IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reecde/v17y2013i2p83-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maximally representative allocations for guaranteed delivery advertising campaigns

Author

Listed:
  • R. McAfee
  • Kishore Papineni
  • Sergei Vassilvitskii

Abstract

There are around 400 advertising networks that match opportunities for “display” advertising, which include banner ads, video ads and indeed all ads other than text-based ads, on web pages and candidate advertisements. This is about a $${\$}25$$ billion business annually. The present study derives a method of pricing such advertisements based on their relative scarcity while ensuring that all campaigns obtain a reasonably representative sample of the relevant opportunities. The mechanism is well-behaved under supply uncertainty. A method based on the mechanism described in this paper was implemented by Yahoo! Inc. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Suggested Citation

  • R. McAfee & Kishore Papineni & Sergei Vassilvitskii, 2013. "Maximally representative allocations for guaranteed delivery advertising campaigns," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 17(2), pages 83-94, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:reecde:v:17:y:2013:i:2:p:83-94
    DOI: 10.1007/s10058-013-0141-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10058-013-0141-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10058-013-0141-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Varian, Hal R, 1985. "Price Discrimination and Social Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 870-875, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miguel A. Lejeune & John Turner, 2019. "Planning Online Advertising Using Gini Indices," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 1222-1245, September.
    2. L. Elisa Celis & Gregory Lewis & Markus Mobius & Hamid Nazerzadeh, 2014. "Buy-It-Now or Take-a-Chance: Price Discrimination Through Randomized Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2927-2948, December.
    3. Ying-Ju Chen, 2017. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Display Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 897-913, August.
    4. Sami Najafi-Asadolahi & Kristin Fridgeirsdottir, 2014. "Cost-per-Click Pricing for Display Advertising," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 482-497, October.
    5. Susan Athey & Emilio Calvano & Joshua S. Gans, 2014. "The Impact of Consumer Multi-homing on Advertising Markets and Media Competition," CSEF Working Papers 379, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy, revised 27 Apr 2016.
    6. Shen, Yuelin, 2018. "Pricing contracts and planning stochastic resources in brand display advertising," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 183-194.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frisell, Lars & Lagerlöf, Johan N.M., 2008. "Eliciting demand information through cheap talk: An argument in favor of a ban on price discrimination," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 99(3), pages 421-424, June.
    2. Kupper, G. & Willems, Bert, 2007. "Arbitrage in Energy Markets : Competing in the Incumbent's Shadow," Discussion Paper 2007-094, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. Jack (Peiyao) Ma & Andrea Mantovani & Carlo Reggiani & Annette Broocks & Néstor Duch-Brown, 2024. "The Price Effects of Prohibiting Price Parity Clauses: Evidence from International Hotel Groups," Economics Series Working Papers 1043, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    4. Kocourek, Pavel & Steiner, Jakub & Stewart, Colin, 2024. "Boundedly rational demand," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 19(4), November.
    5. Kokovin Sergey & Zhelobodko Evgeniy, 2004. "Leviathanian Fiscal Competition in Heterogeneous Country," EERC Working Paper Series 01-219e, EERC Research Network, Russia and CIS.
    6. Dirk Bergemann & Benjamin Brooks & Stephen Morris, 2015. "The Limits of Price Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 921-957, March.
    7. Shi, Wunan & Wouters, Olivier J. & Liu, Gordon & Mossialos, Elias & Yang, Xiuyun, 2020. "Association between provincial income levels and drug prices in China over the period 2010–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    8. Takanori Adachi & Noriaki Matsushima, 2014. "The Welfare Effects Of Third-Degree Price Discrimination In A Differentiated Oligopoly," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(3), pages 1231-1244, July.
    9. Alessandro Acquisti & Hal R. Varian, 2005. "Conditioning Prices on Purchase History," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 367-381, May.
    10. Alireza Fallah & Michael I. Jordan & Ali Makhdoumi & Azarakhsh Malekian, 2024. "The Limits of Price Discrimination Under Privacy Constraints," Papers 2402.08223, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    11. Einer Elhauge & Barry Nalebuff, 2017. "The Welfare Effects of Metering Ties," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 68-104.
    12. Patricia M. Danzon & Eric L. Keuffel, 2014. "Regulation of the Pharmaceutical-Biotechnology Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 407-484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Maxime Agbo & Marc Santugini & Jonathan W. Williams, 2012. "Screening with Congestion," Cahiers de recherche 1239, CIRPEE.
    14. Antony Dnes, 1997. "The Future of the British Post Office," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 93-102, January.
    15. Aguirre, Iñaki, 2019. "Oligopoly price discrimination, competitive pressure and total output," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 13, pages 1-16.
    16. Cecere, Grazia & Le Guel, Fabrice & Soulié, Nicolas, 2012. "Perceived Internet privacy concerns on social network in Europe," MPRA Paper 41437, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Cecere, Grazia & Rochelandet, Fabrice, 2013. "Privacy intrusiveness and web audiences: Empirical evidence," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1004-1014.
    18. Stephen K. Layson, 2017. "Quasilinear Utility and Two Market Monopoly," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(3), pages 164-168, March.
    19. Karp, Larry & Perloff, Jeffrey, 2011. "The iPhone Goes Downstream: Mandatory Universal Distribution∗," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7vc007jh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    20. Xingtang Wang & Lin Zhang, 2022. "Monopolistic third-degree price discrimination, welfare, and vertical market structure," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(1), pages 75-86, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Advertising; Representativeness; Mechanism design; Market design; Bidding; Exchange; D02; M37;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • M37 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Advertising

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:reecde:v:17:y:2013:i:2:p:83-94. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.