US Agencies vs The Trade Desk: Who Could Benefit from the Controversy? 🕵️
You can't work in AdTech and have missed the story about US agencies and The Trade Desk (TTD)—unless you've been living in a cave without fibre broadband. 😉 But beyond the headlines, a more intriguing question emerges: who might benefit from all the bad buzz?
1. What did US trade publications report about The Trade Desk?
Two articles in Adweek drew particular attention in the programmatic community. The first reported that WPP US and dentsu US had quietly disconnected from OpenPath: read the first Adweek report.
A second report described Publicis US advising some clients not to use The Trade Desk: read the second Adweek report. AdExchanger also examined the dispute.
These are reports and recommendations attributed to the organisations concerned, not a finding of wrongdoing. Crucially, the underlying audit methodology is not publicly available in the source material for this commentary (which makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the substance of the case).
2. Why did the timing catch our attention?
What struck us was the apparent sequence: three competing US agency groups, audits on a similar subject, and press coverage within less than 30 days, as described in our original commentary.
Quite a coincidence, isn't it? 🕵️ That said, proximity in timing is not evidence of coordination. Agencies can independently investigate the same market concern, and press coverage may cluster around a common industry debate.
The point is not to claim a conspiracy. It is to ask whether this episode reflects a deeper change in the balance of power between agencies, DSPs and supply-side intermediaries.
3. Does OpenPath really threaten agencies' intermediary partners?
One explanation discussed in the trade press is that agencies feel threatened because OpenPath connects publishers more directly to The Trade Desk, potentially bypassing parts of the traditional programmatic supply chain.
There are two reasons we find that explanation incomplete. First, OpenPath's direct DSP-to-publisher approach primarily concerns the supply path used to access inventory; it does not automatically prevent agencies or trading desks from negotiating separate commercial deals with partners.
Second, direct supply integrations are not unique to TTD. Other major AdTech companies, including Google, Xandr and Criteo, have pursued different forms of closer publisher connectivity (although their technical and commercial models are not identical).
Directness can reduce unnecessary intermediation, but it can also concentrate power in a platform. That's why the real questions are about transparency, auction mechanics, costs and buyer control, rather than whether a connection is simply labelled “direct”. For background, read our articles on bid duplication and programmatic financial transparency.
4. If agencies reduce TTD spend, where could the budgets go?
Advertisers still need to buy programmatic media. If they decide to reduce their reliance on one DSP, another platform—or a mix of platforms—will have to take on the work.
| Possible alternative | Our strategic reading |
|---|---|
| Google DV360 | A major established option, although agencies may hesitate to increase their dependence on Google across Search, YouTube and display. |
| Xandr Invest | Not a straightforward replacement in the context of the product's shutdown discussed in the original post. |
| Criteo | An important AdTech player, but not necessarily the first general-purpose DSP that every agency buyer considers. |
| Other global DSPs | Potential beneficiaries if they can demonstrate scale, buying capabilities, service and commercial appeal. |
These are commercial possibilities, not a forecast of actual budget migration. Existing contracts, regional availability, inventory access and campaign objectives all matter.
5. Is there another global player waiting in the wings? 📦😉
Now, let's play detective. Is there a global company with major programmatic ambitions, significant resources behind its DSP and a particularly energetic approach to agency relationships?
We certainly have someone in mind. 📦😉
Our original post deliberately left the answer as a wink rather than a named allegation. The suggestion is a competitive hypothesis: a well-funded DSP challenger could gain attention when agencies reconsider their platform mix. It is not evidence that any competitor organised, influenced or benefited from the reported audits.
6. What should media traders learn from the controversy?
For buyers in the US, here in France or across EMEA, the more useful takeaway is to look past the headlines and ask practical questions: can you understand the full supply path, compare effective fees, verify inventory quality and retain meaningful control over your buying strategy?
DSP diversification can be sensible, but only when the alternative genuinely improves reach, outcomes, transparency or resilience. Switching platforms for the sake of switching can simply replace one dependency with another.
For more on these trade-offs, see what programmatic curation actually does and why the Transaction ID debate matters.
7. GreyFox Ads: Quality Open Web buying across DSPs
At GreyFox Ads, we believe the quality French Open Web can deliver real effectiveness for brands. Our Master Deals are designed to simplify activation while prioritising publisher-direct supply routes, fewer unnecessary resellers, brand safety, screen share, audience relevance and transparent costs.
Our approach is DSP-agnostic where integrations allow: media traders should be able to choose the buying technology that best suits their needs, rather than being forced into a single platform.
Looking for a quality programmatic advertising partner?
Let's talk about transparent, efficient display and video campaigns on the French Open Web.
Original LinkedIn post: US agencies vs The Trade Desk — GreyFox Ads commentary.