X hits on this document

211 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

49 / 98

174.

The price development for selected long-term DFP customers (that remained

in the same volume tier throughout the period) shows that the CPMs charged by DoubleClick have remained relatively stable over the duration of a contract, only to drop significantly whenever a contract came up for renegotiation It is thus clear that DoubleClick’s customers have been able to obtain significant price reductions whenever a contract expired.

175. The market investigation has confirmed that customers renegotiating terms and obtaining lower prices from DoubleClick have been In addition 106 , clearly describe the presence of price . DoubleClick's internal documents107 pressure in the market for ad serving.

Competitive constraints from in-house provision of ad serving tools

176.

As indicated in paragraph 29, ad serving can also be provided in-house.

Major advertisers and publishers have opted for this solution. For instance, the market investigation has confirmed that on the advertiser side, Aegis, eBay or Napster108 have developed their in-house technology. On the publisher side, cNet, Microsoft, Yahoo!, AOL, Auféminin and WPP, are also using such an in- house solution. Furthermore, a number of ad networks have also developed their own in-house ad serving technology (Quigo, ValueClick, TradeDoubler, Adpepper, Zanox for instance).

177.

The ability to develop in-house solutions imposes a constraint in two ways.

First, publishers could develop their in-house solution for their own use in response to a price increase by third-party ad serving tool providers. Second, in- house solutions can ultimately also be marketed and sold to third parties as well (that is to say customers become competitors). Some publishers have already demonstrated their ability to commercialize their in-house ad serving solution to third parties (Microsoft, Auféminin) and have become actual competitors on the market (Yahoo! is also turning its in-house solution into a solution for third parties). Ad networks that use in-house solutions to deliver display ads to third party sites on which ad space is sold can also offer their ad services as a third party provider (TradeDoubler for instance has started selling its ad serving tool). Therefore, the constraint exerted by the development of in-house solutions for ad serving cannot be ignored when assessing competition in the online advertising industry.

178. If in-house solutions are taken into account, the present position of DoubleClick in the market diminishes substantially. According to information

106

See, for instance, replies to questions 57 and 58 of the questionnaire to customers of 10 September 2007 by eBay, or a major online travel company, or a major French TV operator or a leading US media company.

107

See FTC doc. 15, 16, 17 and 19.

108

[…]*, a direct marketer, left its agency and then its ad serving provider, DoubleClick, to move its campaign management and ad serving completely in-house between the end of 2005 and the beginning of 2006.

49

Document info
Document views211
Page views211
Page last viewedSat Dec 03 12:15:35 UTC 2016
Pages98
Paragraphs2084
Words46734

Comments