Viant Technology Inc (DSP) 2025 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Hello, everyone, and welcome to Viant Technology's first-quarter 2025 earnings conference call. My name is Emmanuel, and I will be your operator today. Before I hand the call over to the Viant leadership team, I'd like to go over a few housekeeping notes for the program.

大家好，歡迎參加 Viant Technology 2025 年第一季財報電話會議。我叫 Emmanuel，今天我將擔任您的接線生。在我將電話轉交給 Viant 領導團隊之前，我想先了解該計劃的一些內部事項。

As a reminder, this call is being recorded. (Operator Instructions)

提醒一下，本次通話正在錄音。（操作員指示）

I will now turn the call over to Nick Zangler, VP of Investor Relations for Viant.

現在我將把電話轉給 Viant 投資人關係副總裁 Nick Zangler。

Thank you, Emmanuel. Good morning, and welcome to Viant Technology's first-quarter 2025 earnings conference call. On the call today are Tim Vanderhook, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer; Chris Vanderhook, Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer; and Larry Madden, Chief Financial Officer.

謝謝你，伊曼紐。早安，歡迎參加 Viant Technology 2025 年第一季財報電話會議。今天參加電話會議的有共同創辦人兼執行長 Tim Vanderhook； Chris Vanderhook，共同創辦人兼營運長；以及財務長 Larry Madden。

I'd like to remind you that we will make forward-looking statements on our call today, including, but not limited to, our guidance for 2Q 2025 and other future financial results, our platform development initiatives and industry trends that are based on assumptions, and subject to future events, risks, and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. These forward-looking statements speak only as of today, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise these statements except as required by law.

我想提醒您，我們將在今天的電話會議上做出前瞻性陳述，包括但不限於我們對 2025 年第二季度和其他未來財務業績的指導、我們的平台開發計劃和行業趨勢，這些都是基於假設，並受未來事件、風險和不確定性的影響，這些因素可能導致實際結果與預測結果存在重大差異。這些前瞻性陳述僅代表今天的觀點，除非法律要求，否則我們不承擔更新或修改這些陳述的義務。

For more information about factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from forward-looking statements and our entire safe harbor statement, please refer to the news release issued today as well as the risks and uncertainties described in our quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, under the heading Risk Factors and in other filings with the SEC.

有關可能導致實際結果與前瞻性陳述和我們的整個安全港聲明存在重大差異的因素的更多信息，請參閱今天發布的新聞稿以及我們截至 2025 年 3 月 31 日的季度 10-Q 表季度報告中“風險因素”標題下所描述的風險和不確定性，以及提交給美國證券交易委員會的其他文件。

During today's call, we will also present both GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures. Additional disclosures regarding these non-GAAP measures, including a reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, are included in the news release issued today and in our earnings presentation which have been posted on the Investor Relations page of the company's website and in our filings with the SEC.

在今天的電話會議中，我們還將介紹 GAAP 和非 GAAP 財務指標。有關這些非公認會計準則 (non-GAAP) 指標的額外揭露，包括非公認會計準則 (non-GAAP) 財務指標與最直接可比較的公認會計準則 (GAAP) 財務指標的調節，均包含在今天發布的新聞稿和我們的收益報告中，這些報告已發佈在公司網站的投資者關係頁面和我們向美國證券交易委員會 (SEC) 提交的文件中。

I would now like to turn the call over to Tim Vanderhook, Chief Executive Officer of Viant. Tim?

現在我想將電話轉給 Viant 執行長 Tim Vanderhook。提姆？

Thanks, Nick, and thank you all for joining us today. We delivered record first quarter results across the board, outperforming our guidance across all key financial metrics and positioning the business for continued strength in the second quarter.

謝謝，尼克，也謝謝大家今天加入我們。我們第一季的業績全面創下紀錄，所有關鍵財務指標均超出預期，為第二季業務的持續強勁發展奠定了基礎。

Revenue increased 32% year over year and contribution ex-TAC increased 25% year over year. Strong top line growth was driven by continued CTV demand, increased use of Viant's addressability solutions including Household ID and IRIS_ID, and further adoption of Viant's AI product suite. Notably, this marks our seventh consecutive quarter of greater than 20% year over year growth in contribution ex-TAC. Adjusted EBITDA increased 76% year over year to $5.4 million in Q1. This marks our ninth consecutive quarter of greater than 30% year over year growth in adjusted EBITDA.

營收年增 32%，扣除 TAC 後的貢獻年增 25%。強勁的營收成長得益於持續的 CTV 需求、Viant 可尋址解決方案（包括 Household ID 和 IRIS_ID）的使用增加以及 Viant 的 AI 產品套件的進一步採用。值得注意的是，這標誌著我們連續第七個季度實現不計入 TAC 的貢獻同比增長超過 20%。第一季調整後 EBITDA 年增 76% 至 540 萬美元。這標誌著我們的調整後 EBITDA 連續第九個季度年增超過 30%。

Before providing an update on our strategic priorities, CTV, addressability, and ViantAI, I would like to first offer our insights and observations on the advertising environment in light of recent tariff announcements and explain why we believe Viant is well positioned to navigate this period of macroeconomic uncertainty. Year to date, through April, ad spend across our platform has been strong with little discernible impact from recent tariff announcements. Year over year growth rates for revenue and contribution ex-TAC increased in each month throughout the first quarter with the strongest performance observed in March.

在介紹我們的策略重點、CTV、可尋址性和 ViantAI 的最新情況之前，我想先根據最近的關稅公告，提供我們對廣告環境的見解和觀察，並解釋為什麼我們相信 Viant 能夠很好地度過這一宏觀經濟不確定時期。截至今年 4 月，我們平台上的廣告支出一直很強勁，幾乎沒有受到最近關稅公告的明顯影響。第一季度，扣除 TAC 後的營收和貢獻年成長率每個月都在增加，其中 3 月的表現最為強勁。

Strong double-digit growth trends persisted throughout April. Generally, advertisers have thus far exhibited a heightened level of resilience to tariff-related macroeconomic challenges, having weathered the late 2022 advertising downturn caused by fears of a recession that ultimately never materialized. It is only very recently that we have seen a small number of advertisers adjust their plans, redirecting ad spend from the second quarter into the latter part of the year.

整個四月份，強勁的兩位數成長趨勢持續存在。總體而言，廣告商迄今為止表現出對與關稅相關的宏觀經濟挑戰的高度抵禦能力，他們經受住了因對經濟衰退的擔憂而導致的 2022 年末廣告業低迷，而這種擔憂最終並未實現。直到最近，我們才看到少數廣告商調整計劃，將廣告支出從第二季轉移到下半年。

Should macroeconomic pressures intensify, we believe we remain positioned to outperform the broader advertising industry and our peers owing to a broad diversification of US based advertisers, limited exposure to those verticals most directly impacted by tariffs, and strategic alignment to secular growth channels, including CTV and the ongoing adoption of differentiated product offerings in the industry.

如果宏觀經濟壓力加劇，我們相信，由於美國廣告商的多元化、受關稅影響最直接的垂直行業的有限敞口以及與長期增長渠道（包括 CTV 和行業持續採用差異化產品）的戰略一致，我們仍然能夠超越更廣泛的廣告行業和同行。

To further elaborate, we serve a broad and diversified group of well over 1,000 advertisers, spanning all major industry verticals, with no one advertiser representing more than 5% of the total ad spend on the platform. After conducting a thorough review of our advertiser base, we anticipate recently imposed tariffs will only minimally impact our future performance as exposure to high-risk verticals like automotive, for example, is limited.

進一步說，我們服務超過 1,000 個廣告商，這些廣告商遍布所有主要垂直行業，並且沒有一個廣告商的廣告支出佔平台廣告總支出的 5% 以上。在對我們的廣告客戶群進行徹底審查後，我們預計最近徵收的關稅只會對我們未來的業績產生極小的影響，因為我們對汽車等高風險垂直行業的敞口有限。

It is also worth emphasizing we believe our business is strategically positioned to foster the growth of proliferating digital channels, including CTV, streaming audio, and digital-out-of-home. These are secular growth channels in the early stages of adoption, making them more resistant to economic cycles. Collectively, these three digital channels represented over 50% of our total ad spend on our platform in 2024, up from 43% in 2023 and 40% in 2022.

