Thomvest Mobile Advertising Overview - February 2016

Mobile Advertising OverviewFebruary 2016

Three trends that make us excited about the mobile advertising opportunity

The mobile ad spend will surpass desktop spend in 2016

- eMarketer predicts that mobile ad spend will rise to $69B globally this year (up 71% from 2014)

- In 2016, the global mobile ad market will surpass $100B, accounting for more than 50% of digital ad expenditure for the first time

- According to eMarketer, mobile accounted for 61% of all programmatic display ad spending in the U.S. in 2015

- Mobile programmatic ad expenditure in the U.S. is expected to surpass $20B by 2017

- MoPub saw brands account for the majority of spend in December 2014 through the holidays

- According to MoPub, 60% of its top 25 private marketplace advertisers are brands (as opposed to performance advertisers)

- An IAB study showed that brand spend on mobile increased 142% from 2011 to 2013

Mobile real-time bidding (RTB) spend is ramping up

Brand ad dollars are flowing into mobile

Agenda

Mobile advertising market size and growth

The rise of programmatic advertising on mobile

Ad formats and targeting capabilities on mobile

Key mobile publishers & ad-tech vendors

Evolving standardization & regulation environment

Ad spend on mobile is growing at a clip similar to early desktop advertising

4

$2

$4

$6

$8

Broadcast TV Cable TV Internet Mobile

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

U.S. Advertising Media Annual Spend Growth for First Four Years ($B)

98% CAGR

72% CAGR

159% CAGR123% CAGR

Source: IAB, PWC, ComScore, Gartner

(1949-1952) (1980-1983) (1996-1999) (2010-2013)

Mobile will drive all of the growth in digital ad spend over the next several years

5

$20

$40

$60

$80

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

$65.9

$57.8

$49.8

$40.5

$28.7

$19.2

$10.7

$25.4$25.2$25.0$26.6$29.9$31.6$32.4

Desktop Mobile

U.S. Digital Advertising Spending, Desktop vs. Mobile ($B)

Source: eMarketer, March 2015

Desktop: -3.4% CAGR

Mobile:29.7% CAGR

2016 will be the year mobile ad spend

surpasses desktop

Mobile ad spend will be primarily funneled through apps

6

$15

$30

$45

2014 2015 2016

$10.8

$7.9

$5.5 $29.7

$20.8$13.7

Mobile App Mobile Web

U.S. Mobile Ad Spend, In-App vs. Mobile Web ($B)

~3/4s of mobile ad spend is

in-app

- According to comScore, U.S. consumers spend 6x more time in mobile apps compared to mobile web

- 54% of total digital media time is spent in mobile apps, compared to 8% in mobile web

Time spent in apps dwarfs mobile web

- There is data that advertisers can glean from apps vs. web, most valuable being location & in-app activity

- Apps rely on advertising identifiers (IDFA, Google Ad ID) vs. cookies (and third-party cookies are disabled by default on iOS devices)

Rich targeting data available in the app environment

- Deeper publisher integration via an SDK enables richer ad experience and a more “native” feel

- Many app publishers work with vendors who pre-cache ad creative for a better user experience (faster load times)

Better ad units in the app environment

Source: eMarketer, March 2015

Agenda






Mobile programmatic advertising has already overtaken desktop programmatic

8

20%

40%

60%

80%

$6

$12

$18

$24

2014 2015 2016 2017

Mobile Programmatic Ad Spend Mobile as a % of Total Programmatic Spend

76%

69%

61%

43%

$20.5

$14.9

$9.3

$4.4

43%

61%

69%

76%

U.S. Programmatic Mobile Ad Spending, 2014-2017 ($B)

47% CAGR

Source: eMarketer, October 2015

Mobile accounted for more than half of

programmatic in 2015

Illustrating the ad exchange buying process

9

User Publisher Ad Server, SSP, or Mediation

Ad exchanges auction ad requests on a real-time

basis, often finishing under half a second. Many types

of demand partners can bid on a single ad request.

The winner of the bid is notified and the demand partner relays a tag that

directs to the advertiser’s ad server to begin ad

serving.

User arrival initiates ad request. Publishers use various methods to

determine ad fulfillment.

