[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2012.00840.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Context information increases revenue in ad auctions: Evidence from a policy change

Author

Listed:
  • S{i}la Ada
  • Nadia Abou Nabout
  • Elea McDonnell Feit
Abstract
Ad exchanges, i.e., platforms where real-time auctions for ad impressions take place, have developed sophisticated technology and data ecosystems to allow advertisers to target users, yet advertisers may not know which sites their ads appear on, i.e., the ad context. In practice, ad exchanges can require publishers to provide accurate ad placement information to ad buyers prior to submitting their bids, allowing them to adjust their bids for ads at specific domains, subdomains or URLs. However, ad exchanges have historically been reluctant to disclose placement information due to fears that buyers will start buying ads only on the most desirable sites leaving inventory on other sites unsold and lowering average revenue. This paper explores the empirical effect of ad placement disclosure using a unique data set describing a change in context information provided by a major private European ad exchange. Analyzing this as a quasi-experiment using diff-in-diff, we find that average revenue per impression rose when more context information was provided. This shows that ad context information is important to ad buyers and that providing more context information will not lead to deconflation. The exception to this are sites which had a low number of buyers prior to the policy change; consistent with theory, these sites with thin markets do not show a rise in prices. Our analysis adds evidence that ad exchanges with reputable publishers, particularly smaller volume, high quality sites, should provide ad buyers with site placement information, which can be done at almost no cost.