另外值得強調的是，我們相信我們的業務具有策略性地位，可以促進不斷增長的數位管道的成長，包括 CTV、串流音訊和數位戶外。這些是處於採用初期的長期成長管道，因此更能抵禦經濟週期的影響。整體而言，這三個數位管道占我們 2024 年平台廣告總支出的 50% 以上，高於 2023 年的 43% 和 2022 年的 40%。

And based on historical precedents, we would actually expect an economic downturn to accelerate the ongoing shift of linear TV ad spend into CTV, where campaigns are addressable. More granularly, our winning strategy with advertisers hinges on our differentiated platform offerings, tailored to support growth within proliferating digital channels.

根據歷史先例，我們實際上預計經濟衰退將加速線性電視廣告支出向 CTV 的持續轉移，因為在 CTV 上廣告活動是可以實現的。更具體地說，我們贏得廣告商的策略取決於我們差異化的平台產品，這些產品旨在支援不斷增長的數位管道的成長。

In CTV, our Direct Access program provides advertisers with a streamlined path to premium inventory, eliminating unnecessary intermediaries and delivering greater spend toward working media. Our addressability solutions, Household ID and IRIS_ID, empower advertisers to deploy sophisticated ad campaigns and measure efficacy through the use of industry-leading audience and contextual identifiers.

在 CTV，我們的直接訪問計劃為廣告商提供了一條獲取優質庫存的簡化途徑，消除了不必要的中間商，並為工作媒體帶來了更多的支出。我們的可尋址解決方案 Household ID 和 IRIS_ID 使廣告商能夠部署複雜的廣告活動，並透過使用業界領先的受眾和上下文識別碼來衡量效果。

And ViantAI, which we expect will prove to be a disruptive innovation, is currently providing early adopters with meaningful workflow improvements, operating structure efficiencies, and meaningful media cost savings and ROAS enhancement. The continued uptake of these innovative solutions is creating powerful tailwinds that support our long-term secular growth strategy.

我們預計 ViantAI 將被證明是一項顛覆性創新，目前正在為早期採用者提供有意義的工作流程改進、營運結構效率以及有意義的媒體成本節約和 ROAS 增強。這些創新解決方案的持續應用正在為我們的長期成長策略提供強大的推動力。

Moving to our strategic priorities: CTV, addressability, and ViantAI. CTV was the strongest driver of top line growth in the quarter and leading in CTV is our highest priority. We are committed to being the premier DSP for CTV advertising, a position we believe we currently hold and intend to strengthen. This is evidenced by our recent performance and our product roadmap, which is strategically focused on CTV dominance.

轉向我們的策略重點：CTV、可尋址性和 ViantAI。CTV 是本季營收成長最強勁的推動力，引領 CTV 是我們的首要任務。我們致力於成為 CTV 廣告的首要 DSP，我們相信我們目前已經佔據了這一地位並打算加強。我們最近的表現和產品路線圖證明了這一點，我們的策略重點是 CTV 主導地位。

During the first quarter, over 45% of total spend on our platform was allocated to CTV, clearly demonstrating the dominance of our CTV offering. Over 55% of CTV spend is now running through our Direct Access premium publishers, which uniquely connects advertisers directly to premium CTV inventory. When advertisers utilize Direct Access, supply side fees are significantly reduced. This means more of their budget goes directly toward working media, increasing impression win rates without the need to raise bid prices. We expect Direct Access will continue to attract incremental CTV spend to our platform, enabling Viant to maintain market leading CTV growth.

在第一季度，我們平台總支出的 45% 以上分配給了 CTV，這清楚地表明了我們的 CTV 產品佔據主導地位。目前，超過 55% 的 CTV 支出都是透過我們的直接存取優質發行商進行的，該發行商以獨特的方式將廣告商直接與優質 CTV 資源連接起來。當廣告商使用直接存取時，供應方費用會大幅降低。這意味著他們的更多預算直接用於工作媒體，從而提高印象贏得率，而無需提高出價。我們預計 Direct Access 將繼續吸引增量 CTV 支出到我們的平台，使 Viant 能夠保持市場領先的 CTV 成長。

Fundamentally, we believe the DSP that wins in CTV will win across all other open web digital channels. In our view, CTV will become the cornerstone of every advertiser's marketing strategy with other digital channels serving complementary roles.

從根本上來說，我們相信在 CTV 中獲勝的 DSP 將在所有其他開放網路數位頻道中獲勝。我們認為，CTV 將成為每個廣告主行銷策略的基石，其他數位頻道將發揮互補作用。

In fact, this reprioritization of CTV is currently underway. Advertisers are increasingly recognizing the fallacy of last-touch attribution campaign strategies where big tech takes credit for outcomes by showing the last ad before a purchase, without truly providing any incremental value.

事實上，CTV 的重新排序目前正在進行中。廣告商越來越意識到最後接觸歸因行銷活動策略的謬誤，大型科技公司透過在購買前展示最後一則廣告來獲得成果，但並沒有真正提供任何增量價值。

Last-touch attribution has trained advertisers to allocate spend to consumers that would have purchased their product anyway. This is not advertising. This is simply a tax. Smart advertisers are shifting gears, directing ad spend based on incremental lift where another dollar of ad spend drives new business growth through another incremental sale. And data shows CTV trounces search and social in driving incremental lift.

最後接觸歸因已經訓練廣告商將支出分配給無論如何都會購買其產品的消費者。這不是廣告。這根本就是一項稅。聰明的廣告主正在轉變策略，根據增量提升來指導廣告支出，即每花費一美元廣告費，就能透過另一筆增量銷售來推動新業務的成長。數據顯示，CTV 在推動增量成長方面勝過搜尋和社交。

Chris will elaborate further in a few minutes. Moving to our leadership position in addressability Viant's Household ID, our patented audience targeting and measurement solution, is experiencing unprecedented demand. Household ID boasts availability across roughly 80% of biddable ad inventory, significantly exceeding other identifiers.

克里斯將在幾分鐘內進一步闡述。邁向可尋址性領域的領導地位 Viant 的家庭 ID（我們的專利受眾定位和測量解決方案）正經歷著前所未有的需求。家庭 ID 可在約 80% 的可競價廣告資源中使用，大大超過其他識別碼。

This quarter, ad spend linked to Household ID surged 33% year over year, as we continue to activate Household ID matches with our premium Direct Access publishers, making them both biddable and addressable. We anticipate continued growth for Household ID as an influx of data-driven advertisers prioritize the CTV channel. Direct-to-consumer e-commerce businesses, performance advertisers, and small- to medium-sized businesses, all pivoting budgets to CTV can leverage Household ID to target highly responsive audiences and track campaign effectiveness.

本季度，與家庭 ID 相關的廣告支出年增 33%，因為我們繼續與優質直接訪問發布商啟動家庭 ID 匹配，使其可競價且可尋址。隨著大量數據驅動的廣告商優先考慮 CTV 頻道，我們預計 Household ID 將繼續成長。直接面向消費者的電子商務企業、效果廣告商和中小型企業，所有將預算轉向 CTV 的企業都可以利用 Household ID 來瞄準高度響應的受眾並追蹤廣告活動的效果。

Our contextual targeting and measurement solution, IRIS_ID, is also gaining traction among both publishers and advertisers. With the addition of Paramount, Lionsgate Films, CNN, and TCL among others, as newly-minted IRIS-enabled publishers, the presence of IRIS_ID across all available CTV bid requests has more than doubled since acquiring IRIS in November 2024.

我們的上下文定位和測量解決方案 IRIS_ID 也越來越受到出版商和廣告商的青睞。隨著派拉蒙、獅門影業、CNN 和 TCL 等新加入的 IRIS 發行商的加入，自 2024 年 11 月收購 IRIS 以來，所有可用的 CTV 競標請求中 IRIS_ID 的存在增加了一倍以上。

IRIS_ID allows advertisers to target CTV ad inventory at the video level, enabling them to align their brand, product, or service with contextually relevant content. As recently reported by Upwave, an independent measurement platform, campaigns utilizing IRIS_ID demonstrated a 5x lift in brand favorability, a 3x lift in ad recall, and a 2x lift in brand awareness and consideration when measured against CTV control groups. This performance has been a key driver in attracting new customers to Viant in the quarter. As IRIS_ID continues to win adoption among publishers, advertisers gain the ability to deploy contextual campaigns at greater scale, which will lead to increased utilization over time.

