At Shiny Ads, we take our work and play seriously. Whenever we need to blow some steam or if a team member needs a “shot to the head”, we pick up one of these Nerf guns and start shooting.

You can see that we have a variety of guns to choose from. The latest addition is the Nerf Vulcan, which is a fully-automatic machine gun with an ammo belt full of 25 bullets with its own tri-pod. I’m not sure how any new team members are going to top that gun…

Other favourites are the common (but modded) Nerf Maverick Blaster pistol for all-out fights, although the Nerf Magstrike AS-10 typically wipes out anyone in front of them. The Nerf Spectre Rev-5 on the other hand, is great for accuracy when you need to hit that one engineer who needs to drop their head phones and answer a question.

What’s you favourite Nerf gun? Or do you have another way to blow off steam at your startup?

Part 2 of 3: Exploring the technical approaches to self-serve advertising

In the first part of this series I addressed the problem and opportunity that online publishers face in servicing smaller ad orders. In summary, a self-serve advertising platform is a very effective solution for processing ad orders under $5000. In part 2 of this 3 part series, I will identify to the two primary types of solutions available to publishers today.

Self-serve via JavaScript

This type of solution is integrated into the publisher’s ad server via JavaScript and will require a bit more human involvement. Publisher’s ad ops team will have to set up a campaign for the self-serve solution similar to how they set up an ad network in the ad server. Therefore a specific amount of inventory must be allocated and will need to be monitored on an on-going basis.

Self-serve via API

This type of solution is integrated directly into the publisher’s ad server via an API. With this type of solution no specific inventory needs to be allocated since inventory availability is determined when the advertiser is ready to buy.

The automation factor of a self-serve advertising platform is key to maximizing publisher’s revenue from advertisers with smaller ad orders. An API based solution is fully automated with one exception; each campaign requires approval from ad ops before going live (for quality control purposes). All other aspects happen without human involvement including sales, campaign trafficking, reporting and payment. Whereas a JavaScript based solution, as mentioned above, requires ad ops team members to create a campaign, allocate inventory and monitor.

The API based solution also offers advertisers full targeting capabilities, which is a great incentive for advertisers with smaller budgets; most value for their dollar spent. This is not the case with a JavaScript based solution, which unfortunately does not have the same targeting functions. For example, it lacks ability to use key value pairs to target ads.

Why the different technical approaches?

Vendors using the JavaScript approach are typically an ad network offering self-serve as a value-add solution or come from an ad network background, they will also cross-sell other sites using their solution. The API based solutions, on the other hand, are pure-play advertising technology companies focused on solving a pain point for publishers while giving them maximum control and flexibility.

I hope you found this information valuable and would love to hear your thoughts on self-serve advertising. Feel free to comment below – let’s get the conversation started.

Also published on the AdMonsters Blog

Part 2 of 3: Exploring the technical approaches to self-serve advertising

In the first part of this series I addressed the problem and opportunity that online publishers face in servicing smaller ad orders. In summary, a self-serve advertising platform is a very effective solution for processing ad orders under $5000. In part 2 of this 3 part series, I will identify to the two primary types of solutions available to publishers today.

Self-serve via JavaScript
This type of solution is integrated into the publisher’s ad server via JavaScript and will require a bit more human involvement. Publisher’s ad ops team will have to set up a campaign for the self-serve solution similar to how they
set up an ad network in the ad server. Therefore a specific amount of inventory must be allocated and will need to be monitored on an on-going basis.

Self-serve via API
This type of solution is integrated directly into the publisher’s ad server via an API. With this type of solution no specific inventory needs to be allocated since inventory availability is determined when the advertiser is ready to buy.

The automation factor of a self-serve advertising platform is key to maximizing publisher’s revenue from advertisers with smaller ad orders. An API based solution is fully automated with one exception; each campaign requires approval from ad ops before going live (for quality control purposes). All other aspects happen without human involvement including sales, campaign trafficking, reporting and payment. Whereas a JavaScript based solution, as mentioned above, requires ad ops team members to create a campaign, allocate inventory and monitor.

The API based solution also offers advertisers full targeting capabilities, which is a great incentive for advertisers
with smaller budgets; most value for their dollar spent. This is not the case with a JavaScript based solution, which unfortunately does not have the same targeting functions. For example, it lacks ability to use key value pairs to
target ads.

Why the different technical approaches?
Vendors using the JavaScript approach are typically an ad network offering self-serve as a value-add solution or come from an ad network background, they will also cross-sell other sites using their solution. The API based solutions, on the other hand, are pure-play advertising technology companies focused on solving a pain point for publishers while giving them maximum control and flexibility.

I hope you found this information valuable and would love to hear your thoughts on self-serve advertising.
Feel free to comment below – let’s get the conversation started.

A recent IAB commissioned survey suggests that 55% of the top 300 brand marketing executives will be spending less than $50,000 this year on mobile advertising. And 77% of those surveyed say that there will be a focus on mobile display advertising, among other mobile strategies. Read the full article on MediaPost.com.

