I would agree with quite a bit of this. However I would disagree with your statement that it is a de factor admission of failure of monetizing all that data.

I would agree with quite a bit of this. However I would disagree with your statement that it is a de factor admission of failure of monetizing all that data. If anything, it is Facebook laying the foundations for a very powerful data asset once it gets the other pieces of the puzzle in place. Let's not forget that Google's own GDN was once the red headed step-child of the display space only a handful of years ago due to quality issues (and the Search Partner Network still suffers from quite a bit of this as covered in a recent article on Search Engine Land[1]). In any event, all of this data that they have, and that Google has, etc. are largely wasted because of both of their failures to leverage it to the fullest capacity and solve the issue of cross-channel attribution analysis and optimization. Perfect example...it is 2014--why the heck can't I get view-through revenue data in the AdWords UI when using the AdWords conversion tag and/or syncing with GA? You most certainly have the data. Why should that be limited to advertisers who pay for DFA to get the exposure-to-conversion reporting capabilities? More importantly, why has nobody tackled the truly large scale, cross-industry problem of true global frequency capping and tracking? I realize it is in part because there is little incentive to play nice with others, but that seems like a problem Google should try to solve as it would provide tremendous value in the form of a drastic reduction in wasted impressions (and thus higher-performance display campaigns). In the end, it is the users that suffer from being bombarded by ads from multiple networks/DSPs/etc. because of the few options to limit exposure across initiatives without setting up complex audience segmentation and negative lists. Getting all of this data under one roof/GUID is only useful if there are tools to optimize against it at that scale and level of complexity. That means making data-driven attribution a priority and proving the incremental value of impressions and view-throughs. Letting advertisers view their data through multiple attribution lenses or define their own is still falling short because attribution should not be based on static values. This is a problem that Google has the chops to solve, and that the average advertiser lacks the resources, expertise, and technology for. I've been pretty disappointed in your solution thus far. This is data you should expose to the masses in an actionable manner that would dramatically help them sell Google display solutions. Admittedly I haven't had a chance to try GA Premium's data-driven attribution features, and I'm dying to know how Adometry will be incorporated into your products, but it can't come soon enough. As it stands right now though, I still can't easily show with data that view-throughs are worth a damn--even if I did have said revenue data. Oh, and don't get me started on video display units...why has AdWords for Video still not been fully merged with the main AdWords platform? It is ridiculous that I need to use a separate platform and split my budgets/data/reporting if I want to run Trueview ads for a retargeting campaign. Anyway, thanks for bearing the brunt of my unloading on Google's display efforts. I've been particularly frustrated with them as of late, and now that I'm client-side without the massive collective budgets I sat on top of as a senior-level individual at a top agency partner, I don't get as many opportunities to share my candid thoughts to Googlers about how to improve things. I actually live/work in Mountain View though if you or any display Googlers want to grab a drink and discuss further. [1] http://searchengineland.com/will-ask-com-google-arbitrage-ever-stop-203565 http://searchengineland.com/will-ask-com-google-arbitrage-ev...