Comments on: The Rubicon Project manifesto is not a silver bullet for publishers http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/2010/02/the-rubicon-project-manifesto-is-not-a-silver-bullet-for-publishers Blogging from the team at Keplar LLP Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:56:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: kenny http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/2010/02/the-rubicon-project-manifesto-is-not-a-silver-bullet-for-publishers/comment-page-1#comment-2444 kenny Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:31:36 +0000 http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/?p=370#comment-2444 Great point made. I didn't read the manifesto yet but according to previous Rubicon market reports (e.g., 2009 ones), they appear to focus on upper-nonpremium add slots. In other words, the stuff that the sales teams can't get to because they are busy dealing with unique cases like that FHM homepage you mentioned. Maybe Rubicon's messaging has changed. I don't know but check out their older reports. Great point made. I didn’t read the manifesto yet but according to previous Rubicon market reports (e.g., 2009 ones), they appear to focus on upper-nonpremium add slots. In other words, the stuff that the sales teams can’t get to because they are busy dealing with unique cases like that FHM homepage you mentioned.

Maybe Rubicon’s messaging has changed. I don’t know but check out their older reports.

]]> By: JT http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/2010/02/the-rubicon-project-manifesto-is-not-a-silver-bullet-for-publishers/comment-page-1#comment-889 JT Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:27:39 +0000 http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/?p=370#comment-889 Good question Yali. Best way to think about it is: Rubicon's customer is the publisher. The publisher's customer is the advertiser. Our job is to give our customers the technology to effectively, effectively and profitably service their customers. We don't work directly with advertisers-- but we do provide publishers with the tools and technology to do so. Our platform also allows publishers to connect in to the different sources of demand through the REVV Marketplace. In the short term, we will probably see more people in the value chain. The traditional tech platforms have done a poor job innovating. Over the long hall, we think that those offering the full platform will be the ones who win. Good question Yali. Best way to think about it is: Rubicon’s customer is the publisher. The publisher’s customer is the advertiser. Our job is to give our customers the technology to effectively, effectively and profitably service their customers.

We don’t work directly with advertisers– but we do provide publishers with the tools and technology to do so. Our platform also allows publishers to connect in to the different sources of demand through the REVV Marketplace.

In the short term, we will probably see more people in the value chain. The traditional tech platforms have done a poor job innovating. Over the long hall, we think that those offering the full platform will be the ones who win.

]]> By: Yali http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/2010/02/the-rubicon-project-manifesto-is-not-a-silver-bullet-for-publishers/comment-page-1#comment-876 Yali Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:10:29 +0000 http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/?p=370#comment-876 Thanks JT - I was under the impression that Rubicon provided publishers with direct access to multiple different demand sources through your solution. Is that right - only none of those sources are advertisers themselves? (Rather, all those sources are intermediaries like ad networks.) If so, the issue becomes - are there too many people in the value chain to enable the publisher / advertiser to collectively deliver an optimal, bespoke solution? (Because you have to enforce some kind of standardisation to ensure everyone can plays together?) If that isn't the case, and you're provided publishers with an expanded toolset they can take use with any demand source to work on an optimal solution with each advertiser, I look forward to getting a chance to see those how those tools work myself! There's certainly a huge amount of scope for the tools that are currently available to be improved upon. Thanks JT – I was under the impression that Rubicon provided publishers with direct access to multiple different demand sources through your solution. Is that right – only none of those sources are advertisers themselves? (Rather, all those sources are intermediaries like ad networks.) If so, the issue becomes – are there too many people in the value chain to enable the publisher / advertiser to collectively deliver an optimal, bespoke solution? (Because you have to enforce some kind of standardisation to ensure everyone can plays together?)

If that isn’t the case, and you’re provided publishers with an expanded toolset they can take use with any demand source to work on an optimal solution with each advertiser, I look forward to getting a chance to see those how those tools work myself! There’s certainly a huge amount of scope for the tools that are currently available to be improved upon.

]]> By: JT http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/2010/02/the-rubicon-project-manifesto-is-not-a-silver-bullet-for-publishers/comment-page-1#comment-874 JT Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:16:23 +0000 http://www.keplarllp.com/blog/?p=370#comment-874 Hi Alex-- great post. I think you're dead right about the importance of making online a successful channel for branding. It definitely falls short of its potential today. And publishers must take the lead in solving that. A couple things-- we don't work directly with advertisers. Publishers, 3rd party sales houses, ad networks or exchanges do the selling/interfacing with publishers. We completely agree context (the where) matters. That's why we think publishers are best positioned to serve the advertisers needs. Need to get back to a meeting, but really enjoyed reading your comments. JT Rubicon Project Hi Alex– great post.

I think you’re dead right about the importance of making online a successful channel for branding. It definitely falls short of its potential today. And publishers must take the lead in solving that.

A couple things– we don’t work directly with advertisers. Publishers, 3rd party sales houses, ad networks or exchanges do the selling/interfacing with publishers.

We completely agree context (the where) matters. That’s why we think publishers are best positioned to serve the advertisers needs.

Need to get back to a meeting, but really enjoyed reading your comments.

JT
Rubicon Project

]]>