Let’s talk about The Trade Desk (TTD) and their latest contribution to the world of advertising—what can only be described as a budgetary black hole. In their infinite wisdom, TTD has rebranded their “Audience Let’s talk about The Trade Desk (TTD) and their latest contribution to the world of advertising—what can only be described as a budgetary black hole. In their infinite wisdom, TTD has rebranded their “Audience Excluder” feature into something fancier-sounding, “Prism,” and slapped on a shiny new price tag that’s nearly three times the original cost. While it might sound like a minor adjustment in marketing jargon, this change is making advertisers feel like they’ve been hit by a speeding freight train loaded with fees. The worst part? These costs are automatic, unavoidable, and eat away at ad budgets before a single impression even hits the audience. It’s not a tweak; it’s an ad tech money grab, plain and simple.
A Breakdown of the Fees: Where’s the Budget Going?
Now, let’s dissect this ad tech fee buffet. TTD has managed to stack so many layers of fees onto their platform that advertisers might need an advanced degree in accounting just to keep up. Here’s how the budget is getting drained:
- Data Alliance Fee: 8.5%
- Cross-Device Identity Alliance: 10%
- Prism (formerly Audience Excluder): 10%
- Tech Fee: 12%
- Quality Alliance & Predictive Clearing: 3.5%
When you add this all up, about 44% of an advertiser’s budget is being devoured by The Trade Desk’s own fees—before they’ve even purchased a single impression. That’s almost half the money gone, allocated to features that are automatically applied whether you need them or not. Imagine spending $1,000 on ads and watching $440 disappear into the abyss of “ad tech necessities” before you’ve even said the word “targeting.” How exactly is that sustainable?
What is the Ad Tech Tax?
The so-called “ad tech tax” isn’t new, but it’s certainly ballooning faster than anyone expected. This term refers to the cumulative fees imposed by various intermediaries in the programmatic advertising supply chain—think DSPs, SSPs, data providers, verification services, and more. Each takes their cut, and by the time you’re left with the actual media spend, it’s a fraction of what you started with. Essentially, the ad tech tax is what advertisers pay to keep the entire machinery of digital advertising running, but at this rate, it’s looking more like a ransom than a service fee.
This isn’t just an inconvenience; it’s a systemic failure. Advertisers are forced to throw more and more money at intermediaries who promise better targeting, better delivery, and better optimization. The irony? Many of these services are solving problems that didn’t even exist before this convoluted system was put into place. Back when ad networks were simpler, you’d pay a flat serving fee, run your campaign, and get results. Now, it’s a minefield of inflated fees and bloated tools, and navigating it without losing your shirt feels impossible.
But worse than the fees is the ad tech mafia—those “experts” who dominate every show, every panel, every so-called educational event. They pitch these bloated products like snake oil salesmen, telling you they’re the absolute must-haves to succeed. The truth is, they’re paid off, every single one of them, to convince you that without these tools, you’ll sink. They profit from the chaos they’ve created. They’re not simplifying anything—they thrive on making it confusing. And when it gets too messy to navigate? That’s when they swoop in, offering you the solution to a problem they manufactured. Back in the day, we could run ads on simple ad networks with a flat serving fee and call it a day. Now, the game is rigged, and the mafia wants to control every move you make.
And let’s talk about these so-called “experts” for a second. They’re not industry pioneers or visionaries. Most of them are one-hit wonders—a junior account guy from some agency who lucked into a good campaign or someone who stumbled into relevance by accident. They’ve built careers on that one success story, and now they charge obscene consulting fees to tell you things they just read five minutes ago—often from this very newsletter. That $15,000 they’re charging for a session? It’s to sell you on solutions you don’t need while inflating their own egos. Worse, they’re paid by the companies behind these bloated tools to convince you that their products are the only way to stay afloat. It’s a scam, plain and simple, designed to keep advertisers spinning in circles.