1

RTB Exchange

2

Ad content (text, images, video) is distributed to the user’s device via a

content distribution network

4

The advertiser’s ad server is called to deploy the ad. This often occurs via a

content distribution network.

3Content Distribution

NetworkAdvertiser Ad Server

Programmatic RTB Auction

Demand Side Platform

Agency Trading Desk

Ad Network

Illustrating the ad exchange buying process

10

For each inbound ad request, bid requests are sent to bidders, responses are evaluated under an auction, the winner is notified & the ad markup is returned. Ads are usually delivered via a content distribution network (not depicted).

RTB Exchange

Real-time auction

Bidder

Real-time decisioning engine

0. Ad Request 1. Bid Request (Auction, Site, Device, & User Data)

2. Bid Response (Bid, Ad URL or Ad Markup)

3. Win Notice (Settlement Price)

4. Ad Markup (If not in Bid Response)5. Ad Delivered

Insertion Orders

Tag Setup Setup & Traffic Control (Config, Rate Throttling, Request Filters)

Comparing ad networks & exchanges

Ad Networks Ad Exchanges

OverviewAggregates publisher inventory via technology integrations (SDK, API, Server-to-Server etc.) & segments audiences to sell impressions to advertisers usually via direct sales

Marketplace driven by real-time auction of ad inventory. Advertisers buy ads programmatically on an per-impression basis. The auction usually occurs in fractions of a second

Ad Buying & Selling Process

- Advertisers are sold audiences aggregated from the network’s publishers

- Relies on human interaction (RFPs & insertion orders)

- Advertisers purchase media with bidders (DSP, ATDs) or self-serve

- Relies on integrations with DSPs, ad networks, and SSPs

Pricing Model- 10-50% margins; sometimes as high as 80% - Media arbitrage commonly used to improve

margin

- 10-15% margin - Media arbitrage less common; exchanges provide

transparency in pricing

Publisher Integration

- Publishers integrate directly with ad networks (SDK, API, Server-to-Server)

- Publishers can also access ad networks via mediation platforms

- Publishers integrate with an exchange via SDKs or APIs

- Integrates with ad network intermediates like DSPs, SSPs, networks, and other exchanges

Exchanges often provide higher fill rates than networks due to greater

diversity of demand sources

Exchanges have eroded the media arbitrage model common

among ad networks

In some cases, private exchanges provide restricted access to specific

demand partners to bid on a publisher’s inventory

11

Comparing private & public ad exchanges

Public Ad Exchanges Private Ad Exchanges

OverviewOpen marketplace where demand partners bid for ad impressions from publishers. Public exchanges often have self-serve products that allow easy and open access to demand partners to bid on ads.

Closed system where select publishers and ad buyers. Publishers often set up markets, select a group of buyers, and dictate market pricing and dynamics.

Ad Buying & Selling Process

- Multiple publishers can sell inventory - Many advertisers can purchase inventory

- Publishers with private exchanges are usually large media houses due to initial IT setup cost

- Advertisers are curated by the publisher; usually they are brands / other large advertisers

Inventory- More remnant inventory than private exchange - Wider reach and more diverse user segments

- Premium inventory from specific publisher

Control- Publishers have limited control over which ads are displayed;

however, blacklisting and whitelisting sources are often available - Advertisers may not know where ads are placed

- Publishers have a wide range of control over advertiser access, ad content, and pricing

- Private exchanges are used to facilitate guaranteed or direct deals

Key Benefits- Large volume of inventory, often higher fill rates - Access to different categories of publishers & ads - Access to wider audience segments

- Higher quality inventory, higher eCPMs - Provides publisher with more control over advertisers and

advertisements on their platform - Easy to facilitate direct deals or guaranteed buys

Concerns

- Lower eCPM, more remnant inventory - Less control for publishers in terms of ads served; however

blacklisting and whitelisting is an option - Less transparency for advertisers

- Limited inventory and less diverse audience segments - Expensive to setup; usually only large publishers can create a private

exchange

12

Agenda






13

Several mobile ad formats have emerged, which vary in pricing & performance

Banner Video Rich Media Incentivized Native

Overview Static images that link to mobile web or app store

Video advertisements, often placed with rich media or incentivized

Interactive ads, often html-5 based

Ads that reward users for engagement (in-app purchases, installs, etc)

