Who was harmed?
The unredacted submitting doesn’t absolutely clarify how Google truly used the advert server information nonetheless. And in advert tech, the satan is within the particulars.
“There are a whole lot of lacking particulars and an enormous conclusion,” cautioned Scott Messer, SVP of media at Leaf Group.
If Google used advert server log information to benefit itself, the query is who ended up dropping the stacked sport: publishers, SSPs, or another person.
For example, publishers could be harmed probably the most if Google used the information to inform advert patrons like DSPs to bid much less, inflicting publishers to obtain decrease costs for his or her advertisements.
“When the mud settles, it can end up that digital programmatic isn’t truly THAT unhealthy a enterprise for native publishers apart from an opaque duopoly that allowed worth to be siphoned off at each hyperlink within the chain,” tweeted Damon Kiesow, Knight Chair in Journalism for the College of Missouri and a former head of product for McClatchy.
On the flip facet, impartial SSPs would have been most harmed if Google used advert server information to vary the flooring on some stock, serving to its personal advertiser demand win. Advertisers who used Google’s DSP would profit, however entrepreneurs who used third-party DSPs would lose entry to stock.
“The management of the writer advert server has been crucial in Google’s domination of digital promoting,” stated Romain Job, Chief Technique Officer of Sensible, an advert server and SSP competitor to Google. “Whereas it might by no means have been a money cow, advert server management permits Google to dam different gamers from competing for share.”
So relying on if Google used the advert server information to do bid shading (which might harm publishers) or change value flooring (which might harm aggressive SSPs and advertisers utilizing non-Google DSPs), the observe would harm totally different elements of the advert ecosystem.
The shortage of transparency makes it tougher for publishers and advertisers to determine who benefitted from Google making an attempt to route extra advert spend by way of its pipes.
“The mechanics…would decide whether or not or not it finally helps or hurts publishers,” Lesko stated.
Does Mission Bernanke nonetheless exist?
Mission Bernanke occurred earlier than header bidding modified the public sale surroundings, and it’s unclear how its information sharing program developed after header bidding took off.
However the identical rules that outlined Mission Bernanke might be utilized by way of Google’s open bidding function. Publishers see proof they already are.
“We see elevated CPM and win charges from the identical trade by way of [open bidding] vs. [header bidding],” even when accounting for timeouts, Lesko stated.
Exchanges use open bidding to entry extra information, which improves their public sale logic so they appear higher to DSPs.
“Google might be making an attempt to stunt header bidding in favor of open bidding the place it may exploit bid-level information to its profit,” Job stated of Sensible.
So if Google continues to be quietly sharing advert server information with different Google advert merchandise, whereas withholding that very same information from rivals, Mission Bernanke lives on.