The Good, the Bad, and the SPO-ly

The Hidden Flaws Behind Ad Tech’s Favorite Buzzword.

Supply Path Optimization (SPO) is my love-hate relationship in ad tech personified. It’s the reason I fell for this industry’s maddening brilliance—and why it sometimes feels like a bad rom-com where no one learns their lesson. At its core, SPO promises efficiency, transparency, and accountability, and when it works, it’s like watching a Rube Goldberg machine perform flawlessly. But when it doesn’t—and let’s be honest, that’s most of the time—it’s just a convoluted mess of hidden fees, questionable inventory, and a lot of people pretending they understand it.

I love SPO for the same reasons I can’t quit ad tech: it’s complex, innovative, and occasionally delivers moments of pure genius. But I also hate it for the same reasons I roll my eyes at this industry daily: it overpromises, underdelivers, and leaves everyone arguing over who’s to blame. SPO, like ad tech, is the classic “we have to laugh, or we’ll cry” situation.

So, here’s the deal: let’s make it work. Let’s turn SPO into the streamlined, transparent game-changer it’s supposed to be, rather than another overhyped buzzword clogging up conference panels. It’s messy, it’s flawed, and it drives me up the wall—but I’m not giving up on it. 

After all, isn’t that what ad tech is all about? Chaos, creativity, and figuring it out just before the deadline.

 Let’s dig into the dirt and clean this thing up.

1. Opaque Cost Structures: The Hidden Toll Booths of Adland

Imagine walking through a shopping mall where every store has a hidden toll booth outside, charging you random amounts just to enter. That’s the SPO cost structure in a nutshell. While SPO is sold as the knight in shining armor, slashing the infamous "ad tech tax," it often just reconfigures the same tolls into more creatively hidden fees. SSPs and DSPs whisper sweet nothings about efficiency while quietly siphoning off dollars that should be spent on actual ads.

Advertisers think they’re saving a bundle, but the reality is closer to playing a rigged game of three-card monte. Without full transparency, it’s impossible to know where your dollars are going—and whether the supposed "premium" inventory is worth the markup. Meanwhile, publishers are stuck wondering if they’ll ever see a fair share of the pie, or if the ad tech middlemen are eating all the good slices.

Solution: Demand radical transparency. Push for open ledgers that detail every cost in the supply chain, from SSP fees to DSP charges. And yes, this will ruffle feathers—ad tech loves its opacity more than a magician loves a locked box. But if buyers and publishers unite, they can flip the table on this bad hand and start insisting on truth in pricing.

2. Buyer-Driven Bias: The Big Kids Hogging the Sandbox

SPO was supposed to democratize ad spend, but instead, it’s turned into a gated community for the biggest players. Buyers cozy up to a handful of SSPs and call it "optimization," but what they’re really doing is giving the finger to independent publishers. Small, niche sites—the ones with highly engaged audiences—get shoved out of the game like they forgot the secret handshake.

This favoritism is a one-way ticket to a bland, homogenized internet where every ad appears on the same five sites. Diversity? Gone. Innovation? Crushed under the weight of predictable media buys. By prioritizing buyer demands over publisher needs, SPO is essentially a bad Tinder match that ghosted the indie publishers after a single swipe.

Solution: Start rewarding diversity in the supply chain. Mandate that SPO algorithms include quotas for independent publishers or niche inventory. Yes, it’s a bit like affirmative action for ad tech, but without it, the ecosystem risks becoming a monoculture of mediocrity. Remember, buyers: today’s small publishers could be tomorrow’s game-changers—if you don’t starve them out first.

3. Limited Transparency in Inventory Quality: Junk In, Junk Out

SPO tools love to brag about their ability to prioritize "premium inventory," but let’s be honest—it’s often more about serving the cheapest inventory that barely meets the definition of "not garbage." Think of it like grocery shopping blindfolded: sure, you’ll get a cart full of stuff, but half of it will be expired, and some might just be rocks labeled as apples.

Advertisers are lured into believing their ads are running in the digital equivalent of a Michelin-star restaurant, only to find out later they’ve been slumming it in a greasy spoon. Worse, fraudsters have gotten savvier, sneaking their trash inventory into these "optimized" paths like a smuggler at customs. The result? Brand safety nightmares and plummeting ROI.

Solution: Build better inventory vetting systems. This means forcing SSPs and DSPs to disclose real-time inventory quality metrics, verified by independent auditors. If an SSP can’t prove its inventory is squeaky clean, kick them out of the rotation. Advertisers should also use AI tools to sniff out fraud before it eats half the budget like a digital termite.

4. Inflexible Optimization Rules: Frozen in Time

SPO frameworks are like that friend who only listens to 90s music—they’re stuck in the past, even as the world moves on. Programmatic CTV? Retail media networks? Dynamic audience shifts? SPO tools are often too rigid to keep up, which means advertisers are missing out on the cutting edge while their "optimized" supply chain plays catch-up.

The problem is that SPO systems rely on rules set by humans—rules that are often based on data from yesterday, not the emerging trends of tomorrow. This rigidity locks buyers into inefficiencies that make them slower than a grandma using a rotary phone in the age of smartphones.

Solution: Time to introduce machine learning and adaptive SPO algorithms. These systems need to evolve in real time, learning from live market trends and adjusting supply paths accordingly. The days of static rules are over—if your SPO system can’t pivot faster than a TikTok trend, you’re doomed to irrelevance.

5. Fragmented Identity and Measurement: The Missing Puzzle Piece

Identity in ad tech is the ultimate whodunit mystery: who’s watching this ad, and how do I know it’s working? Without consistent identity resolution, SPO becomes a game of darts in the dark. Fragmented data makes it nearly impossible to target or measure effectively, leaving advertisers throwing money into a black hole and hoping for the best.

This isn’t just a mild inconvenience—it’s a full-blown existential crisis for SPO. If you can’t connect the dots across channels, you’re not optimizing anything; you’re just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. And don’t even get us started on attribution—trying to assign credit in this mess is like asking a group of toddlers to agree on who gets the last cookie.

Solution: Invest in unified ID solutions that work across all channels. Industry players need to stop hoarding their proprietary identity tools and start collaborating. If everyone’s using a different set of IDs, we’ll never get a clear picture of what’s working. It’s time to put aside petty rivalries and build a unified framework—or risk watching the whole house of cards collapse. And let's be honest, only the Trade Desk's Unified ID Solution 2.0 is the only one that actually works.

SPO needs a radical rethink. Without transparency, flexibility, and collaboration, it’s just another buzzword propping up an inefficient, fragmented system. The ad tech industry loves its jargon, but it’s time to back it up with real change—or watch advertisers and publishers find alternatives that cut out the middlemen entirely.

CHAT ABOUT THIS ON LINKEDIN