Ads that are in-stream with the content of the app

Ad Types- Partial screen: 320x50,

120x20,300x50, etc - Full-screen: pop-up,

interstitial

- Interstitial - Pre-, Mid-, Post-Roll - Click-to-view - Incentivized

- Interstitial - Banners - Video, click-to-call, deep

linking

- Offer wall, Video, Banner, Rich Media - In-stream, Video

Estimated Average CPM

- Full-screen: $3.00 (all OSs) - Banner: $0.60 (all OSs)

- $5.50 (all OSs) - $6.60 (iOS) - $3.40 (Android)

- Full-screen: $3.20 (all OSs) - Banner: $0.80 (all OSs)

- Generally lower than non-incentivized

- $5-$50, depending on publisher & content

Inventory Volume - Largest inventory available - Relatively low level of

inventory, but growing - Moderate level of inventory - Not supported by most exchanges

- Not supported by many exchange, but growing

Primary Performance

Metric- Effective cost per action

(CPA)

- DR: Cost per completed view (CPV)

- Brand: Brand lift or recall

- Cost per ad engagement (CPE) - Cost per install (CPI) - Cost per engagement (i.e.

downloads)

Source: Images from NativeX, Thomvest Research14

All mobile ad types are expected to grow over the next several years

15

$25

$50

$75

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

$6.9

$6.0

$5.1

$3.9

$2.6

$1.5

$0.7

$27.0

$23.8

$20.6

$16.9

$12.1

$8.1

$4.6

$28.4$25.0$21.7$17.9

$12.9$8.7

$4.9

SearchBanners, Rich Media, OtherVideoSMS / MMS / P2P MesagingOther (Classifieds, Email, Lead Gen)

U.S. Mobile Ad Spend by Ad Format (Billions, USD)

- Mobile video is a top priority for many ad tech co’s

- Publishers & media buyers are asking for mobile video

- Vungle launched first in-app mobile video ad exchange

- Greater adoption of IAB industry standards for mobile video like VAST and MRAID

Growing Demand for Mobile Video

- MoPub recently launched Native Ads specifications for all publishers

- OpenX launched Native O|X, a mobile native advertising exchange

- We’re also seeing an emergence of pure-play native exchanges (TripleLift, Nativo, Sharethrough, and others)

Exchanges are Launching Mobile Native Ads

Source: eMarketer, Flurry, Thomvest Research

$0.6

$1.0

$1.6

$2.1

$2.8

$3.3 SMS $0.24

16

Video, native & interstitial ads are the fasted growing ad formats on mobile

These mobile formats have been proven to perform better than standard banners ads, driving up CPMs and prompting more publishers to integrate new ad units

Q2 2014 Q2 2015

Video Enabled eCPMs

Q2 2014 Q2 2015

Native eCPMs

Q2 2014 Q2 2015

Interstitial eCPMs

+31% +40% +46%

- 50% more publishers with video ad units in Q2 2015 compared to Q2 2014

- According to Nanigans, mobile video ad units have a 39% higher CTR compared to static images

- 1073% more publishers with native ad units in Q2 2015 compared to Q2 2014

- According to Fiksu, native ads convert at a rate 4x higher than standard banners

- 52% more publishers with interstitial ad units in Q2 2015 compared to Q2 2014

- According to Fiksu, interstitial ads convert at a rate 2x higher than standard banners

Source: Mopub Q2 2015 Marketplace Report

17

Marketers expect to continue using video formats, but native formats may decline in popularity

Pre/Mid Roll Video

Display Banners

Native

Rich Media

Display Interstitials

Interstitial Video

Interactive Overlays

In-Banner Video

IAB Rising Stars 31%

33%

35%

37%

37%

39%

45%

45%

46%

15%

43%

28%

28%

29%

46%

50%

63%

45%

Currently Use Will Use in 2016

Source: Trusted Media Brands, Native & Video Mobile Advertising Whitepaper, January 2016

Mobile Ad Formats Current & Planned UsageAccording to a survey of 283 brand marketers & agency executives

- Display banners & rich media formats are expected to decrease most significantly in 2016

- Usage of native formats may begin to wane as well, driven by difficulties in producing and measuring ads in this format

- Usage of interstitial and overlay ad formats is expected to increase in 2016, likely driven by high viewability and performance relative to other formats

