It is well known that between search, social and media, acquiring a client is expensive for the advertiser, very expensive, even with good a targeting data ... and that he can terminate in the blink of an eye on a whim after just a few months.
This is why the know-how and support in optimizing media plans via targeting also extend to loyalty or to what is called anti-churn, that is to say, the ability to predict and anticipate the churn of a customer whose expectations have evolved and so to optimize the service provided and keep him.
Does that make sense to you? You are right ... Our whole life is punctuated by the balance between conquest and retention: it is difficult to earn a living, but just as difficult to save, as it takes a lot of luck to win at the “roulette” and a lot of guts not to play all in stride.
But then, why is this principle not also applied to consent? The actors on borrowed time that we are all, know the value of the cookie and the many uncertainties that hang over its future. We are all worried about the interest of consent which has become unnecessary for a cookie which will be blocked anyway by the browser, but who today is responsible for the immense waste of the opposite phenomenon: all these cookies still technically usable but legally inaccessible, because of a lack of consent?
We should all collectively cherish and thank every Internet user who authorizes monetization through partner trackers, and truly appreciate the immense value of their authorization.
Instead, while this user has already said yes, many players are asking the same question over and over again, on the pretext that a new startup has been created in the depths of Nebraska and has integrated a list of potential partners who could earn a few euros if the user gives his consent again.
Except that, over-requested and annoyed, the user learns to say no: consent rates are dropping each passing week! So, like this roulette player we were talking about above, we are calling into play the authorization given to monetize our traffic thanks to the local and international leaders of AdTech ... to refresh the consent and make it benefit a new player who, let’s be honest, is unknown and will not bring us anything.
For several reasons (protection against data leakage, principle of data minimization, etc.), some players like us support their customers and partners on these issues, in order to select their partners one by one and be sure to name only the companies that will allow real monetization, and more those that will not share the value created with the publisher, or even have a deflationary effect: many companies present in CMPs today are only intended to “optimize” media investments, implied ... to reduce them ...
Here comes the double sanction: we risk losing a consent hardly obtained, and therefore our income, to the benefit of an actor who, in the best case, will decrease our revenues if the user trusts us again and says Yes.
Thus, with our partners, aware of the value of consent, it is only after a careful consideration and when the benefit / risk balance is in favor of this addition that a new Third Party is added to its list.
This balance is good, for the user, for the publisher and all its partners. Nevertheless, we are aware that these balances imposed for the good of all can have a perverse effect on innovation and free competition: indeed, a new local player should not be able to emerge, or even worse, that Internet users and publishers be deprived of new beneficial offers, on the pretext that we cannot afford to lose a consent already given for the historical leaders of AdTech.
This is why we have invested a lot of time and energy in understanding these mechanics, and I am proud, once again, to present what our team, at the forefront of mastery and innovation, imagined: “the application of choices”.
Very complex to implement technically and legally, the concept is childishly simple to understand: if a user has already chosen to accept advertising cookies, why shall we ask him again to consent when it is just about to ask him to apply his choices to a new actor? If the user says “yes”, the new partner inherits from his existing choices (consent or refusal depending on each purpose), while if he says “no” the new partner is not authorized to carry out its treatments. But in the latter, the consent already given to existing partners is not questioned.
The partners, members of our choices co-op (4000 websites), are aware that a good management of this list is crucial : A website can only declare 200 partners at a maximum (vs the thousands he can find) to access our network and benefit from the users framework choices.
"This feature is a great idea! As the CMP is a central part of the advertising and monetization ecosystem for publishers, it is essential to have the control of our partners list. Being able to add new vendors without risking losing the consent of those already acquired is a good way to stabilize and then develop our revenues." Julien HERMETET, Chief Revenue Officer, Cambium Media
Aware of the market interest of such a solution, and of the potential impacts for the user in the event of a deviation, we invite the CMP editors who will implement equivalent solutions to reproduce the entire system, including and in particular in its most restrictive aspects but so benefiting for users.
Discover two other testimonials from partners so enthusiastic about this new feature :
“Regular discussions with the Sirdata team have enabled Smile Wanted to better understand the strategic issues around CMP and to provide our customers with the best possible support.
The impacts, particularly in terms of monetization, have been beneficial for all of our partner publishers as well as the various players in the value chain. It was important to be able to ensure an optimal transition under the GDPR. Sirdata was perfectly able to adapt and respond present.
After the sharing cooperative of choice, Sirdata once again proves its understanding of the issues of monetization thanks to its total involvement in this subject and thus maximizing the revenues of the sites.
Discussions with publishers are constantly evolving. It is less and less common to talk only about the UI and the nature of the text displayed in the CMP. We are now getting into much more complex and technical revenue optimization topics.
With the latest evolution of the Sirdata CMP, our customers will no longer take the risk of losing the consents previously obtained for major players (Google, Criteo, Xandr, etc.). From now on, this will be effective each time a new actor appears in the vendor list due to the obligation to re-display the CMP to the user.
It may seem minor, but it is an important and strategic development to further sustain the ad revenue levels of our growing number of clients. » Bruno Michel, Chief Revenue Officer, SmileWanted
The configuration pushed by Sirdata is optimal to pursue the two common objectives that we share with our customers: Optimizing the consent rate in order to provide the best service for our customers and thus limit the risk of loss of income related to the application of the latest cookie guidelines. » Julien Tournier, Head of Publisher & influence Development Group, Kwanko