Everybody’s a DSP, wait, what’s a DSP?
February 26th, 2010
Unless you’ve been living under a rock you’ve heard the term ‘DSP’ — “Demand Side Platform” thrown around like no other. The term has hit such a buzz that there is almost no meeting that doesn’t start with — “Wait, are you a DSP? What is a DSP? Is ____ a DSP? Are you working with a DSP? Which DSP should I work with?”.
Let’s start with some history. I’m not quite sure who coined the term originally but it was primarily used to describe cross exchange buying desks & bid management solutions like Invite, Turn & DataXu. We at AppNexus even briefly described ourselves as a DSP — that was of course when the ‘Platform’ was still a part of DSP — more on that in a bit.
Since then, agencies started allocating budgets away from “networks” and towards “DSPs”…
Wait… what?
You got it –agencies, eager to cut into the hefty margin networks take, started to allocate budgets towards DSPs for exchange buying. What’s of course ironic, is that the typical relationship between an agency and a DSP is certainly not a “platform” relationship but a simple media IO. Early versions of the platforms weren’t (and many still aren’t) mature and the only way they could make them work is by having people manually traffic and optimize campaigns on ad exchanges. Although the spirit of the relationship was one of a platform optimizing media across exchanges the reality is that it is primarily a service driven offering… something which practically looks very similar to a network with a slightly more defined box of inventory and in some cases clearer rules & margins.
Networks of course become massively threatened when their IO budgets got cut in favor of DSPs & Exchange Buying. Now if you’re a network, what do you do? You just rebrand yourself as a DSP or launch a new DSP arm of the business! Voila… now you can go right back to the exchange and say — “Oh, we do that too!”. Now every ad-network is suddenly a DSP…. Of course the response from the first set of DSPs has been to quickly try to define DSPs as “not a network”. You can read two examples on AdExchanger here: Zach Coelius @ Triggit, Nat Turner @ Invite.
Now the majors (Google/Yahoo/MSFT) of course see their direct relationships with the agencies being marginalized by this new “DSP” concept. So what do you do… that’s right, you become a DSP!! Yahoo has already announced this strategy and Google has been rumored to buy a DSP — Microsoft can’t be far behind.
There you have it… who is a DSP? Everybody. The problem is that in this whole process the ‘P’ of ‘DSP’ has disappeared — where is the platform– it just seems to be anybody who plays on the Demand Side — technology vendors, ad-networks & brokers, portals and a few hybrid tech/network companies. Platforms draw valuations, therefore everybody is a platform. The thing is that platform implies that people can build technology on top of your technology. Of the umpteen companies calling themselves a ‘DSP’, how many can say that there is technology being built on top of them? How many have open APIs that you can integrate with?
Here is my proposal… let’s retire the term DSP. It’s loaded, and effectively doesn’t mean anything anymore. Instead, let’s talk about Display Engine Marketing (DEM) and ad technology vendors. DEM companies are ones that will take your media $ and optimize it for you across aggregators of Display. This is the media relationship. Adserving & RTB technology vendors are ones that will license a technology — which may or may not be a platform on it’s own — to integrate with supply aggregators and help run a DEM business. Of course going to be DEM companies that build their own and some that license others, that’s expected in this world. Similarly there are going to be technology vendors that have their own in house DEM teams (*cough* dem==ad network *cough*) that will take an IO and run the media on your behalf.
In the end I want to point you back to an old post I wrote: I don’t care who you say you are, what do you DO?. The next time someone says they are a DSP — respond with — “That’s great, but what do you actually do?”
Related Posts:
- Exchange v. Network Part II: Adoption
- What’s really in my cookie cache?
- Gaining consumer trust for ads
- Exchange v. Network, Part I: What’s the difference?
- The Challenge of Scaling an Adserver






February 26th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
test to see if comments are moderated
February 26th, 2010 at 7:59 pm
Mike,
Agree wholeheartedly. I was calling them “marketer’s agents”, being anyone who represented a marketer in buying media.
http://reactionwheel.blogspot.com/2010/02/duck-duck-goose-on-demand-side.html
DPSs will have to choose whether they want to be a marketer’s agent or a technology that marketer’s agents use.
Jerry
March 1st, 2010 at 1:49 pm
I agree wholeheartedly; I’ve never accepted the term DSP for our company in any manner other than grudgingly because it doesn’t mean anything.
But Mike (with respect) I have to ask, if AppNexus is not a cloud hosting company, not an ad exchange, and now, apparently not a DSP, then are you guys an agency, an ad network or something else?
March 2nd, 2010 at 4:08 pm
You are spot on. Great post!
I propose a new term – ASSININE DM(Another Seriously Stupid Irrelevant Name In a New Era of Digital Marketing)
March 3rd, 2010 at 3:01 am
It was a very interesting post thanks for writing it!
March 4th, 2010 at 10:51 am
Testing a new comment, does it work now?
March 4th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
Mike
Intelligent commentary as ever. Always good to see someone knee-deep in the ad tech sector not hiding behind the hype.
Ciaran
March 23rd, 2010 at 4:59 pm
[...] Let’s start with some history. I’m not quite sure who coined the term originally but it was prim… [...]
March 29th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
Agree with confusion over DSP. I do, however, believe that demand-side serving, digital agencies, demand-focused networks, demand analytics companies, and RTB platforms are melding into “DSPs”, where the “P” is more general as “Provider”. This mirrors a belief on the supply side that the optimizers, supply-side networks, publisher ad servers, etc. will meld into a few SSPs, again, where the “P” is provider not platform. On the demand-side, I echo Mike’s comments but with a simple metaphor – advertising effectiveness vs. efficiency. The effectiveness players are experts in connecting advertisers to target audiences, integrating a wealth of third-party data, proprietary customer data, research, and campaign expertise. They will focus on engagement, yield, and pipeline value. The platform folks are providers to the former, but their primary proposition – IMO – is one of efficiency: once the campaign is targeted and defined, go purchase the impressions at the lowest-overall cost that achieves the target yield. It will be near impossible to do both well, so both components will need each other in strategic partnership.
April 15th, 2010 at 9:43 am
[...] Let’s start with some history. I’m not quite sure who coined the term originally but it was prim… [...]