While the Android OS is more common, iOS devices generate over half of mobile ad revenue

18

- About 70% of the auctions that MoPub, Turn, and Smaato see are for 320x50 banners

- According to Smaato, the 320x250 ad size for app and mobile web comprised 21% of inventory in 1H’15

Most Mobile Exchange Inventory is 320x50

- 18% of ad spend on Opera Mediaworks came from Social Networking, followed by News & Information and then Games in Q2’15. Music, Video and Media still comprised a good portion at 15%

- Smaato saw spend coming from Entertainment (50%), Social Networking (16%) & Games (13%) at the end of 2014

Greatest Spend from Entertainment & Media

- According to Opera Mediaworks and Smaato, Android accounted for more auctions than iOS in Q2 2015

- Android also leads iOS in terms of % of revenue in Q2’15 (48% Android vs. 47% iOS)

Android Beats iOS on Traffic Not Revenue

Smaato Global Top Operating System Share, Q3 2015 (% of Auctions)

Android iOS Other

65% 29%

26%

6%of traffic

44%of revenue

of traffic of traffic

52%of revenue

4%of revenue

Traffic & Revenue Share by Publisher Category, Q3 2015

10%

20%

30%

Business, finance & investing

Entertainment Games Music, video & media

News & information

Social networking

% of revenue % of impressions

Source: Smaato, Turn, Opera Mediaworks, Thomvest Research

Targeting on mobile is becoming more sophisticated, driven by geo and in-app data

19

- Lat/long data is unique to mobile. However, there are concerns about the accuracy of the lat/long data provided through exchanges

- Device IDs allow for behavioral targeting, data enrichment (first- and third-party), and other user level targeting

Geo and Device ID are Important to Buyers

- MoPub and Nexage have integrated with BlueKai to add third-party data to ad requests

- Companies like LiveRamp are offering first-party data onboarding services

- Many DSPs and DMPs offer data onboarding services

Layering of First- and Third-Party Data

- Industry experts admit that parameters in ad requests are not fully utilized for targeted mobile ad buys, even by sophisticated DSPs

- Integration with third-party analytics and attribution providers like Apsalar and others are enabling richer user behavior capture

Mobile Targeting Still Evolving

Demographic Location Device Behavioral Ad Specific Publisher

- Age - Gender - Marital Status - Children - Household income - Education - Occupation - Language

- Latitude/ Longitude - Zip code - City - State - Country - DMA - MSA

- Device ID - Device OS - Device type Carriers - IP address - Screen Resolution

- Key words - Time of day - Neustar AdAdvisor Targets - Nielsen PRIZM clusters

- Ad size - Ad type and specs (video,

banner, etc) - App vs. mobile web

- App category and type - Publisher name - Whitelist/ Blacklist

Mobile Ad Targeting Paramaters

Source: Nexage, Mocean Mobile, Thomvest Research

The challenge for advertisers is connecting users’ targeting profiles across devices

- Unique IDs and cookies are deterministic models that are accurate but have limitations across app and mobile web (see right)

- Probabilistic models like fingerprinting are less accurate but can work across app and web

- Single sign-on is deterministic and works across app and web. However, typically only the provider of the sign-on (FB, TWTR, etc) can track user behavior

Limitations of Mobile Attribution Methods

- Fingerprinting and single sign-on can be used for cross app-web user measurement

- AdTruth, TapAd, and Drawbridge provide methods for app-web and cross device attribution and tracking

Cross App-Web Tracking and Attribution

- Advertisers are demanding more granular information on conversion and other lower funnel metrics

- As brands and, in particular, direct response advertisers enter mobile, ROI measurement will become increasingly important

Industry Trend Towards Attribution and ROI

ID-Matching Methods In-App Mobile

Unique Identifier Matching (Device IDs)Unique ID strings for each mobile device. IDFA for iOS, Advertising ID for Android. Also, Google Play Install Referrer is available for app install attribution. Limited app-to-web attribution for IDFA.

Yes No

Cookies, Pixel Tags, Click RedirectsVarious methods on a mobile web browser that provides information on a user’s device and browsing information. Limited usage on Safari.

