What is interesting here is that, as Dan mentioned, this already exists in legitimate form. Audience Science and others do it for audience extension, while a new generation of data companies do it for user’s history. All of it is done without the user’s consent, the same as what I have described above. If legitimacy is only based on whether everyone is getting paid, it’s not enough to make it right for the end consumer.

And it is also true that this can be done with traditional ad networks. The point is that it’s much easier to do with ad exchanges because of the scale of inventory available through them. Even the smallest audience intersections become available on tap.

I would say that increasingly we’ll be seeing companies trying to showcase that they “out-data” others, after years of trying to “out-optimize” in vain. Some even change their names to reflect that.

@john nardone - Not sure what warrants an attack like this from you. I am in no way implying that we are doing this, since we’re serving for some of the biggest, most respected brands in the world. I am raising the point that data ownership, both from the user and media perspective, is an issue that has to be seriously addressed by the industry. Industry players saying that they don’t do it just doesn’t cut it — I don’t believe in self-policing in this one.

I’m hoping that the venerable “grown-ups” at xplusone would agree with this.

Let’s try and be more conscious of bad-mouthing new opportunities before folks down in the trenches have had a chance to evaluate themselves.

“You are right Bill, and I mentioned that in the post. The point is that it’s possible and RTB exchanges facilitate this to happen under the radar.”

I disagree. First, RTB exchanges have very specific terms and conditions. Second, like I said, these kinds of techniques are possible for any kind of moderately sophisticated ad network or exchange. It really has nothing to do with RTB.

“Moreover, since RTB requires you to have data to make buying decisions, there will most definitely be a rise in getting data with whatever means are necessary. ”

This is also true of all kinds of efficient ad buying, not just RTB. I suppose the only difference is that if you buy through an ad network or exchange and also use their “house” optimization you rely on a third party to have sufficient data to do a good enough job. You are correct, with RTB, the buyer drives the optimization, so the buyers needs both targeting algorithms and data.

In general, I disagree with the undertone of the article, which seems to insinuate that RTB is a seedy way to buy media. Yes, it’s possible to behave badly using RTB, but behaving badly has always been possible through any kind of media buying on the internet. RTB is a just a new way of buying where many buyers have the opportunity to simultaneously compete for a particular impression. There is nothing fundamentally different about it that would encourage these kinds of tactics.

You definitely raise some interesting points. I guess it will eventually come down to a cost thing.

Whilst doing #1 could be done fairly cheaply, going down the #2 route would take a long time to compile and maintain the product level URL list. This might incur a cost that would be more expensive than just buying this data from a competitor or data company directly (assuming, of course, you could convince them of the benefits of doing so). Would there not also be potential issue in checking all the thousands of URLs within the RTB timeframe?

#3 already exists in legitimate form, Audience Science’s Audience Extension product works in a similar way but pays the publishers for the segment. As long as the cost is not prohibitive, this could open the door to a better relationship with the publisher for more complex segmentation, something that would be far more difficult using the underhand method.

Ultimately, as long as it doesn’t cost too much to do things legitimately, I’d like to think that the majority of the companies in the industry would stay above board. Time will tell!

Moreover, since RTB requires you to have data to make buying decisions, there will most definitely be a rise in getting data with whatever means are necessary.

Your comment seems to be more of a plug for dataxu - well done on that.

We don’t use them at DataXu. We consider leveraging browser exploits and re-targeting specific publisher audience to be off-limits.

Bill Simmons
VP Tech, DataXu