IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/elcore/v18y2018i3d10.1007_s10660-017-9267-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Auctions for online ad space among advertisers sensitive to both views and clicks

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Maillé

    (IMT Atlantique)

  • Bruno Tuffin

    (Inria Rennes Bretagne Atlantique)

Abstract

Advertisement in dedicated webpage spaces or in search engines sponsored slots is usually sold using auctions, with a payment rule that is either per impression or per click. But advertisers can be both sensitive to being viewed (brand awareness effect) and being clicked (conversion into sales). In this paper, we generalize the auction mechanism by including both pricing components: the advertisers are charged when their ad is displayed, and pay an additional price if the ad is clicked. Applying the results for Vickrey–Clarke–Groves auctions, we show how to compute payments to ensure incentive compatibility from advertisers as well as maximize the total value extracted from the advertisement slot(s). We provide tight upper bounds for the loss of efficiency due to applying only pay-per-click (or pay-per-view) pricing instead of our scheme. Those bounds depend on the joint distribution of advertisement visibility and population likelihood to click on ads, and can help identify situations where our mechanism yields significant improvements. We also describe how the commonly used generalized second price auction can be extended to this context.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Maillé & Bruno Tuffin, 2018. "Auctions for online ad space among advertisers sensitive to both views and clicks," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 485-506, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:elcore:v:18:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s10660-017-9267-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10660-017-9267-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10660-017-9267-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10660-017-9267-6?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. Benjamin Edelman & Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2007. "Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 242-259, March.
    2. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    3. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    4. Maillé,Patrick & Tuffin,Bruno, 2014. "Telecommunication Network Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107032750, October.
    5. Milgrom, Paul, 1989. "Auctions and Bidding: A Primer," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 3-22, Summer.
    6. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    7. Dobzinski, Shahar & Lavi, Ron & Nisan, Noam, 2012. "Multi-unit auctions with budget limits," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 486-503.
    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. Satish Kumar & Weng Marc Lim & Nitesh Pandey & J. Christopher Westland, 2021. "20 years of Electronic Commerce Research," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-40, March.

    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. C.-Philipp Heller & Johannes Johnen & Sebastian Schmitz, 2019. "Congestion Pricing: A Mechanism Design Approach," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 53(1), pages 74-7-98.
    2. Kazumura, Tomoya & Mishra, Debasis & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2020. "Mechanism design without quasilinearity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(2), May.
    3. Hitoshi Matsushima, 2021. "Auctions with Ethical Concerns," CARF F-Series CARF-F-515, Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo.
    4. Malik, Komal & Mishra, Debasis, 2021. "Pareto efficient combinatorial auctions: Dichotomous preferences without quasilinearity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Michael Ostrovsky & Michael Schwarz, 2023. "Reserve Prices in Internet Advertising Auctions: A Field Experiment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(12), pages 3352-3376.
    6. Milgrom, Paul, 2010. "Simplified mechanisms with an application to sponsored-search auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 62-70, September.
    7. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2020. "Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2020-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    8. Jeong, Seungwon (Eugene) & Lee, Joosung, 2024. "The groupwise-pivotal referral auction: Core-selecting referral strategy-proof mechanism," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 191-203.
    9. Patrick Hummel, 2018. "Hybrid mechanisms for Vickrey–Clarke–Groves and generalized second-price bids," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 331-350, March.
    10. Rica Gonen & Anat Lerner, 2013. "The Incompatibility of Pareto Optimality and Dominant-Strategy Incentive Compatibility in Sufficiently-Anonymous Budget-Constrained Quasilinear Settings," Games, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-21, November.
    11. Seiji Takanashi & Takehiro Kawasaki & Taiki Todo & Makoto Yokoo, 2019. "Efficiency in Truthful Auctions via a Social Network," Papers 1904.12422, arXiv.org.
    12. Dirk Bergemann & Juuso Välimäki, 2007. "Dynamic Marginal Contribution Mechanism," Levine's Bibliography 843644000000000300, UCLA Department of Economics.
    13. Komal Malik & Debasis Mishra, 2018. "Pareto efficient combinatorial auctions: dichotomous preferences without quasilinearity," Discussion Papers 18-06, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    14. Yukun Cheng & Xiaotie Deng & Dominik Scheder, 2022. "Recent studies of agent incentives in internet resource allocation and pricing," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 314(1), pages 49-76, July.
    15. Kenneth C. Wilbur & Linli Xu & David Kempe, 2013. "Correcting Audience Externalities in Television Advertising," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 892-912, November.
    16. Devanur, Nikhil R. & Hartline, Jason D. & Yan, Qiqi, 2015. "Envy freedom and prior-free mechanism design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 103-143.
    17. Yi, Jianxin & Wang, Hefei & Li, Yong, 2018. "Designing efficient and incentive compatible mechanisms is almost impossible in quasi-linear environments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 113-117.
    18. Margarida V. B. Santos & Isabel Mota & Pedro Campos, 2023. "Analysis of online position auctions for search engine marketing," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(3), pages 409-425, September.
    19. Yan Chen & Peter Cramton & John A. List & Axel Ockenfels, 2021. "Market Design, Human Behavior, and Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5317-5348, September.
    20. Yan, Haomin, 2021. "Position auctions with multi-unit demands," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 179-193.

    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:elcore:v:18:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s10660-017-9267-6. 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.