Apple’s privacy push puts programmatic value to the test

This article is not written or presented as legal advice or legal opinion. Readers should not act on or rely upon the opinions expressed in this article or any linked materials without seeking independent legal advice.

In summary

• Safari tracking restrictions are beginning to challenge some of the alternative identity solutions developed in response to third-party cookie restrictions.
• Recent testing in Safari allowed The Trade Desk to serve advertisements, while identity-related requests, including those associated with ID5, continued to be blocked.
• Google’s first-party relationships, integrated ad-serving and demand-side platform technologies, and global infrastructure create a different value proposition from those offered by independent identity providers and DSPs.
• While there is currently no quantifiable evidence that these restrictions have affected campaign performance, limitations on audience addressability could change the value proposition offered to advertisers by programmatic platforms and demand-side platforms.
• Advertisers must consider the total value their media technology investments deliver to their business, rather than focusing solely on the cost of media.

Apple’s focus is shifting beyond cookies

Apple’s latest Safari privacy restrictions are putting pressure on some of the alternative identity technologies developed as third-party cookies have become less reliable.

These technologies allow advertisers to recognise users across websites, but they operate in different ways. Some rely on authenticated, consented first-party data, while others use combinations of signals to identify users without a direct relationship between the consumer and the identity provider.

Apple appears to be tightening restrictions on the latter, particularly where technologies enable persistent identification across the open web.

Recent testing of Safari on iOS.27.2 beta 3 found that The Trade Desk’s ad-serving requests were functioning again, while certain identity-related requests associated with ID5 remained blocked.

Blocking an identity request does not necessarily prevent an advertisement from being delivered, although it could affect the ability to identify and target audiences.

Another development is that Apple’s tracking block lists appear to be less dependent on major operating system releases. This could allow restrictions to change more frequently, creating further uncertainty for identity providers and advertisers relying on their technologies.

Identity is becoming a more complicated investment

The ad industry continues to invest heavily in identity solutions to identify, reach and measure audiences as browser restrictions limit the use of third-party cookies.

Browser privacy protections are increasingly restricting tracking on the open web, so even the most advanced identity matching solutions have limited value if they cannot function consistently across different browsers.

There is a significant difference between identity solutions built on authenticated, consented first-party data and those attempting to maintain a persistent user ID without a direct relationship with the consumer.

Apple’s recent iOS updates suggest its restrictions may be increasingly focused on tracking technologies that operate without that direct consumer relationship.

An alternative identifier does not equal consistent audience addressability across all browsers. And just because you invest in identity solutions does not automatically guarantee better advertising results.

Why Google’s position may be different

Google is in a different position to many independent identity providers because of its extensive advertising infrastructure and direct first-party relationships with users of services such as Search and YouTube.
These relationships, combined with its ad serving, measurement and media buying technologies, give Google different ways to reach and measure audiences without relying entirely on cross-site identity solutions.

However, while Google appears to be less affected by the restrictions currently applying to identity solutions such as ID5, this remains an evolving area. Future Safari updates could also affect Google’s ability to identify and target users across the open web.

For advertisers, Google Marketing Platform offers integration between Display & Video 360, Campaign Manager 360 and other measurement solutions. Whether these deliver better results does depend on the advertiser’s goals, technology setup and campaign performance.

Transparency and consistency will be important, particularly as Apple balances its commitment to user privacy with its own commercial interests in advertising. Any perception that Apple is favouring its own technologies could also expose the company to greater regulatory scrutiny and potential legal challenges.

When cheaper media doesn’t necessarily mean better value

Media cost is only one factor when evaluating a DSP. Other important factors are the quality of the inventory that the DSP has access to, any technology fees, the level of audience addressability provided by the DSP, measurement capabilities and the DSP’s operational efficiency.

Additionally, as browser restrictions limit the availability of identity signals, some of the targeting and measurement capabilities offered by demand-side platforms may become less effective.

How important are all these independent DSPs like The Trade Desk vs integrated platforms like Google’s Display & Video 360?

When evaluating alternative demand-side platforms, media cost savings alone are not enough to justify a change in media strategy. Other features, including the quality of measurement and optimisation provided by a DSP as well as the associated technology costs of integrated platforms, must also be taken into consideration by the advertiser.

Integrated platforms will not necessarily deliver better results than standalone providers of DSPs. Lower CPMs do not necessarily equal better value. More important is the total return on media investment including the value of incremental conversions, quality of measurement, the technology costs and operational efficiencies.

Louder recommendations

Apple’s tightening of browser tracking restrictions raises new questions about the value advertisers receive from their programmatic technology investments.

• Identify the identity solutions your platforms are built with, how audiences are currently identified and where limitations by browser restrictions may exist.
• Go beyond CPM when evaluating your media investments to consider the incremental value of conversions, measurement quality, technology fees and operational efficiency.
• Re-evaluate your current technology stack and assess if your current media planning tools are meeting your business objectives. Could integration with additional solutions across the Google Marketing Platform such as DV360 and CM360 deliver additional value?
• Invest in first-party data collection and measurement. This could include the implementation of consent-aware data collection methods and server-side measurement solutions, which can aid in delivering higher quality data whilst complying with the restrictions on identity requests.
• Advertisers should assess whether browser restrictions are affecting campaign performance before making changes to their technology platforms or media investment.

Get in touch

Want to understand how evolving browser privacy restrictions could affect your programmatic advertising and measurement? Get in touch with the Louder team to discuss your current technology stack and opportunities to improve media effectiveness.

For more insights into the latest developments in marketing technology, sign up to our newsletter