On Monday, November 7, I was fortunate enough to introduce a panel discussion at the IAB Ad Ops Summit on the topic of Consolidation and Operational Efficiency.  The audience consisted of Ad Operations leaders from a variety of different companies – large and small – and as a speaker, I was asked to provide content that would enable attendees to better, and more effectively, lead their organizations.

The panel was asked to address the following question:  Does the consolidation of the industry’s operating systems mean less complexity and more efficiency – or less choice, less competition, less innovation?

For me, there are three questions at the core of this topic:

1. Is consolidation really happening?
2. Should publishers have to choose between efficiency and innovation?
3. What is an operating system?

Is there Consolidation?

There certainly have been a good number of acquisitions in our industry, but innovation is also happening at a rapid pace.

Just look at the data…

For example, the number of IAB vendor members continues to increase.  Whereas there were 25 members in 2005, the number has climbed to 140 in 2011.  And the 2011 number is still higher than the 2010 number which cited 125 members.  Just last week, Brian Morrissey of Digiday mentioned in his “What if the Music stops in ad tech” article, that there are over 200 vendors listed on the LUMA Partners slide, and that’s just the display slide!  Here at Operative, the number of requests to integrate with our platform is three times what they were just two years ago.  These numbers and the activity in the space indicate to me, that consolidation is not happening.  The reality is that for every company that is bought, two to three are being created, and driving the need for solutions that solve very big problems.

So consolidation is just not happening, nor will it in the next five years, which means publishers cannot and should not rely on it to achieve operational efficiency.  In fact, M&A activity within the ad tech market is just getting warmed up.  While many people refer to the proliferation of solutions as fragmentation, a word with negative connotations, what they are really talking about is specialization.  In an industry that is changing as quickly as ours, a lot of individual innovators are required to help address the change.  We just need a way to manage it all, which brings me to my next question.

Everybody calls this Fragmentation. I call it Specialization.

Do YOU Have to Choose Between Innovation and Effectiveness?

The answer is quite simply NO.   You HAVE to do both.  You can NOT choose.

You must be able to run the car and change the engine at the same time if you want to survive in an industry going through this much disruption.  Our industry is complex but it’s not THAT complex relative to other industries.  The question should be how to balance innovation with operational effectiveness?

This may seem impossible to imagine today, but there was a time thirty years ago, when other industries were experiencing major challenges and pains managing their complex supply chains, demand channels and changing market dynamics.  But they overcame those challenges and pains, and they did it with business management software, or what we call them in this space, operating systems or platforms, that integrate with all suppliers, buyers and innovators.  These systems enabled these industries to effectively balance innovation with operational efficiency.

What is an Operating System?

Why do we even have to definite what an operating system is?  It’s because everyone calls themselves an operating system nowadays, which is creating more chaos and confusion.  We need to get beyond the hype and understand what it truelly means to have an operating system.

So how do we, in this industry, define what an operating system is?  By technical definition, an operating system:

• Is a program that manages other applications
• Is a Hub
• Integrates with other technologies
• Uses a common language

 

For a company, an operating system is a business tool or central hub that brings it all together.  It allows the company to grow and innovate, while being more efficient.  Our industry still operates in production systems and in order to become more efficient, to embrace innovation and effectively compete in this dynamic market space, we must begin operating in Operating Systems.

Imagine if when you bought a car from a dealer, they had to input the order into each and every robot on the manufacturing line.  That’s inefficient – HIGHLY inefficient, but that’s what we do in this industry, day in and day out, with our excel files and outlook databases.  We need to work differently, and simplify, in order to embrace change.

When I think about the state of our industry and I hear the pains and challenges customers are experiencing, I am reminded of the following quote:

“Nearly all men die of their remedies, not of their illnesses.”

- Jean Baptiste Moliére

This quote reminds me that solutions chosen out of expediency, out of desire to solve just the immediate problem, will quite often lead to longer term problems and pains.  It’s a good reminder to all of us in this industry that we need to think more broadly, and long-term, about how we solve or pains and problems.

Criteria for Choosing an Operating System

So how do we go about selecting an operating system and move beyond the hype?  Well for starters, you don’t want it to compete with you.  The system needs to be agnostic.  Can you imagine entering your business data into Windows, and Microsoft turning around and using it to create a competing business?

