Addressable TV, Programmatic Ad Spends To Grow At Double Digits

by Tobi Elkin , July 12, 2017

Ad spending for addressable TV and programmatic TV (PTV) is expected to grow in the U.S. by double digits through 2019, according to an eMarketer forecast.

The digital researcher projects that in 2017, addressable TV ad spending will grow 65.8% to reach $1.26 billion. It defines addressable TV ads as targeted ads delivered by a cable or satellite provider, via internet-connected set-top boxes. The ads mainly target viewers based on age and gender and can be seen during live broadcast/cable viewing or during on-demand viewing.

While three-quarters of U.S. households have cable or satellite boxes capable of delivering targeted ads, addressable TV spending will make up just 1.7% of total TV ad expenditures ($72.72 billion) in the U.S. this year, according to eMarketer. By 2019, that proportion will grow to 4.0%.

“Addressable TV is a seller’s market. Even though cable and satellite providers have the capability to target 74 million U.S. households, they are rationing the inventory,” stated eMarketer forecasting analyst Oscar Orozco. “Some targeted TV ads command lower prices, and measurement capability is limited at this point.”

Meanwhile, ad spending on PTV will grow 75.7% to $1.13 billion this year, representing 1.6% of total TV ad spending in the U.S., according to eMarketer. It said that in 2018, PTV spend will grow another 85.2% to $2.09 billion, and will reach nearly $4 billion by 2019.

While the advanced targeting aspect of programmatic TV ad spending is rather sophisticated, “pure automation from beginning to end is still not as advanced as it is for digital programmatic. Currently, ad placement is still generally done manually. For programmatic TV ad spend to grow as fast as we’ve seen on the digital side, it must advance to complete automation,” Orozco stated.

addressable tv, forecast, programmatic, programmatic tv

4 comments about "Addressable TV, Programmatic Ad Spends To Grow At Double Digits".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

PJ Lehrer from NYU, July 12, 2017 at 10:19 a.m.
Standby for more pissed off former customers. More here...
http://pjlehrer.blogspot.com/2017/06/advertisers-will-be-held-responsible.html
Reply

Shawn Roberts from WideOrbit replied, July 12, 2017 at 1:52 p.m.

Ms. Lehrer - Brand/content adjacencies shouldn't be a problem in TV as it is in digital for a number of reasons. For most programmtic TV platforms:
- There is an "in-station" approval step built into the process. This is necessary to allow stations to adhere to local content standards, among other reasons.
- The buys aren't 'real-time' so there's no possibiliity of an ad airing without a human having an opportunity to review its content. Most programmatic TV buying is at least a week in advance of air date.
- Buyers are making offers on specific programs or time slots, so they know what content their message will be integrated with.

Drop me a line if you'd like to discuss - sroberts at wideorbit dot com.

Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, July 12, 2017 at 2:18 p.m.

When the idea of "programmatic" for TV time buying was proposed a few years ago, the cornerstone of the concept was that the computers would scan all ---or most----competitive options and select those that best fit the advertisers' targeting and efficiency needs. How many of these "programmatic" TV buys do anything like this and how many are basically single seller deals, computer-aided---that do not make such comparisons?

Shawn Roberts from WideOrbit replied, July 14, 2017 at 1:34 p.m.

Ed - I don't know how many, but I do know ours does that! Buyers can use their data to assess audiences of 24/7/365 station-controlled inventory from 750+ local TV stations reaching 93% of US households. My understanding is that other platforms have more limited inventory options, but I'm happy to be corrected.

That's our open marketplace. We can also faciliate 'programmatic direct' connections for stations/groups with their select buying partners. Basically setting them up to use software for the same transactions, with the same transactors, with the same defined business terms they are accustomed to - but doing it all in an automated platform instead of by phone or email or....

Drop me a line if you'd like to discuss: sroberts at wideorbit dot com. Cheers!