The AppLovin Unity lawsuit, Tencent announces AdSurge, CloudX releases Orchestrator.

Greetings, and welcome to mobile signal. I'm Josh Chandley, and joining me today is not Warren Woodward, who's out. But we do have-- Vincent, from 5020 to 10, I'm happy to be here. Good to see you, Josh. Three stories for you today. Apple and the Unity go to courts. Tencent launches ad search, a new in-app ad network. And finally, CloudX launches orchestrator, a solution for managing multiple ad mediation solutions. We'll explain what that is and what the impact is as well. But before we talk about the lawsuit, Unity was just from the pub last week with Felix Day, the chief AI officer. How was that, Vincent? I really enjoyed the pod. We don't really hear often someone who is operational or just from the grow/advertising business unit or involved in this business unit talking publicly and sharing what's going on under the hood. How do they see their progress, obviously, on Vector? So just for that, it was great to understand, OK, what is the vision and how do they understand the trajectory right now of Vector? So yeah, I felt overall was a really good one. I thought Felix was very open for a C-suite exec at a publicly traded company. Yes. And the stakes are very high, obviously. It's stuck listed, as you say. But yeah, a lot at stake. My sense being in the room when it was happening, he felt very-- well, he's super talented. But justifiably, he comes across as very confident right now. But I mean, 18 months since launch and the execution has been really consistent, which is exactly what we were criticising previous versions of Unity for. But I do believe day 28 campaigns will commoditise soon as more networks launch that type. And I don't think runtime has been proven yet. So I think what I'm watching for is, from a unity perspective, is can Felix and Co continue that drumbeat of consistent gains? Can they execute against a runtime opportunity faster than day 28 commoditises? Because that's the thought race there, isn't it? Yeah, and I believe you asked the question of, OK, what happens, and do you still have an age once everybody's on the 28, right? And the answer was very interesting also, because when you think about it some-- not too long ago, everybody was D7, and so everybody was competing with the same kind of weapons or algorithm. So soon is going to be the same playing field. And so how do you differentiate, right? And obviously runtime fee is obviously a key-- from the outside, a key unique data set, right? And obviously you did a good job trying to understand where his perspective on how valuable is the runtime data. And I thought the Felix stake was very interesting. And obviously I encourage everybody to listen to the whole thing. But my understanding is the sequencing and the timestamp of all the even. And essentially having a source of truth, right? Something very solid in terms of the event. And yeah, sure. You ask any head of data, having a very clean database that is normalized is the first thing you need. So then the question is, OK, well, if you don't have this runtime fee, is your data kind of messy in that regard or not? And is it really the way to tackle that? And a unique way to tackle that and make sense of your whole data lake as, you know, if you're a network? That's obviously a question mark. To me, which I'm not technical or an engineer. But yeah, the uniqueness and is it an age to have access to this data is still a question mark, I believe? I think you're right. I think that my personal opinion is that it is some level of an edge. I don't think it's notable quite yet how big of an edge it is, or isn't. But I do think it's real. I think my question in my head-- thinking about the runtime, I wonder if the unity engine, the revenue growth that it causes for that company, if it's going to be expressed more in the create side, or if it's going to be expressed more in causing the ad network to grow? I think this question is kind of a key thing for that. Because to your point, it almost-- developers almost want this to work, because that means it can keep the engine cheap. Yes. And again, if the network is healthy, the prices on the engine will not go as up otherwise. So I think as a publisher, this is one partner with two different products. You actually want the engine to have a healthy business, which again was not really the case for ages. So whether the runtime fee will help one more than the other, I'm not sure, I don't know. And again, this is the central question of how valuable it can be for the ad network. But either way, as a client, I personally need each business unit to be solid and financially valuable. You don't want something unbalanced. Otherwise, you're going to pay the price on the other side, I think. I think that's fair. Either way, I think it was a good podcast. It was a lot of fun to do. And I came away feeling pretty good about it. Yeah. Just one thing is, I think you expose yourself with a prediction of three networks, whatever the time line is going to launch D28. And I think the Felix interview gives you some perspective on if you're going to be correct or