In selecting an operating system, be sure to ask yourself:

• Does the vendor compete with me?
• Do they want to replace me?
• Do they want to commoditize me?

The operating system must also be enterprise-wide, so that the entire organization is utilizing it.  This will create efficiencies and enable you to manage the entire yield curve.  And lastly, it must have scale so that it can integrate with other applications.

Operating Systems in Media

So if this is the criteria for selecting an operating system, then who are we left with in our industry?   We do not lack people and innovation to drive operational efficiency and innovation, but there is a lack of companies whose business models provide the infrastructure that enable YOUR efficiency and innovation, and prioritize driving YOUR company’s value above driving their own.   I believe we are left with only a handful of players – Operative, Media Ocean, Oracle and SAP among them.  While there are others on the image below, we do question their scale and ability to support you in the way a true operating system should, as defined above.

We believe the future consists of two main operating systems:  one on the buy-side and one on the sell-side.  And this is one reason we were excited about the MediaOcean announcement a few weeks back.

So how do Ad Ops Professionals Lead the Charge? 

The job of today’s Ad Ops professionals should be to take a step back and ask, what is my approach to building an efficient company that continually innovates?   And the answer to this question is how you lead and become the change your organization needs in order to effectively balance innovation and efficiency, or, to have your cake and eat it too.

The deal between Donovan and MediaBank is great news and much needed. Our industry is blessed with a tremendous amount of innovation.  Unfortunately, many innovators in our space have lacked the foresight to adopt a long term approach to enabling successful, profitable relationships between buyers and sellers. As a result, these middlemen that disintermediate between buyers and sellers have fostered an unsustainable ecosystem that robs each side of the value they create. The merger is a welcome landmark step in filling a gaping hole in our space today—THE Operating System on the buy side.

Dealing With The Devil

As an industry, we have made a deal with the devil. Indirect sales channels burst onto the scene promising more revenue with less effort. Easy money, however, comes at a high price.  Traditional technology infrastructure claims only 2-5% of revenue, while these so-called revenue-boosting partners unabashedly take a hefty 30-70% ransom after all is said and done.

Buyers and sellers depend on these players to run their advertising business. But business infrastructure has been usurped by a myriad of brokers, each taking a cut along the way. First came the ad networks. Then came audience extension platforms and ad exchanges. Re-branded efforts produced yield optimizers and then RTBs.  As everyone knows, if you take a look at the business model, they’re still all networks who are paid at exorbitant rates.

Everyone argues about whether it’s the buyer or seller who holds the position of power, when in reality, these intermediaries hold both of them hostage. Not only are their margins at stake, but their ability to compete against traditional mediums are hindered. Where is the capital to invest in better content? Where is the capital to invest in better creative? It certainly feels like it’s going to the VCs, rather than to advertisers and publishers.

How is this sustainable? Buyers and sellers have known for years that they have been losing a disproportionate amount of revenue to indirect and remained concerned that their partners are commoditizing their data, audience, and inventory. In the end, they ask, “Are my partners intent on competing with me?”

Even the titans in our industry are banding together to fight against the middlemen—just look at the recent AOL, Yahoo, Microsoft announcement.

Change Is In the Air

Both buyers and sellers are fed up. The leakage from the spread between the buyer and seller has become large enough. It has come to the point where they are realizing they are mortgaging their future by not partnering with people that allow them to build value on their own. As Michael Donovan noted to partners yesterday, the deal is addressing their clients’ outcry for “a single, neutral and universal operating system for advertising technology”. Over the past several years, we’ve seen no different on the sell side—publishers are demanding an operating system that enables them to work more easily and directly with buyers while increasing their margins. It is high time that buyers and sellers repatriate their assets and capture revenue for the value they deliver. The key to doing so is to work with partners whose business model is to provide infrastructure, not to compete.

Now, we are one step closer to enabling our clients to succeed. The Donovan and MediaBank merger paves the runway to building tighter buyer-seller relationships by providing this much needed infrastructure on the buy side.

There is no doubt  MediaOcean still has challenges ahead—two different companies, two different cultures, a huge technology challenge to integrate multiple platforms. My hope is that this team knocks it out of the park. This is by far the healthiest thing in a long time that has happened in our ecosystem.

Hey CROs – Is Your Comp Plan at Risk?