IRIS_ID 允許廣告主在影片層級定位 CTV 廣告資源，使他們能夠將其品牌、產品或服務與上下文相關內容結合。根據獨立測量平台 Upwave 最近報道，與 CTV 對照組相比，利用 IRIS_ID 開展的廣告活動使品牌好感度提高了 5 倍，廣告回憶度提高了 3 倍，品牌知名度和考慮度提高了 2 倍。這項業績是本季 Viant 吸引新客戶的關鍵驅動力。隨著 IRIS_ID 繼續在出版商中贏得採用，廣告商獲得了更大規模部署情境廣告活動的能力，這將隨著時間的推移提高利用率。

Finally, I will provide an update on our ViantAI product suite. As a reminder, two phases have rolled out, and we expect to complete the next two phases later this year. The four phases consist of AI Bidding, AI Planning, AI Measurement and Analysis, and AI Decisioning. I'll very briefly touch on all four.

最後，我將提供有關我們的 ViantAI 產品套件的更新。提醒一下，我們已經推出了兩個階段，我們預計將在今年稍後完成後兩個階段。這四個階段包括AI競價、AI規劃、AI測量和分析以及AI決策。我將非常簡要地談論這四個方面。

Less than two years after launch, AI Bidding now automates 85% of the ad spending on our platform, up from 80% in Q4 2024. With AI Bidding, advertisers enable Viant's algorithms to find and buy optimal ad placements across the open web, aiming for the lowest cost while meeting their KPIs. With surging use, contribution ex-TAC generated from AI Bidding is up 75% year over year. AI Bidding is a major success, and we expect to see a similar adoption trajectory across our other AI products.

推出不到兩年，AI Bidding 現已實現我們平台上 85% 的廣告支出自動化，高於 2024 年第四季的 80%。透過 AI Bidding，廣告主可以使用 Viant 的演算法在開放網路上尋找和購買最佳廣告位置，以最低成本滿足其 KPI。隨著使用量的激增，AI Bidding 產生的 TAC 之外的貢獻同比增長了 75%。AI Bidding 取得了巨大的成功，我們期望看到其他 AI 產品也出現類似的採用軌跡。

In the third quarter of 2024, we launched AI Planning, which enables advertisers to create enterprise-level ad campaigns in seconds. Early agency adopters are reaping the benefits of an improved workflow, as their capacity for new business pitches has accelerated; greater operational efficiency, as employees are redeployed to more strategic initiatives; and improved return on ad spend, as ViantAI is now utilized to navigate the complexities of campaign construction to yield optimal results.

2024年第三季度，我們推出了AI Planning，讓廣告主能夠在幾秒鐘內創建企業級廣告活動。早期採用該技術的機構正在從改進的工作流程中獲益，因為他們進行新業務推介的能力已經加快；更高的營運效率，因為員工被重新部署到更具策略性的計劃中；並提高了廣告支出回報率，因為 ViantAI 現在用於解決廣告活動構建的複雜性以獲得最佳結果。

Launching later this quarter, AI Measurement and Analysis is expected to revolutionize reporting with on-demand insights. Advertisers can simply ask ViantAI for a specific data and receive answers in seconds, eliminating the need for lengthy reports. This streamlines productivity and empowers continuous campaign optimization.

人工智慧測量與分析將於本季稍後推出，預計將透過按需洞察徹底改變報告方式。廣告主只需向 ViantAI 詢問特定數據即可在幾秒鐘內收到答案，從而無需冗長的報告。這簡化了生產力並支援持續的活動優化。

And finally, we expect to launch AI Decisioning in the second half of 2025, enabling advertisers to grant ViantAI the autonomy to manage their media plans. ViantAI will actively adapt campaigns to market fluctuations, aiming for the best possible outcomes. And in contrast to Big Tech black box services, ViantAI is fully transparent, providing advertisers with detailed insights into their campaign data, including publisher allocation, clearing prices, return on ad spend metrics, and so much more.

最後，我們預計將在 2025 年下半年推出 AI Decisioning，使廣告主能夠授予 ViantAI 自主管理其媒體計畫的權力。ViantAI 將積極根據市場波動調整活動，以期達到最佳效果。與大型科技公司的黑盒子服務相比，ViantAI 完全透明，為廣告商提供有關其廣告活動數據的詳細見解，包括發布商分配、清算價格、廣告支出回報率指標等等。

To summarize, our business is growing quickly, fueled by our investment in secular growth channels and our distinct innovative offerings. Looking ahead, we expect CTV to emerge as the most effective digital channel, addressable campaigns to become widespread, and AI to usher in a new era of efficiency, further improving return on ad spend for our customers. Viant is well positioned for long-term growth as these market dynamics evolve.

總而言之，我們的業務正在快速成長，這得益於我們對長期成長通路的投資以及我們獨特的創新產品。展望未來，我們預期 CTV 將成為最有效的數位管道，可尋址的廣告活動將廣泛推廣，而人工智慧將開啟一個高效的新時代，進一步提高客戶的廣告支出回報率。隨著市場動態的演變，Viant 已做好實現長期成長的準備。

Before turning it over to Chris, I want to briefly address the recent District Court ruling, which affirmed Google is a monopolist in ad tech and marked a win for the ad tech industry at large. The DOJ is pursuing remedies that could include a divestiture of both the DoubleClick assets and Google AdX, which collectively include Google's SSP and ad server.

在交給克里斯之前，我想簡要談談最近的地方法院裁決，該裁決認定谷歌是廣告技術領域的壟斷者，並標誌著整個廣告技術行業的勝利。美國司法部正在尋求補救措施，可能包括剝離 DoubleClick 資產和 Google AdX，其中包括 Google 的 SSP 和廣告伺服器。

If these assets are spun off into an independent entity, it is reasonable to expect this new supply-side platform to seek out incremental demand through additional partnerships with third-party DSPs beyond Google's DV360.

如果將這些資產分拆為獨立實體，那麼可以合理地預期，這個新的供應方平台將透過與 Google DV360 以外的第三方 DSP 建立更多合作夥伴關係來尋求增量需求。

In time, this could present an opportunity to provide our clients with access to YouTube ad inventory through our buying platform. Additionally, the removal of DV360's exclusive access to YouTube may level the playing field among DSPs, which provides Viant an opportunity to attract ad spend from advertisers looking to consolidate on our platform.

隨著時間的推移，這可能為我們的客戶提供一個機會，透過我們的購買平台存取 YouTube 廣告資源。此外，取消 DV360 對 YouTube 的獨家訪問權可能會為 DSP 之間創造公平的競爭環境，這為 Viant 提供了一個機會，可以吸引希望在我們平台上整合的廣告商的廣告支出。

Truly, any regulatory action taken to limit Google's illegal market dominance will improve Viant's competitive positioning. And in our view, an open market for YouTube is the most beneficial outcome.

確實，任何限制谷歌非法市場主導地位的監管行動都將提高 Viant 的競爭地位。我們認為，對 YouTube 來說，開放市場是最有利的結果。

With that, I'll now turn it over to Chris.

現在，我將把發言權交給克里斯。

Thanks, Tim. I would like to address three major industry topics head on. These topics have dominated the conversation with investors in recent meetings. They are, number one, Big Tech attribution misrepresentation and the growing preference among advertisers to optimize for incremental lift measurement; number two, the emerging opportunity to win incremental ad spend from data-driven advertisers diverting spend from search and social; and number three, the investor misperception that Amazon is a material threat to open Internet DSPs.

謝謝，蒂姆。我想直接談三個主要的行業話題。這些話題在最近與投資者的會議上佔據了主要話題。首先，大型科技公司對歸因的誤傳，以及廣告商對優化增量提升測量的日益增長的偏好；第二，新興的機會可以從數據驅動的廣告商那裡贏得增量廣告支出，從而轉移搜索和社交廣告支出；第三，投資者誤以為亞馬遜對開放互聯網 DSP 構成了實質性威脅。

Beginning with attribution misrepresentation, in our view, Big Tech's deceptive attribution practices are coming to an end. For far too long, search and social media have been wrongfully credited with outcomes originating from more impactful ad channels, particularly linear television, and more specifically, CTV. By gamifying last-touch attribution, Big Tech has convinced advertisers that it is the very last exposure to their ads that drive the final consumer purchase decision. But we believe this is a fallacy.