not. Because his explanation on why so late, why it took so long, where I believe it was, I don't know, two years ago, was very interesting. And again, I've seen that in my past experiences of disrupting yourself and essentially cutting an arm to just continue to grow stronger, which essentially is what you have to do. You have a D7. It's kind of growing where you know it's not the best and you're late in the market for the next evolution. You need to give air or oxygen. I think it was your expression there with Felix to your other product. And for that, you need to kind of hurt, to some extent, your current main revenue driver. This is very, very tough to do. It's called a sacrifice. And so how quickly you do that, how intense you go, and what is the urgency, is the question everybody is asking themselves right now, who are still on D7. And you need to went through that and is actually seeing the end of the tunnel, the out of the tunnel I believe now on D28. Yeah, yeah, I think you need to have that tunnel, but I really do think it's been two years since I've loved and launched D28. And it was so obvious how much of an improvement that made when we ran those campaigns. And as a publisher, I was asking every ad network for day 28. And I have been for two years. So it's hard for me to feel like ad networks are just like, if you're a liftoff, if you're a meloco, if you're a mincer girl, if you're Google or even meta, it's hard for me to think that you've waited until Q2 seeing Unity's results to start doing D28. I think this has been thought about for years, or at least that's my gut, because we've been asking for it. I agree. And then my simple answer will be the difference between having a great ID and then the execution of it. And we are in a business of execution, right? Can you do it quickly? Which is tough. Yeah, that's true. That's true. And so I think D28, we've now seen two businesses show big growth after launching day 28. But Apploven alleges that Unity's growth partially came from unfair data practices. And in fact, now Apploven has sued Unity over ad quality. And that's our next story. For background, Unity markets their ad quality SDK as a free tool that helps publishers catch bad ads. Apploven is alleging that it also collects creatives, user data, and revenue data from ads at Apploven wins. And that data could be helping train vector Unity's ad network. Unity's stance, I believe, is that publishers have authorized the collection and that ad quality isn't even what's driving its performance in the first place. Two months ago in August, Apploven asked Unity to stop. Unity offered to switch ad quality off for Macs if Apploven considered the matter resolved and Apploven declined. It wanted the data already collected to be deleted, including from any models trained on it. So it asked the judge to make Unity stop collecting this data. The judge said, no, that isn't ruling on who is or isn't right. It just means it requires arbitration. And so that's the real fight. And so first question, Vincent, who cares? Why is this data worth fighting over? Yeah, it's obviously a super interesting discussion on data ownership and is it used left or right? And obviously, as a publisher, an app is generating tons of data. If you think about it, the analytics, the attribution, the obviously the impression serve. So which one of them is actually valuable and who owns it? My own experience or understanding is, obviously, this ad quality tool was part of the level play. And a year ago, Unity decided to open it up to non-level play clients. So even if you're on max, you can access the ad quality tool, which is actually regarded as a pretty good ad quality tool. And it is an opt-in option, right? You don't have-- it's not-- done behind the back of publisher, right? So it was announced, and as a publisher, you could ask for it, obtain for it, and then integrate the SDK or update to the latest R&Source level play SDK. And then you have access to the dashboard, which is populated with what's going on in your ad quality. And the ad qualities obviously adserved, and they are served from your mediation, and in that example, it's max. From that perspective, I think it was super relevant and super interesting. I personally was happy to improve my ad quality and my blockless strategy with the additional and the quality of this tool. And so you know your share, your data, you know, your user activity data with Unity, because they needed to display this great ad quality tool, and it's for free. So everything that is free, is usually about your attention or your data, and then you have a service for free. There are some paid ad quality tools in the market, it's pretty expensive. So the decision is made fairly quickly. You know, shall I save a couple of hundreds or dozens of k of dollars on the tool by just sharing some of my data, right? And when I say that, well, yeah, it's my app, and it's my users, so I'm going to share this data. So for me it's very simple. I actually didn't see that coming, right? So why is it becoming a big deal? Well, I guess it's a good signal that, you know, vector is a threat, and people are