TruConnect is a first-party ad server which enables advertisers to build one-to-one relationships with their desired audiences and customers web wide. James Sandoval, Founder and Managing Director of Invizua, spoke to ExchangeWire this week about how first-party ad serving can significantly improve campaign performance, why online display is not serving advertisers well, and what can be done to address some of the key problems in the display model.

Can you provide an overview of the TruConnect ad server?

JS: Certainly. TruEffect’s TruConnectTM (formerly called DirectServe) is a buy-side i.e. agency/advertiser digital ad management platform that enables advertisers to deliver and measure their digital marketing programmes from their own domains (i.e. the “1st party”).

Perhaps more importantly, the TruConnect platform enables advertisers to leverage proprietary customer and business [meta] data, again, from the confines of their own domains, for extraordinary ad targeting and insight generation everywhere they buy digital media.

Maybe more simply said, TruEffect customers are now using their own domain data for what we’re calling Relationship Advertising. It’s effectively CRM for display advertising online. The customer-level insight, however, can be drawn from any online marketing initiative that’s managed via TruEffect’s platform e.g. standard, rich or video display, paid search, affiliates, email, etc.

Here’s why advertisers love it:

- Advertisers own and control their digital marketing data unlike ever before, as it’s keyed/locked to their domains i.e. no data leakage or transfer to competitive or sell-side organisations, which is all too common today. We view the foundational data domain [i.e. the advertiser’s domain] as the key determinant of data ownership. Said another way, any domain that’s not advertiser enterprise owned and controlled is, by default, owned and controlled by another organisation; and any all data contained in a non-enterprise data asset (e.g. cookies) is also, by default, not owned or controlled by the advertiser. Again, the domain is the incontrovertible determinant factor of ownership. Giving advertisers the opportunity to fully own and control their digital marketing data is strategically very compelling in and of itself, but the actionable benefits make the platform even more interesting and valuable for them.

- Advertisers benefit from an unparalleled data alignment between 1.) their TruConnect-managed digital marcomms programmes and 2.) their web site customer experience intelligence gathered via web site analytics solutions like WebTrends Analytics, Omniture SiteCatalyst, etc – each commonly deployed today on a “1st party” basis i.e. from advertisers’ domains and 3.) their eCRM Data (also “1st party”).

- Advertisers’ audience & customer relationships are direct (the best one are) when [digital] marketing programmes are managed on a “1st party” basis.

- Many consumer privacy advocates like this one - the consumer opt out is also direct i.e. from brand/business using TruEffect’s platform (vs. opting out from ad-related data collection by one or more 3rd parties, with whom consumers have no visibility or, perhaps more importantly, no relationships).

- We’re seeing media agencies developing new and, arguably, stronger ties with their clients through the use of the TruConnect platform, partly because media agencies gain access to more/better data from which they can create greater value for their clients i.e. leveraging new data for better planning, optimisation decisions, targeting and more vs. turning, as they have been for 10+ years, primarily to data that’s foundationally disconnected from their clients’ organisations.

- Attribution models and reporting move into a Next Gen development phase because advertisers now have both behavioural and relationship data available for analysis and reporting.

Can you explain how first-party ad serving works and how it differs from third-part serving?

JS: I gave some it away above, but let’ do this. Let’s look back at what’s been at play for 10+ years now: advertisers have been [commonly] distributing and managing their online ad campaigns via “3rd party” platforms like Google’s DoubleClick DART, Microsoft’s Atlas and ValueClick’s Mediaplex. Before I continue, it’ll be worth clarifying the concept of “3rd party” in the context of the buy-sell equation in digital marketing and ad serving technology. “3rd party” essentially means “other” – the “other” party that’s not the buyer of media and not the seller of media.

"1st party”: from the advertiser’s domain e.g. sky.com (not a customer, but we’d love to have them.

“3rd party”: from another domain e.g. doubleclick.net (Google’s DoubleClick), atdmt.com (Microsoft’s Atlas), mediaplex.com (ValueClick’s Mediaplex), etc

Do you think first-party can improve campaign performance for advertisers and agencies?