從歸因不實陳述開始，我們認為，大型科技公司的欺騙性歸因做法即將結束。長期以來，搜尋和社群媒體一直被錯誤地認為是更具影響力的廣告管道（尤其是線性電視，更具體地說是 CTV）的成果。透過將最後一次接觸歸因遊戲化，大型科技公司讓廣告商相信，最後一次接觸他們的廣告將推動消費者做出最終的購買決定。但我們認為這是一種謬論。

Enhancements in CTV measurement reveal the true customer journey. CTV sparks consumer demand, and display, search, and social channels merely navigate the consumer to the point of purchase. Advertisers have been misled. And in some cases, this attribution misrepresentation has led advertisers to shift budget away from highly effective channels like linear TV and CTV to the detriment of their own brand.

CTV 測量的增強揭示了真實的客戶旅程。CTV 激發消費者需求，而展示、搜尋和社交管道僅引導消費者到達購買點。廣告商被誤導了。在某些情況下，這種歸因錯誤導致廣告主將預算從線性電視和 CTV 等高效管道轉移，損害了自己的品牌。

Look to the prominent sports apparel brand that we all know as a high-profile example. Just a few years back, they slashed their TV budget and went all in on the lower funnel channels like display, search, and social. The result? Seemingly positive lower funnel KPIs, but slumping top line sales. Why? They dedicated too much of their budget targeting existing customers and failed to attract any new customers.

以我們熟知的著名運動服飾品牌為例。就在幾年前，他們大幅削減了電視預算，並將全部精力投入到展示、搜尋和社交等較低的管道。結果如何？看似正面的下部漏斗 KPI，但頂線銷售額卻下滑。為什麼？他們將太多預算投入現有客戶身上，卻未能吸引任何新客戶。

And this is the realization many advertisers are waking up to. They have been over-allocating spend to search and social. And in doing so, they have been wasting budget, marketing to consumers that were ready to buy their product anyway. Google, Meta, Amazon, they've all been winners of the gamification of last-touch attribution. Left unchecked, they will take credit for every outcome.

許多廣告商已經開始意識到這一點。他們在搜尋和社交方面投入了過多的資金。這樣做，他們就浪費了預算，浪費了向那些已經準備好購買其產品的消費者行銷的機會。Google、Meta、亞馬遜，他們都是最後接觸歸因遊戲化的贏家。如果不加以控制，他們會把所有結果都歸功於自己。

However, advertisers are shifting their strategy, prioritizing the measurement of incremental lift, which identifies the ad channels that bring in entirely new customers, those who would not have made a purchase without the exposure to the highly impactful informative ads delivered via CTV. Anchored by Household ID, Viant's measurement solutions offer advertisers the ability to measure incremental lift, which is now the most requested measurement feature on our platform.

然而，廣告主正在轉變策略，優先衡量增量提升，即確定哪些廣告管道可以帶來全新的客戶，這些客戶如果沒有接觸到透過 CTV 投放的極具影響力的資訊廣告就不會進行購買。以家庭 ID 為基礎，Viant 的測量解決方案為廣告主提供了測量增量提升的能力，這現在是我們平台上最受歡迎的測量功能。

Demand for this feature has in part powered a 500% increase in Household ID-powered ad spending on a trailing 12-month basis over the last two years, with a growing portion of that spend directed towards CTV. The convergence of these trends presents a significant opportunity for Viant. As advertisers increasingly turn to incremental lift measurement, we believe our platform reveals CTV's superior impact, driving significant ad spend growth across our platform.

對該功能的需求在一定程度上推動了過去兩年家庭 ID 廣告支出在過去 12 個月內增長 500%，其中越來越多的支出流向了 CTV。這些趨勢的融合為 Viant 帶來了重大機會。隨著廣告主越來越多地轉向增量提升測量，我們相信我們的平台展現出 CTV 的卓越影響力，從而推動整個平台的廣告支出大幅成長。

Over the coming years, we believe search, social, and other forms of display advertising will come under pressure as advertisers prioritize more effective ad channels like CTV, which proves to drive incremental sales.

在未來幾年，我們相信搜尋、社交和其他形式的展示廣告將面臨壓力，因為廣告商優先考慮更有效的廣告管道，如 CTV，這被證明可以推動增量銷售。

This leads me to my next major industry topic. There is a significant opportunity to win ad spend from data-driven advertisers overinvested in search and social. This group comprising 10 million small businesses, performance marketers, and direct-to-consumer e-commerce companies, is believed to represent over half of the $200 billion US search and social ad market. We think this spend is poised for reallocation to more effective digital channels like CTV.

這就引出了我的下一個主要行業主題。從在搜尋和社交方面投入過多的數據驅動型廣告商那裡贏得廣告支出有很大機會。這個群體由 1000 萬家小型企業、績效行銷人員和直接面向消費者的電子商務公司組成，據信佔據了 2000 億美元美國搜尋和社交廣告市場的一半以上。我們認為這筆支出將重新分配給 CTV 等更有效的數位頻道。

We believe Viant has a compelling value proposition that effectively attracts data-driven advertisers and aligns with their current buying behaviors. Through the use of our addressability solutions, Household ID and IRIS_ID, data-driven advertisers can precisely target niche consumer audiences in contextually relevant environments and gain insightful feedback, including incremental lift measurement to assess overall campaign effectiveness. And unlike search and social walled gardens, our measurement solutions provide advertisers with transparent and objective attribution, helping them allocate ad spend to the channels that deliver the highest return on their investment.

我們相信 Viant 擁有引人注目的價值主張，能夠有效吸引數據驅動的廣告商並符合他們當前的購買行為。透過使用我們的可尋址解決方案、家庭 ID 和 IRIS_ID，數據驅動的廣告商可以在上下文相關的環境中精準定位利基消費者受眾，並獲得有見地的反饋，包括增量提升測量以評估整體廣告系列效果。與搜尋和社交圍牆花園不同，我們的測量解決方案為廣告主提供透明、客觀的歸因，幫助他們將廣告支出分配到可帶來最高投資回報的管道。

We have built ViantAI to make the open Internet accessible to data-driven advertisers, greatly simplifying the DSP interface. We have stripped away the complexities of a traditional DSP, removing the primary barrier, which has prohibited smaller data-driven advertisers from accessing the open Internet.

我們建立了 ViantAI，使數據驅動的廣告商能夠存取開放的互聯網，從而大大簡化了 DSP 介面。我們剝離了傳統 DSP 的複雜性，消除了阻止小型資料驅動廣告商存取開放網路的主要障礙。

In its current state, ViantAI is building detailed media plans and manages continuous bidding for advertisers. Our goal is to release a completely autonomous DSP by the end of the year, offering dynamic campaign planning, optimized execution and reporting. We believe the displacement of search and social and prioritization of CTV as the cornerstone of ad campaign strategy, coupled with the simplicity of ViantAI will draw data-driven advertisers to Viant.

目前，ViantAI 正在製定詳細的媒體計劃並管理廣告商的持續競價。我們的目標是在今年年底前發布一個完全自主的 DSP，提供動態的活動規劃、最佳化的執行和報告。我們相信，搜尋和社交的取代以及 CTV 的優先作為廣告活動策略的基石，再加上 ViantAI 的簡單性，將吸引數據驅動的廣告商加入 Viant。

Finally, I would like to address the misperception by some investors that Amazon has suddenly emerged as the new threat in the open web DSP space. Let's not forget, we have already been competing with an illegal monopoly for the entirety of our existence, one who entices clients with the bundling of services, price discounting, free use of unique data, and exclusive supply to YouTube, the world's largest video platform. Of course, I'm referring to Google.