wondering how this performance is coming from. Where is it coming from? And again, you just interviewed, you know, Felix the, and he shared some answers, and then the big question is the right time fee. You know, interesting discussion, who owns this data? I guess it's a legal question. At the end of the day, I think, and again, we need to check the distances of every company's, but this is publisher's user activity data. And then, you know, it's a fight between two ad tech or networked players in a, in obviously a very big moment of, you mentioned, D28, you mentioned networks trying to catch up with the leader. So of course, it's a very intense competition right there that we are witnessing. Yeah, it's a unique moment. And you're right. We're not going to settle whose data this is. The arbitrator will. I think the simple truth is that, you know, the core job of an ad network is to value an impression. And so how do you know if person A, on device B, how much is his impression worth? Well, knowing how much the last one sold for, it's probably a very useful indicator. And I think that this is just information that everybody, you know, wants to have. And so let's take Apple of inside seriously. It alleges, you know, Unity's code is like, literally, hooking into the Apple of an SDK and pulling that impression level revenue, which is not clear that it's related to catching bad ads. You know, if that's true, Vincent is a publisher consenting enough? Well, it depends, I guess, again, it depends on, you know, a publisher contract and agency with its own mediation. You know, can you make use? Can you share this data with a third party? Yes or no, right? Is it useful? Again, what is the purpose of an ad quality tool, right? You want to do a good job and it's very, very difficult, right, which add to block. And obviously to do that, yeah, you need to do some arbitrage on obviously the revenue you're getting from those ads and the churn they are causing. So the revenue of a creative is relevant to make this decision as a publisher, right? Do they collect it for that purpose and for displaying a level play ad quality tool? Yes, that's just a fact. Is Unity using that for something else? They're not supposed to. And then again, it's a legal and a teasing season and an opt-in, you know, fine line conversation. But again, the purpose of this data is to provide a service which is an ad quality tool. Yeah, ad tech, yeah, it can be a dirty business. So I don't concern myself too much with what's fair as much as what's legal. But even when you look at directly what's legal, it is confusing and there's very fine lines. So for instance, my interpretation is that Unity cannot be hooking into the MaxS SDK and gathering impression level revenue data to train Vector. But it can have the publisher send that user level impression data to an MMP and then forward that from the MMP to Vector for training. And that makes it somehow different. Because what we're also only talking about here is that's like the foundation of ad row ask campaigns. If you don't allow that, all of Apploven's publishers will go out of business. And so these are very fine lines. These are very fine lines. But I believe there is a nuance. What you describe with the MMP flow, it's for only your sharing impression level revenue data with users coming from that ad network. If you choose to, not all MMPs even allow you to make that distinction. Right, I don't-- does it just allow that distinction? I don't know. I need to double check. But again, a network need to know the revenue of the users they send to you to optimize their ad row ask campaign. They don't need to know the revenue of each user, even the organic tech organic. To optimize your model for ad row ask optimization, D28, you need to know the quality of the users you're sending to your clients. And so that the MMP flow, at least on paper or should be, whereas getting access to 100% of all users' revenue is a different thing. And again, until now, indeed, it was only the mediation accessing this level of depth of data, which is obviously super valuable, right? But again, you're right, you're right. To measure, you need, at the very least, installs that you cause to have those postbacks, which is accessing this data, albeit the pipeline, instead of going from device to vector server, it goes from device to MMP to vector server. All right, all right. So that would still be that same kind of data. It's just from a user installed because of a Unity ad. Additionally, though, of course, networks want more than that. They want all postbacks, right? They want every network's postbacks. AppsFlyer does provide that option to send all postbacks. Does that mean AppsFlyer is violating these terms, too? It's unclear. It's not just subtle nuance, as I think it's murky to me, right? I see you upon-- but again, it's a different path. It's a different data flow. But yeah, if you restrict that from this data flow, we're discussing with the level paired quality tool. The next step could be to forbid that through different and various other paths, right? Yeah, I think the key question here. What is publisher data? And what is apploven data? I don't really have any intention of taking sides between apploven and Unity. I work closely with both of them. And I don't like things getting this messy. But for publishers out there, I don't think they love being put in a position where it's unclear whether or not they're violating their mediation agreements. 