<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Ad Exchange Model (Part III)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/</link>
	<description>Ramblings about online advertising, ad networks &#038; other techie randomness</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:29:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Annie</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/comment-page-1/#comment-59624</link>
		<dc:creator>Annie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/#comment-59624</guid>
		<description>Great site, love your writing style.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great site, love your writing style.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guaranteed</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/comment-page-1/#comment-58316</link>
		<dc:creator>Guaranteed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 22:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/#comment-58316</guid>
		<description>I have been searching on the net for guaranteed and end up visiting your site. I really like the posts here, especially this one regarding The Ad Exchange Model (Part III). I already bookmarked your site and sure visit again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been searching on the net for guaranteed and end up visiting your site. I really like the posts here, especially this one regarding The Ad Exchange Model (Part III). I already bookmarked your site and sure visit again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/comment-page-1/#comment-257</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 21:36:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/#comment-257</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the feedback Greg, lotta good points.

The one thing I will disagree with is the financial market stockbroker analogy.  Hedge funds thrive on their models, this is how they arb.  That doesn&#039;t necessarily translate to the Exchange model, unless you integrate your model with the exchange -- at which point you essentially become a technology provider.  There will simply be too much data and too many different transactions to do too much offline modeling.

Although -- I will refute my point that on the premium side of things this might actually work.  It might well be possible that arbitragers will assume risk on inventory.  E.g., place a buy for the next month at a flat rate assuming that they will be able to sell it at a higher price later.  Assuming publishers are risk-averse, in that they would rather take a lower guaranteed price today than have a higher potential payoff, this might become a very lucrative market.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the feedback Greg, lotta good points.</p>
<p>The one thing I will disagree with is the financial market stockbroker analogy.  Hedge funds thrive on their models, this is how they arb.  That doesn&#8217;t necessarily translate to the Exchange model, unless you integrate your model with the exchange &#8212; at which point you essentially become a technology provider.  There will simply be too much data and too many different transactions to do too much offline modeling.</p>
<p>Although &#8212; I will refute my point that on the premium side of things this might actually work.  It might well be possible that arbitragers will assume risk on inventory.  E.g., place a buy for the next month at a flat rate assuming that they will be able to sell it at a higher price later.  Assuming publishers are risk-averse, in that they would rather take a lower guaranteed price today than have a higher potential payoff, this might become a very lucrative market.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg</title>
		<link>http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/comment-page-1/#comment-255</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 20:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikeonads.com/2007/05/04/the-ad-exchange-model-part-iii/#comment-255</guid>
		<description>Nice post.  

I definitely see a large role in the future for any agency providing management services, but I don&#039;t think you&#039;re going to see rapid consolidation to a single company per exchange.  Think of them as the equivalent of stockbrokers -- they all essentially do the same thing, yet there&#039;s an absolute ton of them.

It&#039;d surprise me if arbitrageurs were to suffer unduly as the exchange model rises in popularity. More efficiency = greater volume = more volume to arbitrage.  (There&#039;s tons of arbitrageurs on the financial exchanges, which are more efficient than we&#039;ll ever hope to be simply because the goods are fungible.)  You&#039;ll go from parties making fat margins on a little traffic to thinner ones on a lot of traffic, that&#039;s all.

Ultimately, any company with a decent creative department has nothing to fear from an exchange -- targeting and optimization will only take you so far if your ads suck.  There&#039;s always going to be a market for ads and landing pages that convert.  That, incidentally, is one of the biggest reasons why lead generators like LowerMyBills.com are successful, not because &quot;it&#039;s because it’s incredibly difficult for one financial services company to sell their services online.&quot;  Some banks have ridiculously good lead generation departments in-house.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post.  </p>
<p>I definitely see a large role in the future for any agency providing management services, but I don&#8217;t think you&#8217;re going to see rapid consolidation to a single company per exchange.  Think of them as the equivalent of stockbrokers &#8212; they all essentially do the same thing, yet there&#8217;s an absolute ton of them.</p>
<p>It&#8217;d surprise me if arbitrageurs were to suffer unduly as the exchange model rises in popularity. More efficiency = greater volume = more volume to arbitrage.  (There&#8217;s tons of arbitrageurs on the financial exchanges, which are more efficient than we&#8217;ll ever hope to be simply because the goods are fungible.)  You&#8217;ll go from parties making fat margins on a little traffic to thinner ones on a lot of traffic, that&#8217;s all.</p>
<p>Ultimately, any company with a decent creative department has nothing to fear from an exchange &#8212; targeting and optimization will only take you so far if your ads suck.  There&#8217;s always going to be a market for ads and landing pages that convert.  That, incidentally, is one of the biggest reasons why lead generators like LowerMyBills.com are successful, not because &#8220;it&#8217;s because it’s incredibly difficult for one financial services company to sell their services online.&#8221;  Some banks have ridiculously good lead generation departments in-house.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
