• by Shirley Marschall , Featured Contributor, March 19, 2025

Ad tech is an industry built on scale. More inventory, more data, more platforms, have always been the answer. But as programmatic has evolved, we’ve reached a point where “more” is often making things worse, not better.

Instead of increasing efficiency and opportunity, oversaturation is leading to fragmentation, inefficiencies, and diminishing returns. From supply-side platforms (SSPs) to ID solutions to retail media networks (RMNs), the industry’s FOMO-fueled expansion is starting to backfire.

Let’s break it down.

More SSPs, Same Supply

Publishers once believed more SSPs meant more demand, higher yield, and better revenue. The logic was simple: more competition should drive up CPMs.

The result? The SSP explosion, where the same impression was auctioned across dozens of platforms, leading to bid duplication, hidden fees, and a bloated supply chain.

The Response: SPO & Curation

Once buyers realized they were bidding against themselves, supply path optimization (SPO) became a necessity. Agencies and brands started cutting redundant paths, prioritizing direct, transparent, and cost-effective routes. Now, curation and efficiency-focused SSP partnerships dominate the space.

The Lesson: More SSPs did not create more supply. They just created more inefficiencies.

More Identity Solutions, Same Identity Crisis

With cookies crumbling, the race to build the next industry-standard ID kicked off. But instead of one or two dominant solutions, we got dozens.

Unified ID 2.0, LiveRamp’s ATS, Yahoo ConnectID, ID5, NetID…The list goes on…

Each claims to be “the future of identity.” The problem? More IDs don’t mean better identity resolution. Instead, they’ve created a fractured ecosystem with competing standards, forcing buyers and sellers into a patchwork of partial solutions.

The Lesson: More identity solutions don’t solve the problem. They just make the landscape even more fragmented.

More RMNs, Same Consumers

Retail media is the fastest-growing sector in ad tech. Every major retailer wants in.

Amazon dominates, but Walmart, Target, and Kroger are all expanding.

Best Buy, Home Depot, and even smaller chains are launching networks.

The problem? Consumers don’t shop at just one retailer. Advertisers are now forced to manage dozens of siloed platforms, each with its own walled garden, increasing complexity rather than efficiency.

The Lesson: More RMNs don’t create more shoppers. They just create more fragmentation.

The CTV Exception? Not Quite.

At the premium end of the market, supply is consolidated among a handful of key players: Netflix, Disney+, Amazon, Hulu, and a few others.

But zoom out, and the broader CTV market is already showing signs of the inefficiencies:

Every major streamer is adding an ad-supported option, while free ad-supported streaming TV (FAST) channels, like Pluto TV, Tubi, and Samsung TV Plus, are rapidly multiplying.

CTV hasn’t reached the SSP/RMN level of fragmentation yet, but as ad-supported tiers and FAST channels multiply, it’s heading in that direction.

The Lesson: More CTV players haven’t created the same inefficiencies - yet.

The Real Ad Tech Paradox

Ad tech keeps repeating the same cycle.

First, we proliferate solutions, driven by FOMO and the promise of better performance.

Then, we realize more doesn’t mean better, just more fragmented, redundant, and inefficient.

Finally, we enter consolidation mode, cleaning up the mess we created.

And now, we’re about to enter this cycle again, with AI.

More AI, Same Chaos?

AI is being sold as the ultimate fix for ad tech’s inefficiencies. But if history is any indicator, the industry will likely…

• Over-invest in AI-driven solutions without fixing core structural problems.

• Create more, not fewer, platforms, further fragmenting an already complex landscape.

• Fail to consolidate standards, leaving advertisers and publishers to navigate yet another layer of confusion.

The real winners won’t be the companies that add more noise to the system. The winners will be those that streamline, simplify, and actually deliver value.

Because in the end, ad tech doesn’t need "more." It needs "better."