ben allen

Google-DoubleClick Deal Makes aQuantive More Attractive

Jeff,
Agree with your point regarding DFP publishers. Regarding ad agencies ... I really don't see why agencies are so scared of Google. Hell running, monitoring and reporting on a Google buy is much more complicated than say buying a page in People magazine... you think advertisers want to deal w/ all that mess? Thats why the big advertiser hire agencies in teh first place. The more media venhicles focus on ROI and stats and metrics etc, the more value an agency brings as their partner to sort though it all. Yes buyers want to spread money around to a lot of different sites, both because it broadens their reach and also because it gives them some leverage against the sellers to have alternatives... but on the flip side trying to manage a 100 site buy manually is nearly impossible without a system to help streamline. Hence the value of Doubleclick in the first place. So there is a huge convenience factor as well... would you dare send out RFPs to tens of thousands of websites? no Way! there is a ton of value in having someone aggregate all the best into a single ad sales contact, technology, reporting source. This is the value, that along w/ tying search query values into the DART ad call, that Google hopes to unlock.

Could you elaborate any more on your comments regarding Tacoda and social networking play? I don't think they care the slightest about Tacoda, but think the model they could pursue will be similar in that they look to move low valued inventory to a higher valued use (for all types of willing publishers) by looking up users recent Google search query keywords and matching those to users they see on the DFP network (for those publishers that opt into the program of course) and then serving them a display ad from the same folks that bought the search key word... as an expanded "display" option for those currently Google search advertisers... now they just need the online banner equivalent of a spot runner.