No Yes

Device Fingerprinting Probabilistic method that uses non-unique information from user’s device header (IP address, etc) to approximate uniqueness. Biggest limitation of fingerprinting is accuracy.

Yes Yes

User Log-insPersistent log-in information across applications, websites & devices. Examples include Facebook, Twitter, and Linkedin accounts.

Yes Yes

20

Agenda






21

The four largest mobile advertising companies together account for nearly 60% of total revenue

22

25%

50%

75%

100%

2014 2015 2016 2017

33%34%32%27%

2%3%3%3%4%4%4%4%

20%19%19%19%

32%32%33%36% GoogleFacebookTwitterYahoo!Apple (iAd)PandoraYPYelpLinkedInAmazonMillenial MediaOther

U.S. Mobile Ad Revenue Share, by Company

GOOG & FB account for >50% of mobile ad revenue

Source: eMarketer, September 2015

Mirroring the broader industry, mobile is the primary growth driver for FB, GOOG, TWTR & YHOO

Mobile Ad Products Notable Recent Updates

- Facebook Audience Network (mobile ad network) - LiveRail (mobile video, display and native ads) - Mobile app install and engagement ads - Page post video, photo, text ad - Page like, offer, event ads

- January 2016 — Facebook Audience Network (FAN) has a $1 billion annual run rate - August 2015 — 88% of Facebook’s monthly active users are on mobile - April 2015 — LiveRail expanded to support non-video ads, including native & traditional units - July 2014 — Acquired LiveRail - April 2014 — Announced launch of mobile ad network to deliver ads on non-FB properties - August 2012 — Launched mobile app install ads

- DoubleClick - AdMob (mobile apps) - AdSense for Mobile (mobile web) - Google Mobile Advertising (replaced AdMob)

- November 2015 — Debuts programmatic ad sales for native & mobile video - May 2015 — Announced Native Ads beta - August 2015 — AdMob SDK sunset, switch to Mobile Advertising SDK - February 2014 — Deprecation of Android AdMob SDK, to be replaced by Mobile Advertising API - October 2013 — Released Mobile Advertising API which supports AdMob , Doubleclick for

Publishers, and Doubleclick Ad Exchange

- Mobile app promotion suite; app cards - MoPub Exchange - Twitter publisher network - Promoted tweets, follows, trends, videos,

accounts

- July 2015 — Announced video app card, optimized action bidding and CPI bidding - June 2014 — Acquired TapCommerce (mobile retargeting) and Namo Media (native ads) - April 2014 — Announced launch of 15 new ad types inc. mobile app install - April 2014 — Launched Twitter Publisher Network which runs self-serve campaigns from on

MoPub exchange - September 2013 — Acquired MoPub

- Yahoo Gemini (mobile search and native ads); available via Yahoo Ad Manager

- Flurry Mobile Ad Network - Yahoo Ad Exchange (Right Media) - Flurry Analytics

- February 2015 — Announces mobile in-app advertising network, powered by Flurry - November 2014 — Acquires BrightRoll - July 2014 — Acquires Flurry - February 2014 — Launched Gemini, an ad exchange for mobile search and native ads - February 2014 — Mocean Mobile and Yahoo launched premium mobile ad exchange - September 2013 — Yahoo launched Stream Ads; native ad placements on Yahoo properties

23

Product segments across mobile ad-tech vendors

Ad Network Ad Exchange DSP SSP / MediationYes Yes Yes No

Yes No Yes No

Yes No No No

Yes Yes Yes Yes

No Yes No Yes

Yes No Yes Yes

Yes Yes No Yes

No Yes No Yes

No Yes No Yes

Yes Yes No Yes

Yes Yes No Yes

Yes No No Yes

Yes Yes No No

24

Ad formats across mobile ad-tech vendors

Banner Video Rich Media Incentivized NativeYes No No No No

Yes No Yes No No

Yes Yes Yes No No

Yes Limited Limited No No

No Yes No No No

Yes Yes Yes No No

Yes No No No No

Yes Yes Yes No Yes

Yes Yes Yes No No

Yes No Yes No Yes

Yes Limited Yes No No

No Yes Yes No Yes

25

Platform, device coverage and exchange type across mobile ad-tech vendors

Mobile Web iOS (in-app) Android (in-app) Public Exchange Private ExchangeNo No Yes No Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes No