最後，我想澄清一些投資者的誤解，他們認為亞馬遜突然成為開放網路 DSP 領域的新威脅。別忘了，我們整個存在過程中一直在與非法壟斷企業競爭，該企業透過捆綁服務、價格折扣、免費使用獨家數據以及向全球最大的視頻平台 YouTube 獨家供應來吸引客戶。當然，我指的是谷歌。

And just like Google, Amazon cannot convincingly claim to be an objective independent partner to advertisers. Amazon is a seller of ads and purposefully directs ad spend to its owned and operated inventory, Amazon-sponsored ads and Amazon Prime Video, where it extracts full margin. This creates a bias. And by manipulating attribution, we believe Amazon can undermine the effectiveness of competing streaming services by directing spend to Amazon Prime Video.

而且就像Google一樣，亞馬遜無法令人信服地聲稱自己是廣告商的客觀獨立合作夥伴。亞馬遜是一家廣告銷售商，它有意將廣告支出用於其自有和經營的庫存、亞馬遜贊助的廣告和亞馬遜 Prime 視頻，並從中獲取全部利潤。這就產生了偏見。透過操縱歸因，我們相信亞馬遜可以將支出引導至亞馬遜 Prime Video，從而削弱競爭串流服務的有效性。

At the opposite end of the bid stream, we believe publishers are reluctant to provide Amazon with addressable signals, be it audience or contextual identifiers, as doing so could incidentally strengthen the Amazon Identity Graph and pull spend away from the open Internet and into Amazon's walled garden. In our view, Amazon's conflict of interest and lack of objectivity weakens its position with the open Internet, and therefore, presents little threat to Viant. Rarely have we ever encountered Amazon DSP in an RFP process.

在競價流的另一端，我們認為出版商不願意向亞馬遜提供可尋址信號，無論是受眾還是上下文標識符，因為這樣做可能會順便加強亞馬遜身份圖譜，並將支出從開放的互聯網拉入亞馬遜的圍牆花園。我們認為，亞馬遜的利益衝突和缺乏客觀性削弱了其在開放互聯網中的地位，因此對 Viant 構成不了什麼威脅。我們很少在 RFP 流程中遇到 Amazon DSP。

Now where Amazon is succeeding is in retail media, which is displacing Google search spend. This is where Amazon is taking share, not from open Internet DSPs. As Amazon's e-commerce presence has grown, consumers have migrated search queries from Google to Amazon, which Amazon then monetizes via sponsored listing ads on its e-commerce website and app. This makes up the overwhelming majority of Amazon's reported ad spend.

現在，亞馬遜在零售媒體領域取得了成功，它正在取代Google的搜尋支出。這是亞馬遜搶佔市場份額的地方，而不是開放的網路 DSP。隨著亞馬遜電子商務業務的不斷增長，消費者已將搜尋查詢從谷歌遷移到亞馬遜，然後亞馬遜透過其電子商務網站和應用程式上的贊助清單廣告將其貨幣化。這佔亞馬遜報告的廣告支出的絕大部分。

Due to Amazon's e-commerce dominance, investors are quick to point to the quality of Amazon's first-party data as a potential threat. And while highly effective within Amazon's walled garden, its usefulness is limited across the open Internet. Signal goes both ways. A targeted ad campaign requires first-party data from both the advertiser and publisher to construct the data match that permits for targeted ads to flow across the bid stream.

由於亞馬遜在電子商務領域的主導地位，投資人很快就將亞馬遜第一方數據的品質視為潛在威脅。儘管它在亞馬遜的圍牆花園內非常有效，但在開放的互聯網上它的實用性卻有限。訊號是雙向的。定向廣告活動需要來自廣告商和發布商的第一方資料來建立資料匹配，以允許定向廣告在競價流中流動。

What signal are CTV publishers like Netflix, Disney, and Paramount willing to provide to Amazon, a competing streaming service? We believe none. Conversely, both advertisers and publishers willingly provide Viant with access to first-party data to match audiences and power addressable campaigns. 80% of biddable inventory is addressable with Viant, and 95% of households are identifiable within our ID graph, empowering advertisers with the ability to target and measure at unmatched scale across the open Internet. I will finish with this.

Netflix、Disney 和 Paramount 等 CTV 發行商願意向競爭對手串流服務亞馬遜提供什麼訊號？我們不相信任何事。相反，廣告商和出版商都願意向 Viant 提供第一方數據，以符合受眾並支持可尋址的廣告活動。 80% 的可競價廣告資源可透過 Viant 尋址，95% 的家庭可透過我們的 ID 圖進行識別，從而使廣告商能夠在開放的互聯網上以無與倫比的規模進行定位和衡量。我就到此為止了。

Viant is arguably the only completely independent and objective enterprise-level self-service DSP that exists in the marketplace. We plan to continue to fend off Big Tech behemoths, including Amazon, through independence and our focus on our three strategic priorities: CTV, addressability, and ViantAI.

Viant 可以說是市場上唯一完全獨立、客觀的企業級自助 DSP。我們計劃透過獨立和專注於我們的三大策略重點：CTV、可尋址性和 ViantAI，繼續抵禦包括亞馬遜在內的大型科技巨頭。

In CTV, we will direct advertisers to the CTV content that drives the highest return on spend, period, with absolutely no bias. Our addressability solutions provide unmatched scale as we are not limited to a walled garden audience, but rather the entirety of the open Internet. And with ViantAI, we aim to surpass the level of simplicity offered by competing search and social AI products while providing a level of transparency they are seemingly unwilling to match.

在 CTV 中，我們將引導廣告主觀看能夠帶來最高支出回報的 CTV 內容，絕對沒有任何偏見。我們的可尋址解決方案提供了無與倫比的規模，因為我們不僅限於封閉的受眾，而是整個開放的網路。透過 ViantAI，我們的目標是超越競爭對手的搜尋和社交 AI 產品所提供的簡單性水平，同時提供他們似乎不願意匹敵的透明度水平。

And with that, I'll turn it over to Larry to provide more detail on our financial performance. Larry?

接下來，我將把時間交給拉里，讓他提供有關我們財務表現的更多細節。拉里？

Thanks, Chris. Before I begin, I would like to remind everyone that we have posted a presentation on our Investor Relations website that includes supplemental financial information to accompany today's call.

謝謝，克里斯。在開始之前，我想提醒大家，我們已經在投資者關係網站上發布了一份演示文稿，其中包括今天電話會議的補充財務資訊。

In terms of our results for the first quarter, revenue for the quarter was $70.6 million, representing a 32% increase year over year and exceeding the high end of our guidance range by 4%. Contribution ex-TAC totaled $42.7 million in Q1, up 25% compared to the prior year period and also above the high end of our guidance range. This represents our seventh consecutive quarter of 20%-plus growth in contribution ex-TAC. It also marks our strongest rate of growth in five quarters, excluding the impact of seasonal political spending.

就我們第一季的業績而言，本季營收為 7,060 萬美元，年增 32%，超過我們預期範圍的高階 4%。第一季扣除 TAC 後的貢獻總額為 4,270 萬美元，比去年同期成長 25%，也高於我們預期範圍的高端。這是我們連續第七個季度實現 TAC 貢獻率超過 20% 的成長。這也標誌著我們五個季度以來最強勁的成長率（不包括季節性政治支出的影響）。

We continue to see meaningful expansion in the number of customers generating significant levels of contribution ex-TAC. On a trailing 12-month basis through Q1, we saw a 37% increase in the number of percent of spend customers generating over $1 million in contribution ex-TAC. Additionally, contribution ex-TAC across our top 100 customers grew by 24% year over year on a trailing 12-month basis.

我們繼續看到，在 TAC 之外產生大量貢獻的客戶數量顯著增加。截至第一季的過去 12 個月中，我們發現，支出客戶中貢獻超過 100 萬美元（TAC 除外）的客戶數量增加了 37%。此外，我們前 100 名客戶的貢獻（不包括 TAC）在過去 12 個月內年增了 24%。

New customer momentum also remains strong. Our top 30 new customers added over the past year generated on average more than $780,000 of contribution ex-TAC during the period, more than 3x the level generated by new customers in the comparable period last year. This underscores our continued success in winning larger, more strategic accounts.

新客戶發展動能也依然強勁。我們在過去一年新增的前 30 位客戶在此期間平均產生了超過 78 萬美元的貢獻（不包括 TAC），是去年同期新客戶貢獻水準的 3 倍以上。這凸顯了我們在贏得更大、更具策略性的客戶方面所取得的持續成功。

These trends, fueled by growth from existing and new customers, reinforce our strong competitive positioning and support our ability to continue outgrowing the broader programmatic market. We delivered strong performance across most customer verticals in Q1, with ad spend across the of our largest customer verticals, healthcare, consumer goods, and business services leading the way.

