Commentary

Linear Reach Beats CTV Frequency For Scaling Performance TV

There 's a reason so many CTV advertisers today -- particularly those that are performance-focused -- are watching their campaigns hit plateaus much faster than they had anticipated. 

TV is now being discovered by tens of thousands of new advertisers each month, many entering through new self-service buying platforms, attracted by the familiarity of online ad buying, audience targeting and real-time measurement and reporting.

Most of these “new to TV” advertisers have taken the same well-trodden path from the direct-to-consumer movement.

Their companies are app- and ecommerce-heavy and they start their marketing with search and social ads, loving the hyper targeting and small entry budgets.

Once they find product/market fit, they maximize their increased spend not just on search and social ads, but also on performance banners, affiliate networks and email.

Cost-per-acquisition (CAC) is the captain of the ship, driving all budget decisions. Of course, for so many of them, the performance eventually plateaus.

advertisement

advertisement

As their sectors become competitive, ad pricing goes up and their CAC goes down. Once they exhausted the digital performance channels, many then moved to TV, and CTV particularly, since linear and its “analog” heritage and practices seem so foreign.

But, alas, so many have found their CTV campaigns and CAC are plateauing too -- just as happened with their other digital channels.

The inevitable questions arise: Are my audience targets wrong? Am I buying CTV ads on the wrong platforms? Do I have the wrong agency or platform partner?

Maybe the real question they should be asking is whether CTV in the U.S. today has the inventory scale to be a  performance channel comparable to search, social and banners.

In fact, there’s only so much real CTV inventory out there. It’s true that 50% of content viewing time on TV today is on streaming, but because so much of streaming video is ad-free or ad-light, only 15% of ad viewing time on TV is streamed. And the majority of the streaming ad inventory is pre-bought in upfront deals or sold together in linear-forest deals with the ads pre-integrated into the feed.

This leaves little true CTV ad inventory available on digital SSPs and DSPs, and what’s there is priced upwards.

Of course, less reputable platforms and companies out there seem to have no issue with “loose” labeling of CTV inventory when they put it on exchanges, frequently putting the CTV label on web video, apps with sound off, PC video banners, etc., creating little surprise that the CAC on those is bad, since they aren’t worth anything close to the 5-10X pricing premium of CTV.

What’s the answer for the CTV performance plateau? It’s simple: Extend your reach on linear TV.

Linear TV has lots of efficient supply and suppliers with strong data-driven targeting, automation in the back end, and closed-loop reporting and automation that can help you control your scaling while watching your ROI.

And local TV, which used to be super-expensive relative to national cable, is now much more affordable if you can be flexible about specific shows and dayparts and avoid the hottest political buys (mostly news) in the election run-ups.

What do you think? Isn’t it time for performance-focused digital advertisers to dip their toes into digitally automated and data-driven linear ads on TV?

4 comments about "Linear Reach Beats CTV Frequency For Scaling Performance TV".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Jack Wakshlag from Media Strategy, Research & Analytics, September 17, 2026 at 5:22 p.m.

    Linear scale vs CTV is the ticket here. So many advertisers pursuing so few impressions on CTV platforms with so many ads seen over and over again within minutes of each other even in the same program. It's been like this for years but either nobody cares (everybody making money from each airing) or or they don't think it's worth finding out. Should they?  It can't cost all that much. Advertisers or their agencies should scrape off a few percentage points from what they spend to know. It's like having your own lawyers. Aren't they needed? 

  2. brian ring from ring digital llc, September 17, 2026 at 9:32 p.m.

    I've just run my Fall 2026 survey and I'll tell you what: FAST is not only real, it's seriously big and getting better by the day. I think I have to disagree w the premise here altogether. Folks that haven't been watching FAST decks aren't understanding how good they are these days. I have more choice and quality on the free services like Roku Channel, Fire TV Channels, Pluto, Tubi even Plex has just about everything you could ever want. And do you know what? They have inventory available. In my view, advertisers need to recognize how high quality is in this new era of FAST - it's time to get aboard the next big thing in TV.  

  3. Dave Morgan from Simulmedia replied, September 17, 2026 at 9:57 p.m.

    Brian, no question that FAST is big, but all verified panels show viewership of FADT well below impression counts. That issue much be addressed. Particularly since the sdk's so many TVs show viewership titally evennall 24 hours throughout the day, with no normal human deviation (sleep, work, school, etc.)

  4. Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, September 18, 2026 at 8:32 a.m.

    If you try to determine the reeach of FASTS you get as much a s 50% of your respondents who claim to us them to varying degrees. But if you monitor their set usage this translates into about 10-15% of streaming viewing and only about 6% of all viewing time with the lion's share going to Tubi, Roku amd Pluto.

Next story loading loading..