Advertising agents begin to move away from the solutions of the platforms that once promised them all

This is definitely valid for a customer to a lot of business business, the most media. According to John Davis, the director of the development of the audience in the company, they have just reduced the expenses with Google by 50% – most was to the maximum performance – and they moved half it to the web open. However, they did not share the specificity of how much the expenses accounted. To be correct, some of this press comes from marketers who hit the ceiling on maximum performance, where casting in several dollars leads to reducing yields, however, these concerns could have been easier to stomach, if the platform had more confidence.

“I have customers who have passed Max complete performance, at a mix of Google advertisements, search campaigns and outside the garden, open web campaigns using display and videos online and connectatetv, etc.,” he said. “I would expect to be able to reduce a budget on Facebook by half.”

It is a similar perspective for Sara Kerr, media director associated with Modern Marketing Partners.

“I had a customer in which their Max CPM performance was about the same as the search CPM, so I cut their PMAX expenses,” she said. “In fact, we are aboard a customer right now, where they have a horribly high performance in the maximum performance that I am concerned about. It will be a hard conversation.”

These concerns are not new. The lack of transparency around the place where the ads are held, which works and if the return justifies the expenses has long been a painful place. But now, those persistent doubts are transformed into action, determined by an increasing achievement that these solutions based on AI may not be as effective as promised.

In the best case, this means wasted budget; In the worst case, it may mean loss of control over the entire media strategy.

“A few days [Google’s Performance Max] It could spend almost nothing, and then it could spend double or even triple the budget. I saw that it happens, “said Kerr.” For example, I saw that he has such a big CPM, although I was sure he was running only in search. They [Google] Indeed, you need to allow you to see where all the placement destinations work. “

And what probably did not help was the recent report of Adalytics, which found that the ads broadcast next to children’s porn – a lively memory of the risks that can happen when marketers do not control their own advertising.

“In the marketing and media space at this time, there is a lack of transparency and questions about where our ads appear,” said Mary Ann Pruitt, president and CEO of Mosaic Media. “In addition, Google and Meta will also have some legislations and regulations that will take place. All these things continue to feed what was already a reliable basis.”

However, it is difficult to say if these movements are a sign of a real change or just a stand tactic. After all, the platforms do not take signs from the advertising agents – they play their own game and everyone else has remained reacting. This will not change unless marketers begin to move away from these solutions. And judging by the latest data, it does not happen anywhere.

Meta, for example, revealed during her 2024 revenues, that advantage+ income exceeded an annual rate of $ 20 billion, increasing by 70% year by year. And, while Alphabet has not explicitly resorted to Google Performance Max for the same time, a report of Tinuţi indicated that more than 95% of retail advertising agents broadcast PMAX adopted. In addition, PMAX constituted 69% of the advertising expenses for shopping for the median retailer in the same quarter 2024, for Tinuiti’s report.

Maybe this is just another convicted test of marketers to let go even of a control control on the platforms. Time will say.

“Their [Google] The typical answer is “give time” and trust us to manage your advertising, using our AI, “said TJ Kropp, the head of the Ramp97.” However, when the campaign performance using their Black Dips box, there is no “why”. The lack of transparency for the reproduction or improvement of the campaign results is a significant discouragement element. It forces us to focus on “traditional”, controllable methods that can generate optimal results. “

Maybe this is just another convicted test of marketers to let go even of a control control on the platforms. What is already clear, however, is the creepy regret that has been established over much of the industry. Marketers invest in instruments that do their job, but there is a feeling that something better could have been handy if they had played differently. This is the sting: not the failure, but the anxious feeling that they have settled too soon. Maybe this really signals this pushback – an account not only with platforms, but also with their own restless compromises.

“Many marketers today are already comfortable with spending millions of dollars on black boxes (non-ai): Connectttv being one of them,” said Brian Ler, the founder and president of Ramp97. “For those marketers who are already comfortable buying in environments that are not transparent, we hope that there is no additional capitulation for this defective advertising mode.”

A Google spokesman said that the company is aware of these concerns from advertising agents and mentioned that Performance Max is designed to support various business goals, with recent updates, such as reporting on asset and impressing action values, determined by feedback. The spokesman has also underlined tools for budget management, placement transparency and strict policies to ensure the safety of the brand, especially around the age sensitive.

In addition, in response to this article, a meta spokesman told Digiday: “The vast majority of the feedback we hear about Meta -Advanced+ is overwhelmingly positive, given its proven ability to effectively lead the results.

We want to hear from you. Make this five -minute quick survey to help Digiday learn how to improve our products and you will be enrolled to win an Amazon $ 50 gift card.