這些趨勢受到現有客戶和新客戶成長的推動，增強了我們強大的競爭地位，並支持我們繼續超越更廣泛的程序化市場的能力。我們在第一季在大多數客戶垂直領域都取得了強勁的業績，其中，我們最大的客戶在垂直領域、醫療保健、消費品和商業服務領域的廣告支出處於領先地位。

CTV remained a core growth driver in Q1, accounting for over 45% of total platform spend, our highest CTV mix on record. In addition, CTV spend reached an all-time high for a first quarter, reflecting continued momentum as advertisers increasingly prioritize premium addressable video to drive performance. Spend across all emerging digital channels, including CTV, streaming audio, and digital-out-of-home collectively represented 54% of total platform spend in Q1, the highest combined share in our history.

連網電視 (CTV) 仍然是第一季的核心成長動力，佔平台總支出的 45% 以上，是我們有史以來最高的連網電視組合。此外，第一季 CTV 支出創下歷史新高，反映出隨著廣告主越來越重視優質可尋址影片來推動業績，CTV 支出持續成長。所有新興數位管道（包括 CTV、串流音訊和數位戶外）的支出總計佔第一季平台總支出的 54%，這是我們歷史上最高的總份額。

This milestone highlights the accelerating adoption of next-generation media formats, underscoring our position as a leading partner for advertisers moving beyond traditional display. Video, inclusive of CTV, represented 62% of total platform spend in the quarter, further reflecting the continued shift toward high-impact measurable formats. Non-GAAP operating expenses totaled $37.3 million for the quarter, reflecting a 20% year over year increase and flat sequentially.

這一里程碑凸顯了下一代媒體格式的加速採用，強調了我們作為超越傳統展示的廣告商領先合作夥伴的地位。包括 CTV 在內的影片佔本季平台總支出的 62%，進一步反映了向高影響力可衡量格式的持續轉變。本季非公認會計準則營運費用總計 3,730 萬美元，年增 20%，與上一季持平。

Notably, these figures include incremental costs related to the recent acquisitions of IRIS TV, which closed in November 2024; and Lockr, which closed in February 2025. Excluding the impact of these acquisitions, organic non-GAAP operating expenses increased 14% year over year and declined 2% sequentially. While we remain committed to investing in AI and technology to fuel long-term growth and market share gains, we continue to prioritize operational discipline.

值得注意的是，這些數字包括與最近收購 IRIS TV 相關的增量成本，該收購於 2024 年 11 月完成； Lockr 於 2025 年 2 月關閉。不計入這些收購的影響，有機非公認會計準則營運費用年增 14%，季減 2%。雖然我們仍然致力於投資人工智慧和技術以推動長期成長和市場份額成長，但我們仍然優先考慮營運紀律。

Over the past 12 months, we increased contribution ex-TAC per employee by 13%, reflecting improved efficiency across the organization. Adjusted EBITDA for Q1 was $5.4 million, exceeding the high end of our guidance by more than 27% and growing 76% year over year. Adjusted EBITDA as a percent of contribution ex-TAC was 13% for the quarter, expanding by 360 basis points compared to the prior year. This margin improvement was achieved while continuing to invest in our ViantAI product suite and integrating the IRIS TV and Lockr acquisitions, demonstrating our ability to scale efficiently while executing on strategic priorities.

在過去的 12 個月中，我們將每位員工的繳費（非 TAC）提高了 13%，這反映了整個組織的效率提高。第一季調整後的 EBITDA 為 540 萬美元，超出我們預期的高階水準 27% 以上，年增 76%。本季調整後的 EBITDA（扣除 TAC 後的貢獻百分比）為 13%，較上年同期成長 360 個基點。這一利潤率的提高是在我們繼續投資 ViantAI 產品套件並整合 IRIS TV 和 Lockr 收購的同時實現的，這證明了我們在執行戰略重點的同時有效擴展的能力。

Non-GAAP net income, which excludes stock-based compensation and other adjustments, totaled $2.8 million for the quarter, up 109% from $1.3 million in the prior year. Non-GAAP basic earnings per Class A share outstanding totaled $0.04 in the first quarter, compared to $0.02 in the prior year period. In terms of share count, we ended the quarter with 63.1 million total shares outstanding, consisting of 16.4 million Class A shares and 46.7 million Class B shares.

本季非公認會計準則淨收入（不包括股票薪酬和其他調整）總計 280 萬美元，較去年同期的 130 萬美元增長 109%。第一季非公認會計準則每股 A 類流通股基本收益總計 0​​.04 美元，而去年同期為 0.02 美元。就股票數量而言，本季末我們的流通股總數為 6,310 萬股，其中包括 1,640 萬股 A​​ 類股和 4,670 萬股 B 類股。

We ended the quarter with $174 million in cash and cash equivalents and $199 million in positive working capital, with no debt and access to a $75 million undrawn credit facility. For the quarter, cash flow from operating activities before changes in operating assets and liabilities was $8.2 million, representing a 30% year over year increase.

本季結束時，我們擁有 1.74 億美元的現金和現金等價物以及 1.99 億美元的正營運資本，沒有債務，並可獲得 7,500 萬美元的未提取信貸額度。本季度，經營資產和負債變動前的經營活動現金流為 820 萬美元，年增 30%。

In the quarter, we invested $12.6 million in operating assets and liabilities, largely driven by seasonality and continued growth. Additionally, we used $22.7 million in cash for financing activities during the quarter, including $17 million for repurchases of our Class A common stock and $3.2 million for taxes related to the net settlement of equity awards.

本季度，我們在營運資產和負債上投資了 1,260 萬美元，這主要受到季節性和持續成長的推動。此外，本季我們用於融資活動的現金為 2,270 萬美元，其中包括用於回購 A 類普通股的 1,700 萬美元和用於與股權獎勵淨結算相關的稅款的 320 萬美元。

As a reflection of our confidence in our strategy and market positioning, we capitalized on recent stock market volatility and aggressively repurchased Viant Class A common stock in the open market at a valuation discount. Since initiating our $50 million share repurchase program in May 2024, we have returned $46.5 million to shareholders, including $17 million in Q1 and $24.9 million year-to-date through May 2. This has resulted in the repurchase of 3.5 million shares at an average price of $13.12 since inception.

作為對策略和市場定位的信心的體現，我們利用近期股市波動，以估值折扣在公開市場上積極回購 Viant A 類普通股。自 2024 年 5 月啟動 5,000 萬美元的股票回購計畫以來，我們已向股東返還 4,650 萬美元，其中包括第一季的 1,700 萬美元和截至 5 月 2 日的年初至今的 2,490 萬美元。自成立以來，該公司已以平均 13.12 美元的價格回購了 350 萬股股票。

As of May 2, 3.5 million remains available under the current authorization. Having nearly exhausted our existing $50 million share repurchase authorization, today we have announced the approval of a $50 million increase to our share repurchase authorization, which we expect to deploy strategically to support existing shareholders, particularly when our stock is undervalued.

截至 5 月 2 日，目前授權下仍有 350 萬個可用名額。我們現有的 5,000 萬美元股票回購授權幾乎已用完，今天我們宣布批准將股票回購授權增加 5,000 萬美元，我們希望策略性地部署這筆資金來支持現有股東，特別是在我們的股票被低估的時候。

Our solid financial foundation, combined with disciplined execution and strategic capital allocation, positions us exceptionally well to capture the significant market opportunity ahead.

我們堅實的財務基礎，加上嚴格的執行和策略性的資本配置，使我們能夠很好地抓住未來巨大的市場機會。

Turning now to our outlook. While we remain encouraged by the strength of quarter-to-date ad spend across our platform, macroeconomic uncertainty, specifically related to recently imposed tariffs, have prompted a small number of advertisers to delay campaign activations originally planned for Q2.