JS: Absolutely. Yes. Although advertisers’ domain data are not immune to consumer management i.e. deletion, we generally see that advertisers’ data “live” longer than that keyed to a “3rd party” domain. There are lots of reasons for this, which I’ll happily address offline.

Partly because “1st party” data is generally more stable, but, more importantly, because of the [non-PII] information managed in their domain data, advertisers are realising performance lifts that are 100%, 200% or greater vs. that realised via “3rd party” platforms.

The visibility and the actionability borne from a “1st party” approach to digital marketing communications (web-wide) are unparalleled.

In an effort to crystallise the point, think of the Pareto Principle for a moment – the truism, in the context of business, goes something like this: roughly 80% of a company’s revenue is generated from 20% of its current customers. From its current relationships. These relationships, sadly, are not visible, they’re not recognised, they’re not available for presenting relevant comms when ads are distributed from a domain that’s alien to the advertiser’s enterprise.

Said another way, today’s archaic “3rd party” platforms put advertisers in the extremely awkward position of treating existing customers like they’ve never been seen before (which partly explains why I continue to see heaps and heaps of customer acquisition-oriented O2 ads for products and services that I’ll never buy), so it’s no wonder that online display advertising doesn’t work for so many advertisers.

Do you think that online display in its present form is serving advertisers well? What can be done to improve the model?

JS: Clearly, with CPMs in the toilet for several years now, and advertisers’ faith in display at an all time low (see Forrester’s recent report “Media Buying Goes Real Time”), no, online display is certainly not serving advertisers well.

Part of the problem, and acutely problematic for top 20 online advertisers, is the fact that they, as I noted earlier, treat all of their existing customer and prospective customer relationships as if they are meeting for the very first time (every time) when display ads are served via a “3rd party” domain.
Here are some numbers to think about: last May comScore published a list of the UK’s top 10 display advertisers for the month of April (https://invizua.box.net/shared/ipiuzgcm0o).

O2 was at the top with over 1 billion ad impressions served in the UK, reaching over 35 million “Unique Visitors”. If accurate, this nets out to a 38.6 average frequency. Quite an achievement. Now, with over 25% market share, O2’s customer relationships are far and wide, online and offline. At a minimum, O2’s April display campaign(s) reached existing relationships (not necessarily customer relationships, but certainly existing, informative relationships nevertheless) upward to 25% of the time, which O2 can’t recognise when it distributes its display campaigns via a domain foreign to its enterprise. This begs the question: how much of O2’s [acquisition-oriented] display advertising is completely wasted because the message is completely disconnected from the relationship e.g. I am an iPhone customer, spending upwards to £200 per month on calls and data services, but I’m presented, at an extraordinary frequency, with pay-as-you-go, Blackberry and a whole slew of other irrelevant promotional messaging day after day.

Here’s possibly a better question – think of the opportunity available, today, for O2 to relevantly address and grow its existing relationships.

Can the TruEffect ad server buy inventory across the ad exchanges and other inventory sources? If not, are there plans to build this functionality into TruEffect?

JS: TruEffect doesn’t buy any media. That’s left to advertisers and their agencies.
That said, an advertiser or agency can use TruEffect’s TruConnect platform to manage campaigns that are purchased via ad exchanges, DSPs, etc, similar to how other ad serving platforms are generally used. We don’t yet offer a solution that enables advertisers to ONLY buy access to their own customer relationship data, but watch this space.

Do you think that advertisers need to implement a data strategy to enhance their competitive advantage? How can they put this into practice?

JS: This is a great question. In this world of digital marketing, my small contribution to advertisers’ data strategy developments is this: when possible, keep all data locked to your enterprise. Add to it. Grow the asset. And unlock the value by partnering with organisations that are aligned to your data strategy and vision. Importantly, stem the flow of valuable data out of the enterprise.

How do you see the online market developing over the next twelve months?

JS: I’ve been “doing” digital marketing for 10+ years. With that context in mind and being semi-aware of some of the industry’s fascinating new businesses and creative thinking/application, I think the next 12 months just gets better. It all gets smarter. More productive. And, I’m confident, privacy-favourable, too.