And let’s not kid ourselves: the purpose of this bloated system isn’t just to make money—it’s to make sure other companies can’t. By adding layers of complexity, costs, and proprietary systems, TTD is building an ecosystem that’s practically impenetrable unless you play by their rules. Smaller players are either forced to integrate into The Trade Desk’s system or risk being excluded altogether. This isn’t just capitalism—it’s competitive survival of the meanest.
But what’s even more insidious is the endgame here. Let’s be clear, this isn’t a moral judgment. It’s just a cold, calculated business decision. The real goal isn’t to build a sustainable system; it’s to squeeze the industry dry while the insiders cash out. Once the stocks are sold, the investors get their returns, and the executives take their exit packages, the whole thing can collapse under its own weight for all they care. It’s a house of cards, but the ones pulling the strings will be long gone by the time it topples.
And who will be left to pick up the pieces? Advertisers, of course, scratching their heads and wondering how they got conned into paying half their budget for tools that did more harm than good. It’s not just an ad tax anymore—it’s an extinction-level event for anyone unwilling to play the game.
What This Means for Advertisers
Here’s the cold, hard truth: with nearly half of their budget gobbled up by ad tech fees, most advertisers are struggling to make campaigns profitable. The margin for error has evaporated. Any misstep in targeting, creative, or placement could mean the difference between a campaign breaking even or becoming a financial sinkhole. And as these fees creep higher, the promise of programmatic advertising—efficiency, precision, and cost-effectiveness—starts to feel like a cruel joke.
Take TTD’s Prism as an example. The feature is designed to exclude irrelevant audiences and optimize campaigns, which sounds great in theory. But at a 10% fee, it’s essentially charging advertisers for something they’ve come to expect as a baseline capability. And it’s not just Prism. TTD’s entire fee structure feels like an endless pile-on of costs that are automatically baked into the system, leaving advertisers with no choice but to pay up. It’s like being charged extra for the privilege of turning on your car’s headlights.
The Bigger Picture: A System That’s Broken
This isn’t just a Trade Desk problem—it’s a symptom of a larger issue within ad tech. The entire programmatic ecosystem has become so bloated with intermediaries and unnecessary add-ons that it’s barely recognizable from its original purpose. What was supposed to be a streamlined way to buy and sell ads has turned into a bureaucratic nightmare of fees, hidden costs, and opaque pricing structures.
And let’s not forget the amazing companies out there trying to simplify the process. Yes, they exist, and they’re doing good work, but the reason they even need to exist is that the whole system is an unholy mess. The more confusing the ecosystem, the more these mafia-approved tools and influencers get to step in and pitch their “solutions.” It’s a vicious cycle: chaos breeds opportunity, and the mafia cashes in.
Is This Sustainable?
Let’s not mince words: the current trajectory is a ticking time bomb. Advertisers are already fed up with spending half their budget funding ad tech middlemen instead of reaching actual audiences. And unless there’s a seismic shift—through regulation, innovation, or advertiser revolt—this system is headed straight for collapse.
This isn’t just speculation; I called it back in 2008 in Adweek, predicting the industry’s implosion by 2009. My argument then was simple: an ecosystem built on bloated fees, opaque pricing, and unchecked consolidation couldn’t sustain itself. Here we are, nearly two decades later, and the cracks are now gaping fissures. The difference? This time, the stakes are higher, with whispers of FTC compliance action, price fixing claims under the Sherman Act, and even class-action lawsuits swirling in the background.
There’s talk that some insiders are quietly briefing the new administration, raising red flags about monopolistic practices and price-fixing allegations.
And why wouldn’t they?
Google and a handful of other companies dominate the space so thoroughly that it’s hard not to see the parallels with other industries that have faced regulatory reckoning. This isn’t just about The Trade Desk; the entire ad tech ecosystem is teetering on the edge, and someone will eventually push it over.
If the industry doesn’t wake up and take a hard look in the mirror, advertisers will simply walk away. They’re nearing the end of their patience, and when they decide that the promise of programmatic isn’t worth the endless fees, the whole house of cards will collapse. The sad truth? The ones profiting the most—the ad tech giants and their executives—will be long gone, cashing out before the dust settles.