100% agree with you. So the industry needs to clarify that or to avoid to put publisher in this situation. Yes, we need clarity. I agree. All right, so now it's a Unity side. They're saying that ad quality is off on max until a publisher turns it on. And they've also pointed out that apploven zone ad review tool, or at least max, collects even more. You mentioned at the start, the Unity made this change a year ago, and it's just recently that apploven is, as far as we're aware, is bringing this to a head. If both companies are doing this, is this fight about fair practices or is it about reducing competition? Yeah, that is a good question. But again, in the center of it is the mediation. And I believe we're going to touch on the mediation topic a little bit further in the pod. But yeah, if you share this data with the mediation in theory as a publisher, yeah, you can share it with whoever you want. If it's your own data. But again, is the mediation a SaaS business where as a SaaS company normally, as a client, this is your data that is hosted in a third-party tool called a SaaS tool. Mediation really sits in the middle for ages in our business. And then again, to your point, who owns this data is still kind of a question mark. I guess we need a lawyer in the room of Claude to check the tendencies of the fact of the contractual matter. Yeah, I don't know if I trust Claude on this one, though. This one's crazy. So my first option was a lawyer, a human being. OK, OK, fair enough. So let's just-- I want to simplify and strip down this question. It's like, take the names out. An auction with many participants runs inside a game. The question is who? It literally has a right to the data that that auction generates and things that happen down stream of the auction like an ad showing, you know, is it the company that ran the auction? Is it the company that owns the game and it owns the inventory and is showing the ad impression? Is it the ad network that won the auction? Is it all three? Is it some of them that where do you land on this? Again, philosophically speaking, me personally, I think it's progressious data. Again, then it depends on the teasing season of the mediation you use. It might be different depending on the contract you sign. We build games, we offer a great user experience and they are monetized, right? So think about it. You have a grocery shop, you use whatever tile payment processing, the information of how much you charge this client and client A, B, C, D, your tomato. You define the price, right? You are the vendor, you are the grocery shop. Again, take this very simple analogy, the price of the product you sell is your decision. And I guess it's your property. But then if you use tool A, B, C, D, you might have obviously different rules applying, which is what we're discussing right now. Now, I think the conclusion is unavoidable. We can't settle whose data this is or even have a strong opinion. The arbitrator will decide that and we probably won't see it. But at least one publisher has decided not to wait for an answer. Tencent has built its own ad network. They've launched ad search. You and I, Vincent with war and our fallen comrades, we asked whether game publishers can build real ad networks. Now on October 14th, MiniClip owned by Tencent, it launched one. It's called ad search. It's a standalone company. It does both UA and admon, so it's sitting on the band in the supply. And they're saying it's aimed at ad monetized games first. So Vincent, if MiniClip calls you tomorrow or ad search calls you tomorrow and asks you to integrate the SDK, what do they have to show you before they're saying yes? Well, as always, it's very simple to add any new demand partner. Do you have a CIA relationship with my mediation? Is it like on the shelf, is it to integrate and maintain essentially a certified adapter? Some publishers refuse to work with custom adapters, I want to say most of them or majority of the market, I believe. And I don't know, I don't have the information. If ad search right now is certified in mediation, A, B, C, D, that would be some kind of a technical requirement. Second is obviously a commercial discussion. As you know, integration and SDK is some kind of workload. It adds code and weight to your build. So you need to be sensitive about how many partners you work with. So then you can ask, okay, what is the bonus incentive to try your network? I give you access to my inventory, because the question is always easy, am I going to get some more revenue or is just cannibalization between my existing network footprint? And so to alleviate that, a bonus incentive is always the answer, right? So I guess for me, there would be the two things. And then obviously I have all the things, but those two things are usually the first question