Dan Frommer, contributing editor at Business Insider, documents the 10 advertising terms you’ll be hearing for years to come. “If you work anywhere near online advertising, you’re going to be hearing many of these terms for a long time. So now’s a good time to get a handle on them.”

This week was a big week for our Founder/CEO, Roy Pereira, and VP of Business Development + Sales, Zunaid Khan. They were both asked to join the XConnectTO crew in the studio to discuss being a Canadian entrepreneur.

In case you missed it the video is below and you can find the blog post at xconnectto.com.

Roy and Zunaid were also interviewed for two separate articles with the Toronto Star and Toronto Standard.

Roy spoke with John Spear of the Toronto Star about how Angels play a crucial role in funding start-up companies. And Zunaid spoke to Toronto Standard’s Navneet Alang, bringing insight to the question, “Is Toronto Technophobic?” If you have a moment, check them out!

Part 1 of 3: Importance of targeting smaller advertisers

A majority of online publishers primarily focus their ad sales efforts on agencies and large brand advertisers via their direct sales force. The cost of operation for this sales channel often requires them to set a minimum ad buy per campaign. In conversations I’ve had with multiple online publishers in North America we have heard that the cost of running an online campaign ranges from $2,500 to $4,000 per campaign. This includes the sales, operations and finance costs. As such you will find that minimum ad buys are set between $2,500 and $10,000 per buy.

With that said, advertisers seeking to purchase smaller ad orders are unable to work directly with online publishers because of these minimums. In most cases, smaller advertisers will spend their advertising budget on solutions like Google AdSense. The limited amount of options for smaller advertisers has a direct effect on online publishers; either they will only generate a small amount of revenue from ad networks or it will all go to companies like Google.

Although their ad orders are of a smaller dollar value, the number of potential advertisers in this segment of the market far exceeds those of large brands; according to Borrel, SMBs make up for 95 percent of all local advertising online. Therefore, it is illogical for publishers to not seek a more effective solution to serve the smaller advertiser market. The potential to generate a higher eCPM than you would from an ad network or exchange is there; it just needs to be considered.

In my 15 years of experience in the digital media world, I have explored this topic in depth and feel there is one option that is simple enough for advertisers (without experience) to work with and provides publishers with a decent return: self-serve advertising platforms. With a self-serve solution, publishers can automate the sales, operations and finance components of running a campaign thereby making the process of servicing smaller advertisers less costly and more profitable. There is no human involvement from the perspective of an online publisher, which can be the most costly component.

Obviously a solution like this will not work if it is not properly promoted, but if done well, can make a big impact on publisher’s ad revenues. But don’t take my word for it; try it out for yourself! Most solutions work on a revenue sharing model so it’s free to get started.

Anyone out there try a self-serve solution yet? If so, I’d love to hear about your experience. Feel free to comment and let’s get the conversation started!

Also published on the AdMonsters blog.

This may not be the Shiny Ads crew, but we definitely ‘nerf on the job’. Enjoy!

Shiny Ads was invited to join 20 other innovative Canadian startups at C100‘s 48Hrs in the Valley – June 8 and 9. This years event focuses on Social Media: Advertising, Metrics and Monetization, which is a perfect fit for Shiny Ads’ self-serve digital advertising platform. During the 48 hours, startups will have an opportunity to network and learn from C100′s Charter Members, which is an impressive list of tech companies and investors.

And we have more good news to share! We just found out that Shiny Ads was selected to pitch at the Plug and Play EXPO on the second day of 48Hrs in the Valley. The plug and Play EXPO features 30 promising startups pitching to over 100 VC investors. Roy Pereira, Founder/CEO of Shiny Ads says, “C100 is a great organization that has a history of connecting the best with the best – Canadian entrepreneurs with partners in Silicon Valley – and we’re proud to be included. This is an amazing opportunity for Shiny Ads and we’re ready to shine during our 48 hours in the Valley!”

On May 2nd, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada hosted the Technology Growth Initiative (TGI) Bootcamp in Toronto and Shiny Ads was announced as the first place winner in the ICT (Information & Communication Technologies) category!

HOORAY! Another one under our belt!

Thank you for realizing our potential, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada! We truly appreciate the support and are honoured to be involved with TGI and all the great things the program is doing for the Canadian tech community!

The win will give Shiny Ads access to Canada’s Trade Consulates in the US.

“And what is TGI?”, you ask. It is a unique 360° turnaround process allowing qualified emerging Canadian technology companies in the IT, Cleantech/Environmental Technology and Life sciences sectors access to dynamic U.S. markets in four phases; 6 business focused webinars, one-day business bootcamp, specialty designed technology pipeline, and aftercare. For more information on the program visit href=”http://www.tradecommissioner.gc.ca/eng/document.jsp?did=112057″>www.tradecommissioner.gc.ca