fingerprinting problem in the industry—and for anybody who's not familiar, it's using passive IDs that are similar to a cookie to understand who the person is without them consenting. Our solution doesn't follow that path. We think that any solution like that is slowly going to be stamped out. Different pieces of that identity is going to be removed, like IP address and user agent; and a lot of the partners out there have already promised to do that. So, I think truly authenticated IDs are in a really good place. I think some of those that sit in a gray area or aren't authenticated are going to have trouble over the coming year or two.
NN: Something you and I have talked about before is: How confusing it can be out there right now where there are solutions that are being suggested to be cookieless solutions, but incidentally they're still using cookies. And one of the most visible ways that that is happening is with fingerprinting. How do you encourage or educate advertisers or anyone that you engage with on trying to better understand and distinguish when a solution is truly cookieless versus when it probably is invested and involved with fingerprinting or something else that is inevitably going to be taken off the table when cookies are finally done away with?
VV: I think we just encourage them to ask a lot of questions. If something doesn't seem to line up or make sense then it's very likely that they're doing something that doesn't fit the change of the consent framework that we're looking to go to. So, asking questions, making sure you have a good understanding of the product suite for that partner. If something sounds too good to be true then it likely is. I think trusting the partner that you work with and knowing that they're transparent with everything that they're doing, they're forthright with how the product is built—a lot of black box solutions out there. I think we tried to be less of a black box solution. We try to give you exactly how we're doing some of these partnerships and how we're generating these IDs. Ultimately you have to feel comfortable from a privacy and security standpoint that you're not going to end up in front of your favorite news outlet at the end of the day. No brand wants to be there, and I think avoiding that at all costs is really important because there's a financial toll. There's a reputation toll that also comes with it, too. So, we are definitely looking to generate products and partnerships that keep brands out of trouble.
NN: You said black box solutions—somebody at Basis uses the term “magic solutions,” and that there is no “magic” and if you don't understand the origins of how a solution is orienting and giving you something cookieless that very much seems it's giving you not just cross-device but cross-site tracking that there's some “magic” (I'm using air quotes in a podcast that that's being applied). Do you ever have that more confrontative conversation of saying ‘that is fingerprinting’?
VV: Yeah. If you have to ask multiple times in a conversation and you still can't get a straight answer, then you're likely looking at something that you're not going to want to partner with. It's definitely challenging because I think there's a lot of buzzwords that come into play and people are looking for options and different privacy teams have different comfort levels about what their partners are doing. So I think the impetus is really on whoever's leading that partnership to ask the right questions, to speak with everybody, to see if the responses are different from all the different parties that you're talking to and to really have faith that what the partner is conveying is actually how they're going about doing things and that they're transparent in the way that they can go about doing that.
If they're willing to connect you, with the publishers, or the platforms, and have them ask those questions directly to that partner and say, “Look, how is LiveRamp doing this?” they can give you transparency. I would definitely encourage that. If you speak to that partner fact channel and they're like “We don't even work with that provider,” obviously there's something a little fishy going on with that.
So yeah, just asking a lot of questions—a lot of “how” questions—I think is helpful, and if it's too good to be true, it likely is.
NN: For an advertiser that is just trying to better themselves when it comes to addressability at a high-level. Maybe we're not getting into the full consultative conversation with a particular client, but they want to inform themselves before reaching out to you on how they should be thinking about working with LiveRamp, how they should be thinking about preparing themselves to take advantage of some of what you can bring to the table – is there any advice that you would give to an advertiser so that they can do a little bit of leg work to see if there's an opportunity for partnership?
VV: Yeah. I think that we put up a ton of good material on our website that gives brands an idea of the type of workflows, the type of benefits clients are seeing for what they're doing today. You could reach out to LiveRamp. We have people that are dedicated to almost every account that's out there that can give you the 101 without you having to really do much. We're happy to educate you on your behalf. We're happy to kind of have those conversations up front and really give you the information that you need. I also think if you're a little bit further down the line, there's a lot of our current clients that are happy to talk with prospect clients and give them a better idea of what they're doing with us today and how that's impacted their business. So, a lot of different ways to go about that, but I would say reach out. We have resources that are willing to have those conversations even if you're not a client to give you an idea of how you could benefit from our products and services—and we're more than happy to do that.
NN: Is there anything happening from an addressability standpoint that you think is particularly exciting that advertisers should be knowledgeable about that's on the horizon or that you're actively releasing or on the precipice of releasing?
VV: Yeah, I’d say there's a few things. CTV is a growing focus. I think across the industry, but especially at LiveRamp. Partnerships with NBCU or Disney or other CTV providers become really important for the brands that we work with. I think direct partnerships with large publishers like the New York Times that we released recently are definitely going to grow in their impact and their usage on the LiveRamp side. Then I think on the measurement side, understanding how the pixels—let's say, on your website—are working today. What workflows are going to be impacted and how can you solve for some of that impact; that's something that we're also really seeing, really focusing on, because we know it plays a really big role in the process for the brands that we work with.
So, things like the conversion APIs, like I mentioned before, is another thing we're really focusing on the addressability side of things because without measurement, activation is always in trouble, so you need to solidify both sides of the equation.
NN: Well, there's no shortage of things to learn about LiveRamp and I feel like I've covered not even 1% of what can be discussed about you all. Obviously, we've got a partnership with you and we're also evangelists for what you all are doing. We appreciate the time and the conversation and looking forward to learning more as you guys keep on chugging all on.
VV: Yeah, it's a pleasure. Thanks for having me.
__
NN: Thanks again to Vince Voiro, Head of Brand and Agency Demand Connectivity & Ecosystem at LiveRamp. There's no question about it: A lot of explorative work and scenario consideration will need to be done by advertisers to find the unique suite of solutions that works best for them. We heard some important thoughts from Vince on how to think more deeply around an established partner that's committed to helping move addressability for the future forward. That's it for this episode of AdTech Unfiltered. I'm Noor Naseer. We'll talk again real soon.