I ask. What about you? So you're saying how easy it is to integrate and how much you pay me to do it? Yes, I think that's a very good answer. I do think you got to believe that this is a long-term network play. Not just tens and chasing a shiny object and building something because Aflovin is doing such a good job right now. I think the key thing, when I think about these new smaller ad networks that are emerging, that max certification, the certified adapter is going to be a blocker for many networks. And just to explain why, max has two paths. Networks can integrate as a custom network, which anyone can do this. But it's a lower quality integration. For instance, you can only do an old school waterfall style bidding, where maybe you provide fill at 10, 30, and $50 CPMs. You can also become a certified bidding network, which I'm guessing is much harder to do. However, if you are certified, you can bid at the impression level. So you can bid $28.14, you can bid $512, you can bid $5. At the impression level, and perform much better in the auction, and to your point, Vincense. If the goal is to create new revenue, if you can have that specific of a dial on what your bids are, it's much easier to create that revenue uplift. And so the certification is very important in my mind. That's one of the biggest things. And it's not been publicly disclosed. I don't think an ad search has that certification yet. What I do assume, though, is that the primary demand source right now is mini-clips-owned UA budget. Would you invest UA dollars into ad search? And what has to be true? Yeah. So similarly, to test a new network, I think it's very simple for any UA manager or director. You need to track. So you need an MMP integration. Otherwise, you're just spending blindly. Ideally, the network has a robust optimized product. You know, we mentioned the 28 vector. But otherwise, you fall back to CPI, CPE, which is, of course, not going to deliver any near the performance you used to as a UA person with other networks, right? So you don't have time to lose and money to lose, actually. So the network has to build an ROAS or ad ROAS. And I'm sure that's what they are releasing. I will assume. I didn't check. So you need the ROAS product. And then, of course, you need some perks or nice to have, which is all the reporting API to keep your finance team happy. And the front end, so your UA manager can actually manage the company themselves. Again, this is more nice to have. The MMP integration and the ROAS product for me are just mandatory. Yeah, I think you're right. My natural assumption as well, though, is that the scale is very likely to be quite low to begin with, right? And if you already are a massive publisher, that might be okay. Otherwise, the network needs to be a very good fit. What ad surge seems to be saying is that they're very focused on ad monetized games to begin with. And that's probably a really good call, because I feel like on SDK networks, like Appla, then Unity, Minter Rule, and such, ad monetized games usually do really well. And so that's a good start. But maybe if you're a hybrid title, it's a little bit less attractive. Now, on the other hand, many clip has a lot of ad monetized games. And it competes with the studios it wants as publishers. They're saying that the data stays isolated in a separate company, but would you trust them with your data? Yeah, so I mean, again, first, if you think about the inception of such project, and I believe it was in the announcement, but it always start with course promotion, right? So they agree that you're going to build. It's going to be tailored for what you do. So if you're an IA publisher pretty minimally, you are good at that you're going to start and kick off with course promotion, it's going to be trained on IA. So for me, it makes all the sense in the world that if it's more of an IA publisher and inventory pool, that the product is going to be for IA competencies or other publishers. Should I be concerned personally, I will absolutely trust my block list, right? And I will trust the network, so I'd search to apply the block list as well. So in Max, if it's certified in Max, my block list that I'm going to put, you know, obviously in Max for a plugin, but for in other networks, it's going to be respected, right? So if I'm competing, for instance, let's pick Easy Brain, which is part of Tencent, I can still technically block all the Easy Brain advertisers and apps and campaigns from my app, but I'm happy to have a cyber games dollars or mini-clip dollars. So exactly. Hopefully, yes, so hopefully your block list system, the whole chain is working and you trust it. And then it's fine. It's absolutely fine to work with them, either on supply or on demand side. So that would be my assumption and how I see that. Last question, who's next to launch? We talked about voodoo being harder work on the last podcast, but this week, Zingha just soft-announced Zade linked in via job postings. It's unclear what that product is exactly, but it sounds an awful lot like an in-app ad network. So who's next? Yeah, I didn't really follow closely this announcement, but