現在談談我們的展望。儘管我們對本季迄今為止整個平台的廣告支出強勁表現感到鼓舞，但宏觀經濟的不確定性（特別是與最近徵收的關稅有關的不確定性）已促使少數廣告商推遲原定於第二季度開展的廣告活動。

As a result, our Q2 guidance reflects the deferral of approximately 3% to 4% of expected Q2 revenue and contribution ex-TAC to the second half of 2025. We view these shifts as temporary and timing driven, not indicative of reduced spend commitments or structural weakness. In fact, the majority of the spend is expected to be realized in the second half of 2025. While this dynamic introduces some near-term forecasting variability, customer engagement remains strong and our long-term growth outlook is unchanged.

因此，我們的第二季指引反映了預期第二季營收和貢獻（不含 TAC）約 3% 至 4% 延至 2025 年下半年。我們認為這些轉變是暫時的、由時間驅動的，並不表示支出承諾減少或結構性弱點。事實上，預計大部分支出將在 2025 年下半年實現。雖然這種動態引入了一些短期預測變化，但客戶參與度仍然強勁，我們的長期成長前景保持不變。

Given these factors, our guidance for the second quarter of 2025 is as follows: revenue of $77 million to $80 million, representing 19% year over year growth at the midpoint; contribution ex-TAC of $47.5 million to $49.5 million, reflecting 17% year over year growth at the midpoint; non-GAAP operating expenses of $37 million to $38 million, up 17% year over year and approximately flat sequentially at the midpoint; adjusted EBITDA of $10.5 million to $11.5 million, representing 15% growth year over year at the midpoint. Our guide assumes record Q2 performance across all metrics: spend, revenue, CXT and adjusted EBITDA, despite the macroeconomic headwinds.

考慮到這些因素，我們對 2025 年第二季度的預期如下：收入 7700 萬美元至 8000 萬美元，中間值年增長 19%；扣除 TAC 後的貢獻為 4750 萬美元至 4950 萬美元，按中點計算同比增長 17%；非公認會計準則增長 3700 萬美元至 3700 萬美元，380 萬美元增長標準17%，與上一季中位數基本持平；調整後的 EBITDA 為 1,050 萬美元至 1,150 萬美元，年增 15%。儘管面臨宏觀經濟逆風，我們的指南仍假設第二季所有指標（支出、收入、CXT 和調整後的 EBITDA）都將創下紀錄。

In closing, we delivered another strong quarter, executing against our strategic priorities, advancing innovation across our platform, and returning capital to shareholders through opportunistic share repurchases at compelling valuations. We believe we are well positioned to navigate near-term macroeconomic headwinds while continuing to capitalize on secular tailwinds, including CTV, addressability, and ViantAI.

最後，我們又取得了一個強勁的季度業績，執行了我們的策略重點，推動了我們平台的創新，並透過以極具吸引力的估值進行機會性股票回購向股東返還資本。我們相信，我們已做好準備，應對近期宏觀經濟逆風，同時繼續利用包括 CTV、可尋址性和 ViantAI 在內的長期順風。

And with that, I'll turn the call back over to the operator for questions. Operator?

說完這些，我將把電話轉回給接線生以回答問題。操作員？

Jason Kreyer, Craig-Hallum.

傑森·克雷爾、克雷格·哈勒姆。

Okay, great. Thank you. This is Cal on for Jason. So maybe just first, if you could just provide a little more color on what you're hearing from your customers today? And then just in particular, as CTV continues to become a larger portion of your spend base, how do you see that potentially insulating the fundamentals from any sort of downside risk on the spend side?

好的，太好了。謝謝。這是 Cal on 為 Jason 準備的。那麼首先，您能否稍微詳細地介紹一下您今天從客戶那裡聽到的消息？然後具體來說，隨著 CTV 繼續成為支出基礎中更大的一部分，您認為這如何可能將基本面與支出方面的任何下行風險隔離？

Yeah. I'll take the first one -- your second question on CTV. We're seeing just incredibly strong growth there. There are secular tailwinds that we wanted to align ourselves with a few years back. I think we're successfully doing that.

是的。我來回答第一個問題——您在 CTV 上提出的第二個問題。我們看到那裡出現了令人難以置信的強勁增長。幾年前，我們曾希望順應長期的順風。我認為我們成功地做到了這一點。

The Direct Access program continues to be a great selling proposition. The fact that we do not take fees, we're eliminating a lot of middlemen fees in there. So if a marketer wants to buy CTV, they're going to do that through Direct Access because they're going through less middlemen.

直接存取計劃繼續成為一項出色的銷售主張。事實上，我們不收取費用，從而消除了許多中間商費用。因此，如果行銷人員想要購買 CTV，他們會透過直接訪問來實現，因為他們需要經過的中間商較少。

It's a great proposition. And really, just the scale of our Household ID just continues to pay big dividends to marketers because they want to be able to target in CTV, and ultimately, that plays out in the measurement where they see how impactful that is. Those are all the things combined that got that to the share that it is today at 45%. Do you want to add anything there?

這是一個很棒的提議。事實上，我們的家庭 ID 規模持續為行銷人員帶來巨大收益，因為他們希望能夠瞄準 CTV，最終，這在測量中得到體現，他們可以看到其影響力有多大。所有這些因素綜合起來，使得這一比例達到了今天的 45%。您想添加什麼嗎？

No.

不。

And sorry, Cal, what was your first one again?

抱歉，卡爾，你的第一個是什麼？

What customers are saying, I believe, was the --

我相信顧客們說的是--

Yeah. And are you specifically talking related to tariffs?

是的。您具體談的是關稅問題嗎？

Yeah, just the sentiment and what you're hearing from customers.

是的，只是情緒和你從客戶那裡聽到的。

Yeah. As we talked about, pretty limited in terms of the numbers of advertisers. If I were to characterize it, less than 10 advertisers. And those are predominantly in consumer goods and some retail. They have pretty direct exposure to supply chains that were hit by the tariffs.

是的。正如我們所討論的，廣告商的數量相當有限。如果要我描述的話，廣告商不到 10 個。這些主要集中在消費品和一些零售領域。他們直接受到受到關稅衝擊的供應鏈的影響。

So we saw some delayed spending out of them in the second quarter, and they postponed some of those investments into second half. So there is certainly, as everybody is -- you'll hear on other calls, there's some uncertainty out there. But we believe that marketers have become much more resilient just over the past -- I think they've weathered a lot of storms.

因此，我們看到他們在第二季推遲了一些支出，並將部分投資推遲到了下半年。因此，正如大家在其他電話會議上聽到的那樣，肯定存在一些不確定性。但我們相信，行銷人員在過去變得更加有韌性了——我認為他們已經經歷了許多風暴。

The kind of fake economic recession or worries of economic recession in late '22 caused a little bit of a headwind to ad spend, but it quickly came back in Q1 of 2023. I think COVID, there was certainly a lot of uncertainty in the market. Yes, there was a short pause, but marketers quickly responded. And I think what's happening now is I think there's a lot of scenario planning happening.

2022 年末的那種假經濟衰退或對經濟衰退的擔憂給廣告支出帶來了一些阻力，但它在 2023 年第一季迅速回升。我認為，由於新冠疫情，市場肯定存在著許多不確定性。是的，出現了短暫的停頓，但行銷人員很快就做出了反應。我認為現在正在發生的情況是，有很多情境規劃正在進行中。

A lot of what-ifs.

有很多假設。

Yeah. There is uncertainty of tariffs, where they're going to land, who they affect, how they're going to handle pricing of their goods to consumers. So I know that there's a lot of scenario planning going. And that's actually good news because when they're scenario planning, they're not sitting there dazed and confused. They're planning for multiple options.

是的。關稅存在不確定性，包括關稅將在何處實施、將對誰產生影響以及他們將如何處理其產品對消費者的定價。所以我知道有很多情境規劃正在進行。這其實是個好消息，因為當他們進行情境規劃時，他們不會坐在那裡茫然和困惑。他們正在規劃多種選擇。

And I think it's going to set up -- all things being equal, at this point, I think it's going to set up for a good second half of '25.

我認為一切將會順利進行——在目前的情況下，我認為它將為 25 年下半年的良好發展做好準備。

And then maybe just a quick follow-up. Can you just kind of walk through the process of convincing advertisers to shift spend away from search and social? And just any key points that you're seeing resonate in the market to get these advertisers to move more spend to your platform?