The online media buying and selling process has changed – direct relationships with agencies and buyers has been reduced by the proliferation of ad networks, ad exchanges, social media platforms and RTB players that have cropped up en mass over the past twelve years, aiming to compete with a publisher’s direct sales channel.  Forrester research estimates that 30% of ad spending will be done via DSPs and RTBs in 2011, while Google estimates that more than 50% of online advertising will be done via these platforms over the next few years.

What does this mean for CROs at online publishing companies?  It means your compensation plan could be at risk.  If you are a CRO or senior digital media sales executive today, you are no longer competing head to head with other publishers to win the big RFPs.  Rather, you are competing with something much faster, and with a different skillset than your human sales team – you are competing with MACHINES.

Many of you have already embraced, or will embrace, this machine-based buying process.  You will compete with yourselves for inventory, most of the time by accident, because you lack visibility into the true value of your impressions.  In addition, many of you will compete or are already competing with machines today.  DSPs, exchanges and RTB players have the power to buy the same or very similar audiences, to the ones you represent today.  Your high reach, high frequency inventory, which used to be the reason you were so successful is now under fire by the machines and, because of this, the direct sales model of today and tomorrow is at risk.

Your revenue is at risk.

The way you and your sales people get compensated for deals will breakdown, if it has not already.

So how do you compete with something that’s faster than you, smarter than you, and doesn’t need sleep in order to be effective?

To hear what some of the leading online publishers think, come hear our presentation at the iMedia Agency Summit in Bonita Springs, Florida on Monday, May 23^rd.

Operative is hosting the Publisher’s Breakfast and will lead an enlightening, engaging conversation about the shift in online media buying and selling, and how these shifts are impacting, or will impact, your company’s revenue and compensation plans.

To help support the discussion, we brought together four of the “founding fathers” of online media – four gentlemen who are arguably the most recognized, well-respected thought leaders  in the field of digital ad sales. We invited them to participate in a pre-event Q&A and were pleased to even get on camera.  Our esteemed cast of characters includes:

• Nick Johnson from NBC Universal
• Kevin Arrix from MTV Networks
• Mark Westlake from Techmedia Network
• Brian Quinn from Triad Digital Media

During the session, you will hear this group talk about three things that publishers need to improve in order to grow their direct sales teams and drive more revenue through the channel.

These include:

1)    Plumbing – Compared to the machines, the current pipes that run water through publisher infrastructure are old and rotting – systems are fragmented and decision-making is hindered.  Imagine an Old Victorian water system, where every time there’s a leak, an entire street needs to be dug up in order to identify and locate the issue.

2)    Inventory – Inventory continues to become more complex to manage and understand, and often comes from multiple data sources. It’s rare that a seller knows exactly how much inventory is available for a segment, target or piece of inventory at the time of proposal.  That’s unacceptable.

3)    Product Packaging – It’s hard to create meaningful packages to takes to customers and impact your average price given issues 1 and 2.

We hope to see you next week at the iMedia Agency Summit…!

iMedia Agency Summit Publisher’s Breakfast Details:

-       Date: Monday, May 23d

-       Time: 8:00 – 9:00 a.m. EST

-       Location: Hyatt Regency Coconut Resort & Spa, Bonita Springs, Fl.

-       Room: Blue Heron Room

Do you depend on someone to run your business whose business goal is to eat your lunch?

Andrew Wallenstein of www.paidcontent.org just published a great article yesterday about Netflix’s recent 10-K filing in which they disclosed the risks associated with their Amazon partnership.

It is obvious that Netflix is facing serious competition from Amazon in their primary business.  But what was disclosed is an additional threat from Amazon, and risk to Netflix.  Amazon, according to the article, provides “mission-critical” web services that enable Netflix to remain in operation.  This same supposed “business partner” is about to become a major competitive threat to Netflix as it looks to offer an online streaming video service to customers that will compete directly with the Wall Street darling (NFLX).

Netflix depends on Amazon to allow their business to scale.  Netflix depends on Amazon to innovate their services so that they can better compete against Amazon.  If they don’t provide that innovation, Netflix will be at a disadvantage.  Is that a safe bet?

And what bets are you placing every day?

David B. Yoffie and Mary Kwak wrote, in their famous Harvard Business Review article entitled, With Friends like These: The Art of Managing Complementors, that “Executives often overestimate common interests with complementors and repeatedly under-estimate the potential for conflict.”