No Yes Yes Yes No

Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Yes Yes Yes No Yes

Limited (Jumptap) Yes Yes Yes No

Yes Yes Yes Yes No

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes No

No Yes Yes Yes Yes

26

Agenda






27

Regulations & standards on mobile have evolved significantly in the last several years

- Dec 2015 – FTC issues guidance on native advertising, including information on disclosures used in ads

- Jun 2015 – FTC warned publishers will be held responsible for misleading native ads

- Sep 2014 – FTC held workshop to discuss transparency in segmentation

- Dec 2013 – FTC held workshop to discuss transparency and disclosure in native ads

Recent FTC Updates

- Mar 2015 – IAB released OpenRTB 2.3 Specs - Dec 2014 – “State of Viewability” transaction report - Apr 2014 – MMA mobile video benchmark study - Mar 2014 – MRC green-lighted Viewable Impressions

as a new impression metric

Recent Industry Association Updates

- Jul 2015 – Google Play allows apps to advertise in Google Play store

- Mar 2014 – Google Play updated with additional provisions; clarification on content, in-app payment disclosure, promotion, malware, and ads policy

- Feb 2014 – Apple announced it will reject apps that request advertising device IDs but do not show ads

Recent Mobile Platform Updates

Government Industry Associations Platforms

Federal Trade Commission

- The FTC is the federal oversight body for the advertising industry

- Each state also maintains legislation pertaining to advertising in addition to FTC rules

FTC Divisions Related to Advertising:

- Division of Privacy and Identity Protection

- Division of Advertising Practices

- Division of Marketing Practices

- Division of Consumer & Business Education

Interactive Advertising Bureau

- Industry guidelines, education, and events for the online and mobile advertising industry

Apple (iOS)

- Apple sets rules for advertising within the iOS app ecosystem (App Store)

- Apple dictates tracking methods (e.g. IDFA) , ad types, privacy , etc.

Mobile Marketing Association

- Mobile-specific advertising and marketing association

Google (Android)

- Google sets rules for advertising within the Android app ecosystem (Google Play)

- Google dictates tracking methods (e.g. Advertising ID), ad types, privacy and more

Media Rating Council

- Organization that sets standards for audience measurement

28

The OpenRTB spec provides industry standards for communication between ad buyers & sellers

- The OpenRTB protocol provides open standards for the communication between buyers and sellers of ad inventory

- Standards including the bidding protocol, information taxonomies, synchronization, and regulation

- The IAB governs the OpenRTB specs and organizes updates with the help of contributing ad tech companies

Standardizing RTB Ad Buying

- Most exchanges and DSPs comply with OpenRTB standards

- OpenRTB specs have helped spur adoption for RTB, particularly in mobile

- However, a few notable companies such as Google DoubleClick do not follow the OpenRTB standard. DoubleClick has its own standard

Adoption Increasing with Notable Exceptions

OpenRTB Consortium Formed

- Formed by DataXu, MediaMath, Turn, AdMeld, PubMatic, Rubicon Project

- By April 2011, 70 companies joined the consortium and created committees for Video and Mobile

Nov 2010

Mobile RTB 1.0 Spec & Blocklist API Spec

- Mobile RTB 1.0 Spec provides guidelines for RTB on mobile

- Blocklist API Spec provided standardization for blocking ad requests based on specific attributes

Feb 2011

IAB Takes Over OpenRTB

- The Interactive Advertising Bureau took ownership of the OpenRTB initiative

- Organization renamed to the RTB Project

Oct 2011

OpenRTB 2.0 Spec

- Expanded object hierarchy and depth of standards

- Expanded IAB categories

- Video support

- More parameters for bid requests (data, geo, ad type, content, publisher, segment)

Jan 2012

OpenRTB 2.1 Spec

- VAST video over RTB

- IAB Tier-2 category support (more granular)

- Location source

- Clear identification of tablet inventory

Oct 2012

OpenRTB 2.2 Spec

- Greater support for Deal ID

- COPPA regulation

- Support for new types of video and mobile inventory

- Differentiating secure (https) and non-secure

- Buyers can send flags to publishers about bot traffic in real-time

Apr 2014

OpenRTB 2.3 Spec

- Adds support for Native Advertising inventory

- Targeting and optimization for banner and video extended to native

Mar 2015

Source: Nexage, DataXu, IAB, Thomvest Research29

MRAID & VAST specifications inform how ads are designed and served on mobile

MRAID VAST

Overview

- Mobile Rich Media Ad Interface Definitions (MRAID) is an IAB standard to define a common API for mobile rich media ads that run in mobile apps