Suggested Citation

  • S{i}la Ada & Nadia Abou Nabout & Elea McDonnell Feit, 2020. "Context information increases revenue in ad auctions: Evidence from a policy change," Papers 2012.00840, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2012.00840
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2012.00840
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hannes Datta & George Knox & Bart J. Bronnenberg, 2018. "Changing Their Tune: How Consumers’ Adoption of Online Streaming Affects Music Consumption and Discovery," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(1), pages 5-21, January.
    2. Palfrey, Thomas R, 1983. "Bundling Decisions by a Multiproduct Monopolist with Incomplete Information," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(2), pages 463-483, March.
    3. Garrett A. Johnson & Scott K. Shriver & Shaoyin Du, 2020. "Consumer Privacy Choice in Online Advertising: Who Opts Out and at What Cost to Industry?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 33-51, January.
    4. Indranil Chakraborty, 1999. "Bundling decisions for selling multiple objects," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 13(3), pages 723-733.
    5. Yakov Amihud & Baruch Lev, 1981. "Risk Reduction as a Managerial Motive for Conglomerate Mergers," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 605-617, Autumn.
    6. Ron Berman, 2018. "Beyond the Last Touch: Attribution in Online Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(5), pages 771-792, September.
    7. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    8. Chen, Yanbin & Li, Sanxi & Yu, Jun, 2018. "Bundling decisions in multi-objects auctions with optimal reserve prices," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 141-145.
    9. Richard Lambert & Christian Leuz & Robert E. Verrecchia, 2007. "Accounting Information, Disclosure, and the Cost of Capital," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(2), pages 385-420, May.
    10. Alberto Abadie & Javier Gardeazabal, 2003. "The Economic Costs of Conflict: A Case Study of the Basque Country," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 113-132, March.
    11. John D. C. Little, 1970. "Models and Managers: The Concept of a Decision Calculus," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(8), pages 466-485, April.
    12. Jonathan Levin & Paul Milgrom, 2010. "Online Advertising: Heterogeneity and Conflation in Market Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 603-607, May.
    13. Busenitz, Lowell W. & Barney, Jay B., 1997. "Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 9-30, January.
    14. Steven Tadelis & Florian Zettelmeyer, 2015. "Information Disclosure as a Matching Mechanism: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 886-905, February.
    15. Abadie, Alberto & Diamond, Alexis & Hainmueller, Jens, 2010. "Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California’s Tobacco Control Program," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(490), pages 493-505.
    16. Seshadri Tirunillai & Gerard J. Tellis, 2017. "Does Offline TV Advertising Affect Online Chatter? Quasi-Experimental Analysis Using Synthetic Control," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 862-878, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kathleen T. Li, 2024. "Frontiers: A Simple Forward Difference-in-Differences Method," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 267-279, March.
    2. Miravete, Eugenio J., 2011. "Convolution and composition of totally positive random variables in economics," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 479-490.
    3. Haris Krijestorac & Rajiv Garg & Vijay Mahajan, 2020. "Cross-Platform Spillover Effects in Consumption of Viral Content: A Quasi-Experimental Analysis Using Synthetic Controls," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 449-472, June.
    4. Ramanathan Subramaniam & R. Venkatesh, 2009. "Optimal Bundling Strategies in Multiobject Auctions of Complements or Substitutes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 264-273, 03-04.
    5. Philippe Jehiel & Benny Moldovanu, 2005. "Allocative and Informational Externalities in Auctions and Related Mechanisms," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000490, UCLA Department of Economics.
    6. Hana Choi & Carl F. Mela & Santiago R. Balseiro & Adam Leary, 2020. "Online Display Advertising Markets: A Literature Review and Future Directions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 556-575, June.
    7. Rustam Ibragimov & Johan Walden, 2010. "Optimal Bundling Strategies Under Heavy-Tailed Valuations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(11), pages 1963-1976, November.
    8. Simon Board, 2009. "Revealing information in auctions: the allocation effect," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 38(1), pages 125-135, January.
    9. Shijie Lu & Koushyar Rajavi & Isaac Dinner, 2021. "The Effect of Over-the-Top Media Services on Piracy Search: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 548-568, May.
    10. Barati Mehdi, 2019. "Punishment Severity and Crime: The Case of Arkansas," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, March.
    11. Bo Cowgill & Cosmina Dorobantu, 2018. "Competition and Specificity in Market Design: Evidence from Geotargeted Advertising," Working Papers 18-09, NET Institute, revised Sep 2018.
    12. Amar Cheema & Peter Leszczyc & Rajesh Bagchi & Richard Bagozzi & James Cox & Utpal Dholakia & Eric Greenleaf & Amit Pazgal & Michael Rothkopf & Michael Shen & Shyam Sunder & Robert Zeithammer, 2005. "Economics, Psychology, and Social Dynamics of Consumer Bidding in Auctions," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 401-413, December.
    13. Qiuyue Xia & Lu Li & Jie Dong & Bin Zhang, 2021. "Reduction Effect and Mechanism Analysis of Carbon Trading Policy on Carbon Emissions from Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    14. Echevarría, Cruz A. & Hasancebi, Serhat & García-Enríquez, Javier, 2022. "Economic Effects of Macao’s Integration with Mainland China: A Causal Inference Study," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 37(2), pages 179-215.
    15. Nicolaj N. Mühlbach, 2020. "Tree-based Synthetic Control Methods: Consequences of moving the US Embassy," CREATES Research Papers 2020-04, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    16. Daniel Albalate & Germà Bel & Ferran A. Mazaira-Font, 2020. "Ensuring Stability, Accuracy and Meaningfulness in Synthetic Control Methods: The Regularized SHAP-Distance Method," IREA Working Papers 202005, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Apr 2020.
    17. Bruno Ferman & Cristine Pinto & Vitor Possebom, 2020. "Cherry Picking with Synthetic Controls," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(2), pages 510-532, March.
    18. Foellmi, Reto & Martínez, Isabel Z., 2014. "Volatile Top Income Shares in Switzerland? Reassessing the Evolution Between 1981 and 2009," CEPR Discussion Papers 10006, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Mustapha Douch & Terence Huw Edwards, 2022. "The bilateral trade effects of announcement shocks: Brexit as a natural field experiment," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(2), pages 305-329, March.
    20. Manuel Funke & Moritz Schularick & Christoph Trebesch, 2023. "Populist Leaders and the Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(12), pages 3249-3288, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2012.00840. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.