Ampush Sells 'Actions' Unit, Now Focused Solely On Programmatic Native

Ad technology provider Ampush on Monday announced that it has sold its Actions Business Unit. It was the last remaining unit of Ampush that was not focused specifically on native advertising. The company will use the money from the sale to focus solely on programmatic native advertising, particularly on social channels.

In that vein, the company has announced the release of its marketing platform for native advertising, AMP 2.0. A company representative told RTM Daily that the platform "is programmatic in that it uses bidding rules and algorithms to help drive more intelligent/efficient buying and optimization of ad inventory."

"Our customers have had incredible success with Facebook and we are working to extend our technology to other native platforms as they develop their own ad offerings," stated Jesse Pujji, co-founder and CEO of Ampush. The company is positioning itself for what it believes will be a full shift to native advertising. The company believes other social platforms will follow Facebook's footsteps into native advertising -- and specifically named Twitter, LinkedIn and Pinterest in its release.

Ampush's new platform is focused on helping native advertisers use mobile-focused platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. The platform also has an ad creation and management tool and a real-time reporting and analytics dashboard. 

2 comments about "Ampush Sells 'Actions' Unit, Now Focused Solely On Programmatic Native".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Kern Wi from Pureflowmedia, November 6, 2013 at 2:35 p.m.

    1.5m upfront? ouch, what happened?

  2. wilson corson from mediawhiz, November 7, 2013 at 7:52 p.m.

    Ampush went from “killing it” 1m a month, to 1m a year, in just less than 12 months. And one of the main reasons is that their Facebook Platform didn’t create an advantage, forcing them to use off shore call centers. Ampush also doesn’t allow third party users to manage their own campaigns, and they insist they do it for them internally, driving up fees. That added cost just compounds the misery of the short lived Facebook referrals sent over for legitimate help. If the platform didn’t work for them internally, why would it work externally? And how lucky or desperate did they get to have a 1.2m-dollar lifeline sent over? Smoke and Mirrors

Next story loading loading..