- MRAID is only specific about providing a method for standardizing ad containers for rich media. This provides flexibility in terms of the ad displayed inside the container

- Current Spec: MRAID 2.0

- Digital Video Ad Serving Template (VAST) is an IAB spec for a universal XML schema for serving ads to digital video players

- VAST is often the preferred way to serve video; as an example, an agency can provide an exchange with a VAST ad tag that allows the agency to serve video assets themselves

- VAST tags also allow the demand side, supply side, and exchanges to see and monitor video completions and other behavioral metrics

- Current Spec: VAST 3.0

Ad Types

- Closing and opening expandables - Inline (ex. a banner) - Interstitials - HTML 5 video - Calendar event - Most types of HTML ad with JavaScript rendering engine

- Linear ads (video only) - Non-linear (overlaying image on top of video) - Skippable linear ads - Linear ads with companions - Ad pods (sequences of linear ads)

Specifications- MRAID compliant rich media ads will run within MRAID complaint

applications from any publisher using an MRAID complaint SDK - Two versions of MRAID: v1 and v2. v1 supports expandable and interstitial

ads. V2 adds support for resizable ads and more features

- VAST-complaint ad servers must conform to VAST XML schema - VAST-complaint video players must display the ad in a VAST response - Minimum requirements to conform to VAST include adherence to inline &

wrapper ads, tracking events, error reporting, & industry icons

30

Why standards matter: MRAID & VAST create a common set of “rules” by which ads are served, measured & reported, allowing advertisers to more quickly and easily build rich ad creative that will run in different publishers’ mobile apps.

Similar to desktop web, mediation plays an important role in the mobile ad ecosystem

Publisher Site Mediation LayerAd Request

Network 1

Network 2

Network 3

Network 4

Priority Waterfall

Mediation allows publishers to manage demand from multiple ad networks. Mediation can be either third-party or created in-house by a publisher.

- Publishers integrates mediation SDK into their app

- SDK for individual ad networks must be installed, unless the mediation SDK already includes an ad network’s SDK (called a wrapper)

- Publishers set rules and parameters for mediation

Publisher Integration Process

- Mediation vendors create wrappers (explained above) or adapters to allow communication between the network’s and mediation layer’s SDK

- Mediation is often offered as a free service. For example, MoPub provides mediation and requires publishers to use MoPub Exchange in mediation stack

Mediation

- While ad networks can technically be mediated without the network’s consent, almost all third-party mediation providers work with ad networks before launching mediation with that network to publishers

Network Integration Process

- Simple waterfall – Publisher sets which networks see an ad request first. If the first ad network does not fill the request, it will send request the second and so on

- Probabilistic – Mediation solution determines which networks provide the highest eCPM through statistical methods

Priority Waterfall

31

Mediation benefits and concerns & mobile mediation providers

- Mediation provides publishers with a way to handle multiple ad networks, generally providing more fill than a single ad network

- Mediation SDKs that are wrappers (includes the ad networks SDK within their own SDK) provides publishers access to many ad networks without individually installing each network’s SDK

- For publishers, switching priority of ad networks in a mediation waterfall is easier with a mediation solution than hardcoding

Key Benefits

- Ad networks who are lower in the waterfall stack will generally receive worse quality impressions. The lower rank networks often receive impressions from users who have seen ads already and are subject to ad fatigue (lower engagement due to viewing each subsequent ad)

- In a simple waterfall, it is difficult to determine the best performing ad networks due to its sequential nature. Well performing ad networks may be masked if put lower in the priority stack

- Waterfalls are generally optimized around eCPM but not fill

Primary Concerns

Mobile Mediation Providers

32

Thank you!

For questions or comments, please contact:

Don Butler [email protected]

Nima Wedlake [email protected]

Mark Prior [email protected] Thomvest Ventures

203 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 680 Redwood City, CA 94065

thomvest.com

33

mailto:[email protected]



http://thomvest.com