0044 7413 346731
support@varrando.com
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Varrando white 676
  • HOME
  • SOLUTIONS
    • Video Solutions
    • Outstream Video Player
    • HTML5 Video Player Demos
      • Outstream InPage Demo
      • Outstream InView Demo
      • Instream HTML5 Video Player Demo
  • ABOUT
    • Mission
    • Team
    • Video Industry
  • CONTACT
  • BLOG
fill-rate-360

Fill rate: a 360 view

August 23, 2016adminUncategorized

Have you ever wondered why your fill rate is alarmingly low? Have you seen ad load times even longer than your content length? In this blog post and the next we feature a discussion on the unsuspected culprit: VPAID wrappers.

Why is fill rate an important metric for a publisher? For those of you new to advertising terminology: Fill Rate = Ad opportunities successfully filled / Total ad opportunities. Basically, ad insertion requests that are actually filled. A low fill rate points to under-monetization of online video content.

Once again, for a 360 view of parties involved, we have:

  • Publishers would like to maximize fill rate, hence revenue
  • Viewers want an engaging experience; preferably with ads that target their interests.
  • Advertisers want to maximize ad recall, brand awareness, and, purchase intent for the right customer segment

Some notes.

Should publishers achieve a maximum fill rate, it would mean that 100% of the impressions are filled and paid. But, not all of those are relevant or tasteful for their audience. Quality of ads greatly influence visitors’ experience. And can impact audience’s loyalty towards that website. eg. willingness to return. Overdoing it damages their long term prospects. Under-doing loses revenue.

56% advertisers of US ad agency professionals cited targeting capabilities as the most valuable digital video advertising feature for their clients.

Targeting puts a cap on the available video ad inventory available for publishers. A publisher’s audience matches a variety of targeting criterias. An ad request from an ad network may reply with “no ad available” for a specific visitor, simply because it does not match any available ad campaign targeting. Many “no ads” responses lower total fill rate. So what do publishers do?

They partner with multiple ad networks. First, they may aim to sign up with a local player, with specialized/specific targeting, matching the bulk/niche of its core audience. The remnant traffic is monetized with several large ad networks.

To sum up. We have a publisher with audience spanning over multiple targeting criterias. And  multiple ad providers hoping to match advertisers with the right viewers. What is the ideal course of action?

An ad request is sent by the publisher. Some algorithm identifies the best ad network, from publisher’s long list of ad network partners. What is the best ad network in this use case? One capable of fetching the best revenue for the publisher. Matching the visitor with the right advertiser targeting criterias. Would be a win for all parties. In reality, there are two approaches.

Daisy Chain / Waterfalling

In waterfalling, a fixed/floor CPM is associated with each ad network. Publishers start by selling impressions to the highest price floor ad network. In case of a “no-ad” tag, the next ad network is loaded to request another ad. And so and so forth.

The length of these ad networks chains? Depends. The average is up to 3-4.

This technique may drive up fill rate, but at a significant cost. Remember the consecutive queued ad tag load? That repeated polling increases latency. Depending on the implementation, as we will see next, the total load time can be outrageously high. High latency affects user experience negatively.

Parallel ad requests

To alleviate high latency issues, publishers can send parallel requests. Basically, a broadcast to multiple ad networks. The first returned ad gets the impression. Win for fill rate and latency. But with a potential downside to revenue maximization efforts. An alternative to this would be to use a real-time bidding strategy: ad impressions sold through real-time auctions during web page load time.

In the next blog post we talk about how these algorithms are implemented.

admin
Previous post Video Player: Varrando vs Akamai AMP Premier vs AOL ONE Player Next post How to boost low fill rate with Varrando (without using slow VPAID wrappers)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • How to Improve Low Video Ad Fill Rate at VPAID Level
  • VAST vs VPAID standards for online video ads. Varrando compliance list explained.
  • VAST, VPAID, Google IMA, outstream video ads & a HTML5 video player to match
  • Monetize content with online video ads. Varrando starting guide
  • Best HTML5 Online Video Player for Video Ads Monetization. Review

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org
HomeHTML5 Video Players – OverviewContactTerms of ServicePrivacy
© Varrando. All Rights Reserved.
We use cookies to offer you a better browsing experience, analyze site traffic, and personalize our communications with you. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to our use of cookies. Find out more.