How often are we (the digital ad industry) depending on competitors to provide sufficient innovation to our mission-critical platforms, and protection of our data, in order to grow our businesses? Do the people that have access to your data want you to win?  Do the people that provide your business systems – from business intelligence and inventory optimization, to user data and customer data – really want you to win?  Or do they just want you to win long enough until they can commoditize your value?

Here are some questions you need to ask yourself to determine if you are putting your primary business assets at risk vis-à-vis a current or potential “partnership:”

-          What are my most critical assets?

-          Who has access to them?

-          Who do I depend on to monetize them?

-          Do they compete? Now? In the future?

-          Are my “frenemies” going to share their innovation, or keep it themselves?

-          What would happen to my business if they stopped serving my interest?

Once you have the answers to these questions, you will be better equipped to know a) whether or not there are risks you need to disclose to investors and/or b) whether or not you should continue to engage in those relationships at all.

Co-opetition is part of our life, it is here to stay.  But engaging with partners that compete or may potentially compete with your primary business and source of revenue is a significant risk that should be carefully evaluated.  Furthermore, you must have the foresight to know whether or not these “partners” have the potential to one day become a competitor, forcing you to predict the future market landscape by running if-then scenarios. Simply disclosing the risk to investors is not enough – and in fact, it’s probably too late.  Understanding the implications and risks before you even have to disclose should be the first step businesses take in evaluating their mission-critical business relationships.

So who’s guarding your henhouse and what will you have to disclose to investors in your next 10-K filing?

I would love to hear from you on related scenarios that may exist in our space where there is exposure of critical business assets and/or partnerships because one partner is preying on the other(s). Comments welcome here or via email.

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-what-worries-netflix-about-amazon-isnt-just-competition/

FFL and Digital Media

Anyone know what time of year it is?  That’s right, it’s fantasy football draft season.  If you’ve played before, you know that draft season is the most stressful time of year.  This is when you have to sit down, look at all the players that are available and decide which ones will help you win a fantasy football championship.  There are many strategies that you can deploy, and the most conventional is to draft running backs- fast, furious and early on.  Why?  They are the steady players that give you consistent point production.  But, fantasy football has changed.  Some NFL teams now use multiple running backs (AKA running back by committee).  Other teams have moved away from running the ball all together and have opted for the exciting air attack.  This opened up opportunities for fantasy owners to structure their teams around additional point contributors like a Quarter Back like Drew Brees or a Wide Receiver like Larry Fitzgerald.  Decisions, decisions. 

How does fantasy football relate back to digital media? 

Well, it’s also technology budgeting season.  Today’s publishers and specialty ad networks feel the stress of making technology decisions for 2011.  They have to sit down, review all the projects they are going to push for and make a stake in the ground that “these are the initiatives that will put us in the best position to win”.  

Many of these projects will fall into 2 categories.  The first category is revenue.  Plain and simple, if that project is successful, it will directly help you make money.  There should be no ambiguity.  Some example projects include:

• Developing custom creative programs to help you attract new brands
• Building a mobile, video or  social media ad server that promotes engagement metrics or gives you a competitive advantage in the market place
• Introducing rich media tools

The second category is around helping companies drive efficiency inside and outside their organization.  Below are some examples of efficiency-focused initiatives:

• Syncing your publisher/partner/network management systems
• Evaluating and deploying reconciliation, reporting and billing tools
• Integrating with proposal , IO and media planning applications

In order to be successful in 2011, media companies need to do both.  You MUST do both.  If you don’t innovate, you won’t attract the big ad dollars.  If you only innovate and forget about the back-end efficiency, you’ll lose all the customers you won or have a ceiling on the amount of customers you can take-on due to inefficiency.  Quite the predicament. 

For most media companies, there are the few factors contributing to this problem:

1. You’ve got 1 engineering team and they are drinking through a fire hose.  I don’t care who you are…if you’re a digital media owner in some capacity, your engineering team has too much on their plate and not enough time.  Furthermore, with all the new technology in the market place, it’s just getting worse and worse.
2. Most publishers, even today, still run their business on excel.  There’s not one platform in place that you can use as a springboard for innovation.  Not one place to connect all these new things that you’re buying or creating.  This is also the reason your operations teams are so busy.  They have to log into 10 different systems to get their jobs done. No wonder there is so much demand for projects that create efficiency.
3. A large percentage of the technology and business leadership within media organizations still promotes a “let’s build it all” type of mentality.  For example, the industry hasn’t matured enough where the role of the CIO is relevant – there’s no one to advise the CEO on best practices on how to get information, drive revenue and scale (all at the same time).