yeah, who's next is obviously a big question. I think last time we tried to guess, and honestly, it's very, very difficult. We mentioned voodoo, we mentioned a couple of others who are already out of the woods. Who's next, honestly, I'm having a hard time to predict. Do you have any ideas or any guess on your end? I have a feeling that just because we're starting to see more and more information trickle out that voodoo and Zingha must be getting pretty close, but for anybody else, I have no idea. Yeah, and I make sense again if you're working on such project is top secret for a long time again Those companies we just mentioned it's been two or three years It was cross promotion first and then step by step you understand if you have what it takes and the results To potentially start, you know talking to the industry and do some alpha and beta and then announce it So by definition, it's normal that it's very very difficult to Guest or to predict who's going to go out of the wood Okay, now let's move on to our last topic cloud x launch orchestrator a multi-mediation offering As of today, it supports one mediation partner on one OS app leavens max only on androids This is a complicated issue. So Vincent What is multi-mediation? And why should publishers care about that concept? Yeah, good question And for me, this is kind of a pandora box or it's a rabbit hole or you call it whatever you like But it's a very interesting Release coming from the cloud x camp at the concept is simple, you know Mediation hopefully everybody listening knows what a mediation is you plug all your networks you want to work with So they can compete each other and now with bidding, you know, you know You have some yield happening and you can squeeze the highest price And multi-mediation is obviously very quickly the publishers say well What if I do the same concept with mediation abcd because for some time, you know We had I don't know four five six different mediation in the marketplace now. They are actually less and less of Mediation, but it's still relevant to Think about it. Hey, I'm gonna put mediation abcd in competition and so on paper I'm gonna get a higher Yield and a higher cpm, and I'm gonna increase my revenue. Why choose? Why being exclusive? It is what multi-mediation is so it's very interesting there they Until now you could build that yourself to some extent, but It's a lot of resources engineering and you can't to indeed Have some app releases so it takes a lot of time to just have your setup out You want to change it need to change the code release it. So very slow very high demanding in-term of resources It's actually worth noting if I may that My understanding is cloudics is not necessarily the first to market. They are some other, you know Less known or but very interesting companies offering some kind of On the shelf tool to help a publisher do a bit testing between mediation or do interesting things But yeah cloud it is coming to the market with a very interesting proposition, which seems Very quick to implement with some kind of cutting-edge differentiators What are the other options available right now? Other than cloud X so to my knowledge you have Lumit who can facilitate a mediation test or Just a setup of having different mediation or one Mediation on one format only and another mediation on another or per country and Also Orion 11 out of a Savinia, so that at least those two companies who are, you know tech companies. They are not publishers it's pure tech and you already can do that with them and again The devil is in the details cloud X is offering a couple of different new things Enough is obviously it's based on their te 2.0 so the this concept of transparency between the mediation's so that's I believe new it is I think there's essentially two ways The meta-mediation can work I guess three three is it first is you don't do it and so you have one mediator doing one auction second You can do what you usually referred to as a parallel auction So let's say you have a mediation a mediation b and you get prices from both and you can pick which one you want to have Then finally there is something that's a little bit more I would say suspects, but that is sequential mediation either with first look or last look Or you can call it pre-bid or post-bid where mediator one runs the auction and gets a price and then the second mediator takes that as the floor and sees if they can beat that is that a good summary of what's available correct. Yes That is usually what publisher Where tempted to do and as you say? It's you know and again you need all this conversation you need to check the teasing of your mediation if it's Allowed in your contract to do those kind of setups. But yeah, so far it was kind of the two options and obviously you have a Concept of asymmetric information and is it a fair auction or not because as a publisher you don't necessarily orchestrate And I think the name is actually pretty nailed down as a publisher you don't really Control the auction when you do sequential and one mediation knows the result of the other or the price of the other and The opposite is not true. I believe what Claudix is offering is essentially the tool for a publisher to do parallel Or more complex setup where no mediation has the information of the other why so you have a layer of Neutrality of transparency that as a publisher you actually control It's my understanding Yeah, and this is this is waiting into murky waters and the reason I'm digging into this technical aspect It is because this is really at least in the west only coming to the forefront as a real opportunity now and It's exposing you know how hard some of these decisions are there's Not good precedent for this on on mobile in app bidding But when you look at addicts changes on the web like Google addicts They went through pretty heavy anti-trust And Google got hit pretty hard one of the things that got hit hard for was last look You know having everybody else run an auction and then you look at that auction outcome and how do you want to beat it? You know there is this rhymes that a lot of what's happening and so Again, I think it's super important to understand what your contracts are What everyone's comfortable with and that means I still don't think this is for the faint of heart And so my real take on this is I think that this is a Starting to get a glimpse of what the future could be But I don't think this is for every every studio. Yeah, this is still a complex very sophisticated thing And just because there are problems coming out to start to make it more easy for you you know relatively more easy When the starting difficulty was absolutely prohibitive doesn't necessarily mean that we should all hop on this tomorrow So I don't really understand if this is something we should move forward with or not Okay, I don't know where this is at yet fair point But again, it's just lowering the the cost of the technical bar for any publisher to try those things And again, it depends on the mediation you work with right Rina is only a plugin supporting this which is great Which is the biggest mediation right? So at least is that but then yeah if you work with I don't know Google and level play Or you want to compare or have them compete once they're going to be supported that could be super interesting Remember that with some mediation you have obviously a nuance on the access to a UA products right whether you are exclusive or not So obviously comes into play when you make those kind of decisions Interestingly, you know in the in the press release or the blog post is actually a setting point saying that it's not gonna Make you any trouble on your UA So I guess he's obviously the impression level revenue data sent to your MMP is going to be complete because that's always the thing and we touched on that earlier if you spread your user journey monetization On several mediation Adjust and upstream your networks. They need the address right so they sort about it and it's part of the product to Essentially make sure the data stream is all right for your UA to still function Which is absolutely key. Yeah, and it and it it also makes me feel as though apploven is adopted a constructive approach here Because this is the at-quality question again to pick a winner orchestrator has to see what max pays Apploven is an arbitration now over that exact issue with unity and so seeing such a constructive relationship with cloud x is definitely interesting Yeah, I believe the answer is cloud x is billed on the transparency Framework right where it's encrypted and anybody can potentially audit on particularly the publisher What's what's happening in the auction? So so I think and again, that's cloud x usb that this use case is covered of The hey cloud x could leverage this information for their own business I think the TE 2.0 is the answer to this Assumption I think you're right and TE 2.0 for the for the audience is a Cryptographically proven way of running these mediation auctions in parallel or sequentially, however you like, and so one mediator cannot see the outcome of another mediator, unless the publisher selects that. Which again, previous solutions we're not offering. What does this tell you about CloudX? Because from my point of view now, it's still early with them on the demand side, but now it seems like supply is really getting mature. It's a mediation platform. They have an exchange. They have a multi-mediation, and now they have an orchestrator a way to actually handle that multi-mediation. Yes. Again, you can see that in different ways. Either the assumption is, hey, the CloudX platform is struggling to scale, and so that's a way to add inventory to fuel the UA. That could be an assumption, but my take is more that it's been in there, I believe, in their pitch since they want to not be a mediation and be bigger than that, and provide monetization suite above the mediation. I believe orchestrator is actually a pretty nice way to now materialize this initial positioning. I think Jim has a vision, and we're seeing it unfold slowly over time. That's a way to put it. Yes. All right. Well, that wraps it up for this week. Next week, we'll be talking about meta and Google earnings. Subscribe if you want to see that first. [Music] you you you you