If this sounds familiar and your ability to be successful depends on your engineering team executing, consider some of these ideas:

1. Make a list of all the projects you have on your plate for 2011.  From there, put a “$” next to each one that your sure will help you drive revenue next year.  Then, put an “E” next to the ones that will help your bottom line (efficiency gains, speed to market, etc.).  Getting clarity on what these projects actually “mean” for the business is the first step.  
2. From there, make the decision to partner with a company that can offer an enterprise platform to help you run your day to day business and gain those efficiencies (inventory management, proposals, packaging, trafficking, reporting, financial reconciliation, etc.).  Make sure your partner has an API and SDK to help you innovate.  You’ll find there are companies that can not only help you get deal with a lot of your “E”s, but also enable you to innovate the “$”s.
3. It’s important to ensure that the company’s technology culture has a strategic focus on revenue and strategic value creation.  I ran into one publisher recently who calls his engineering team “Team Money”.  That’s because their engineering leadership has a mentality of selecting projects that will help the company drive new revenue by establishing partnerships with companies that help them achieve greater efficiency.   This is a cultural change and isn’t always easy.  Engage your CEO in this concept – make it a big deal towards hitting the 2011 revenue number.

By focusing your engineering teams on things that are exciting (like drafting quarterbacks and wide receivers) and partnering with a company that can help you innovate and scale (your work horse running back), you’ll be in a better position to be successful in 2011…successful in beating your competition, meeting the new demands of brand advertisers, raising employee satisfaction in your engineering department and keeping both the top and bottom line on the up and up.

Operative Survey: The State of the Industry- Digital Operations

For the last 2 weeks, we’ve been working with the team at DM2PRO to survey the digital advertising community about the current state of affairs:

- Growing need for data integration among all players in the ecosystem

- Blurring lines between publisher, agency, brand and network roles and responsibilities

- As we continue to innovate, our inability to adopt those innovations is holding us back!

- Fragmentation is NOT going away….and agencies, publishers, brands, advertisers and networks alike need to stop losing money and bring our systems together to compete effectively.

Among the highlights: What publishers can’t deliver, but say they NEED to in order to profit in a hyper-competitive marketplace include

• Real-time inventory forecasting (29%)
• Real-time campaign performance (28%)
• Cross-platform buys (25%)
• Content integration (21%)
• Targeting (17%)
• Product packaging (12%) and
• Creative tracking / iteration (11%)

What is the Answer??

ONE.

One place for your media team to access real-time data. One place to integrate and aggregate data from every technology solution needed to run your business.  One platform to help you manage your business.

For more insight into our findings, please check out the Operative/DM2PRO White Paper: The State of the Industry- Digital Operations.

For more information, please click here.

Operative partnered with the team from DM2PRO to survey digital publishers and agencies about the people, processes and tools required to run a profitable advertising business.  At DPAC today, we’ve released the findings.  Take a look at some of analysis we’ve gathered.

More than 339 self-identified publishers weighed in during a one-week period, ample enough indication that we’d struck a nerve with our subject matter. While many of them without doubt juggle “cross-media” campaigns with their traditional content channels and the Web, we went a step farther, asking, “What percent of all your current campaigns includes three or more media (e.g. a mobile, video and display component in a single order)?”

For a slight majority of respondents, such campaigns are still a rarity. But, for the other half, they range from 10%-25% for a little more than a fifth of respondents, to greater than half all campaigns for the top 10% of publishers.

To read more survey results, check out the below PDF.

DPAC_Presentation_Sample survey findings

For more information, please click here.

The day of ‘seller defined media buys’ will decrease as publishers understand the who, how and where in the context of a media buy.  Sellers need to not only understand the revenue picture but also the value of the audience.  

The question is not WHO owns the data, but WHAT can we use the data for? 

Advertisers and publishers hire vendors to solve their business problems.  The two sources of real data are from advertisers and publishers.  All of data is incomplete. 

Does data equal revenue? 

Are we managing data to get a stronger revenue stream? 

Data ownership is a false paradigm.  It is all about how we USE the data.  We must be respectful of the consumer and prevent legislation at the same time.  If we eliminate data and data usage, it will cause everyone more problems.  Controls are important for both publishers and advertisers.

Advertisers want to buy on frequency and modeling for maximum reach of a targeted audience.  We need a combination of trust and responsibility.  The holding companies want to be transparent and open.  

Big publishers and holding companies are afraid of start-ups who are doing non-ethical things that effect the revenue model for everyone.  But the truth is that big players need to take a lead in the marketplace.  There is a big disagreement between agencies and publishers as far as who can do what with data.   This is a fundamental issue that might not be solved for years.  Right now data is all over the place, no one trusts each other, and advertisers want to buy on an audience basis. 

So, what the value of targeting without context?  

What can publishers do to protect themselves moving forward?  

Don’t work with ad networks. 

Create a business policy on any 3rd party tags. 

Consider search and the influence of site indexing. 

One great way to think about inventory and data, is that we need to evaluate opportunity cost for each partnership.  The first step for everyone has to be transparent throughout the buying and selling process.

For more information, please click here.

Gordon McLeod, President, The Wall Street Journal Digital Network

The Evolution of Content

1. Paid content should be free. Once free, always free is a myth.

The hybrid model is the ultimate access with a paid and free model in the same market.  Drive traffic with free but keep the audience with paid.  Try to also think of different levels of pricing to create a lot of value but let the client decide how much they want to pay.  The highest level is also a great driver for the overall brand. 

2.  Platform agnostic

Print, mobile, web, e-reader, etc.  All of these can work with content.  The key is to make sure you understand the consumers on each platform. 

3.  Forget free, build a pay wall (2010)

Don’t literally build a brick wall.  Low traffic, no inventory is terrible.  Transparency and allowing customers to see the value helps attract higher value.  Make it easy for consumers to use your product.  Constant improvement and showing value is critical here.  Hybrid models could be a good fail safe.   Find a way to get new people  to the site to see the value. 

4.  Paid content is easy, charging is hard.

One view of the customer, the value of that customer is tremendous.  Take control of your business so you can set price.  Add in products that are complimentary but maybe not obvious.  Could industry bundles work as a solution? Bundling is the secret to paid content success.  Also, paid content actually adds value to the business.   With paid content, you get a higher premium.   

Book entitled Information Rules.  Best quote, “Technology changes but economic laws do not.”

For more information, please click here.

A lot of time is spent online, but we do not know exactly when and where.  Traditional information is moving from offline to online. 

Advertising models have not kept up with these changes.  Page views, impressions, friends, Tweets, buzz, uniques, etc are all ways in which people are buying media.   The Olympics has AS MANY mobile users as there are TV viewers!  The money in digital clearly has not caught up- 30% of time is spent online and 16% of the ad dollars are spent online. 

Why has ad spend not caught up?

It’s simple.  The ad buying process for online is VERY difficult.   There are roughly 30 steps to buying a single ad impression (ie: from RFP’s sent out, to email changes, to ad tag generation and testing and implementation….all of these tasks effect the marketplace).   And, for online video, standards are very different.  

7 predictions

1. Inventory should be frictionless.  is critical to success.  Marketers want to spend more time on creativity and less on paperwork.   28% of the costs for selling, executing and billing an online ad go to administrative work.  We need to do better.

2.  We could increase our revenue from gleaning better insights.  If the publisher had a more knowledge about the inventory, they could get a higher value.  It would also provide greater analysis for running the business. 

3.  More revenue from sophisticated yield management.  “If you are managing yield in an excel sheet, or managing it away from the ad server, you are losing money.”  If for example Michael Jackson’s death causes a spike, it should be sold at auction.

4. There are 1000′s of display advertisers.  Make it easier to create an online ad.  A site like www.issuu.com is a great example of self service ad creation. 

5. Have the perfect ad for your users.  Quality targeting makes for a quality experience. 

6.  Syndication is critical to having more people see your content.  It is not about having more content or page views.  It is about more premium content that lures advertisers.  Better syndication is critical for everyone. 

7.  Every campaign will have desktop, mobile and social elements.  Social does not mean Facebook, it is a mind set more than anything else. 

Innovation and implementation will lead to online advertising success.

For more information, please click here.