然後可能只是一個快速的跟進。您能否簡單介紹說服廣告商將支出從搜尋和社群轉移的過程？您認為市場上有哪些關鍵點能夠引起共鳴，進而吸引廣告主將更多資金投入您的平台？

Just to start, it's about education on the consumer journeys and what's impacting what and analyzing each channel independently and then all together. And we do a lot of this education, but I would say so much is happening from even third-party measurement companies. You've seen Meta roll out incrementality models for people to use. I think more of the sophisticated advertiser set is definitely moving towards this move towards allocating spend based on incrementality, but it's a big sea change from the enormous wall of money that's been spent towards last-touch attribution. So I would characterize it as it's all about education.

首先，它是關於消費者旅程的教育，了解什麼會影響什麼，然後分別分析每個管道，然後再綜合分析所有管道。我們做了很多這方面的教育，但我想說，即使是第三方測量公司也做了很多。您已經看到 Meta 推出了增量模型供人們使用。我認為，越來越多的成熟廣告商肯定會轉向根據增量分配支出，但與花費巨額資金進行最後接觸歸因相比，這是一個巨大的變化。所以我認為這完全與教育有關。

Now that streaming TV or CTV is here, we're able to connect the dots better on a journey from TV ad exposure, showed up on Google search, bought the product on your website or through a retailer. So now that we're able to connect those dots, it's really just an education process while the marketers understand that new path.

現在串流電視或 CTV 已經出現，我們能夠更好地將從電視廣告曝光、出現在 Google 搜尋中、在您的網站上或透過零售商購買產品的過程聯繫起來。所以現在我們能夠將這些點連接起來，這實際上只是一個教育過程，同時行銷人員了解新的途徑。

And I think when your platform, which ours is, it's becoming the default measurement experiment of choice with our clients, over half of them are using incrementality to decide where they're going to spend their money. So you're educating them upfront on trying out a new form of measurement of what sometimes it's called conversion lift or sales lift, but really is, I spend another dollar in advertising, what drove another sale, then marketers are heat-seeking after that.

我認為，當您的平台（也就是我們的平台）成為我們客戶選擇的預設測量實驗時，超過一半的客戶會使用增量來決定在哪裡花錢。因此，您要提前教育他們嘗試一種新的衡量方式，有時它被稱為轉換率提升或銷售量提升，但實際上，我在廣告上又花了一美元，是什麼推動了另一筆銷售，然後行銷人員就會熱切地尋找它。

And that's why you see the share of spend on our platform in the last quarter here reach 45% in CTV. That is much higher as a percentage of mix of ad spend on our platform versus other -- versus competitors. And the reason is, is that their default measurement of choice is still last-touch attribution. And it's because they have such high preponderance of display ad spending in their platform.

這就是為什麼你會看到上個季度我們平台上的 CTV 支出份額達到了 45%。與其他競爭對手相比，我們平台上的廣告支出佔比要高得多。原因是，他們選擇的預設測量方式仍然是最後接觸歸因。這是因為他們在其平台上擁有如此高的展示廣告支出。

So if you use last-touch attribution, it always shows things like search outperformance, because it was the last ad before purchase or display ads last seen, because there's so many more of them because they're such cheaper. But when you look at incrementality, it's completely turned around. The CTV on average with our -- and this is other data that's out there, not just in ours. But on average, it has a 200% incremental lift compared to other formats and channels. If you look at search, social, and much of display advertising, that's in the mid-single digits to low-double digits of incrementality.

因此，如果您使用最後一次接觸歸因，它總是會顯示諸如搜尋表現優異之類的訊息，因為這是購買前的最後一個廣告，或者最後一次看到的展示廣告，因為它們數量更多，而且更便宜。但當你觀察增量時，情況就完全相反了。我們的 CTV 平均值 — — 這是其他數據，而不僅僅是我們的數據。但平均而言，與其他格式和管道相比，它的增量提升幅度為 200%。如果你看一下搜尋、社群和大部分展示廣告，你會發現增量在個位數中段到兩位數低段之間。

It's not even close. So yes, we do some upfront education, but really, the marketers are just heat seeking. When they see those results, they're moving the money to what's driving the largest incremental impact.

根本就不接近。所以是的，我們做了一些前期教育，但實際上，行銷人員只是在尋求熱點。當他們看到這些結果時，他們就會將資金轉移到能夠帶來最大增量影響的領域。

Chris Kuntarich, UBS.

瑞銀的 Chris Kuntarich。

Hi Chris, how are you? Emmanuel, maybe we'll come back to Chris.

嗨，克里斯，你好嗎？伊曼紐爾，也許我們會回到克里斯身邊。

Condon, JMP.

康登，JMP。

My first one is just on the advertisers that pushed spend to the back half of the year. Can you just talk about your confidence in that spend actually coming through in the back half? Like, what gives you that confidence that spend is actually going to be there in the second half of the year?

我的第一個問題是關於那些將支出推遲到下半年的廣告商。您能否談談您對下半年實際支出的信心？例如，什麼讓您有信心今年下半年確實會有支出？

And then my second one is Google launched something that appears to be akin to your Household ID, or at least they're implementing IP addresses into their DSP, into DV360. Can you just talk about what the differentiation of your Household ID is compared to what they have on their platform?

然後我的第二個想法是谷歌推出了一些類似於家庭 ID 的東西，或者至少他們正在將 IP 位址實現到他們的 DSP 和 DV360 中。您能談談您的家庭 ID 與他們平台上的相比有何不同嗎？

Yes, I'll take the first one. How we're confident in the money being moved to the back half? Those aren't verbals. Those aren't -- that wasn't what we were characterizing. And our platform, think of it like an order entry system.

是的，我選擇第一個。我們如何確信資金會轉移到後半部？這些都不是動詞。這些都不是——這不是我們所描述的。我們的平台可以想像成訂單輸入系統。

They are taking money. They may be taking some investment out of the second quarter, but they are replacing it. And so we already see that in platform and where it's scheduled. So we're highly confident in that.

他們正在收錢。他們可能從第二季度撤出了一些投資，但他們正在進行補充。我們已經在平台和安排地點看到了它。所以我們對此非常有信心。

Yes. And then just addressing Google, doing quite a sea change from where they've been over the last five years. What I would say is they would exclude and actually hide the IP address, as you mentioned, Matt. And so they've made a change to enable IP address for use across their products. Our Household ID, so one thing that's important, does not represent IP address.

是的。然後我們再談談谷歌，與過去五年相比，谷歌發生了翻天覆地的變化。我想說的是，他們會排除甚至隱藏 IP 位址，正如你所提到的，馬特。因此他們做出了改變，以便在他們的產品中使用 IP 位址。我們的家庭 ID，因此重要的一點是，它並不代表 IP 位址。

IP address is commonly used, I would say, amongst most industry ecosystem participants. What Household ID is focused on people-based identifiers where an IP address is a digital identifier that is out there with cookies. So what is Household ID? Simply put, it's your home address, your postal address, where we're then attaching other people-based identifiers to that physical home address. Very different than what Google has enabled, which is allowing the IP address to flow through Google AdX and their exchange there.

我想說，IP 位址在大多數產業生態系統參與者中都很常用。家庭 ID 專注於基於人員的標識符，其中 IP 位址是與 cookie 一起存在的數字標識符。那麼家庭身分證是什麼？簡而言之，它是您的家庭住址、郵寄地址，然後我們將其他基於人員的識別碼附加到該實際家庭住址。這與 Google 所啟用的功能非常不同，後者允許 IP 位址流經 Google AdX 及其在那裡的交換。

So they focus on a digital identifier, similar that an IP address could represent a household. But our data structure is actually based on physical address, not IP address. So similar, but different.

因此，他們專注於數字標識符，類似於 IP 位址可以代表一個家庭。但我們的資料結構其實是基於實體位址，而不是IP位址。如此相似，卻又不同。

Yes. And I think IP addresses, although an interesting turn of events for Google to all of a sudden say IP addresses are good, when they have had years and years of scaring the ecosystem that, one, these were privacy violations; and two, that they should be eradicated. Google actually did eradicate IP addresses in AdX. Although they've come out and said that they are going to use them, and they're okay now, they are still not passing that through AdX. So on one hand, it's good.

是的。我認為 IP 位址，儘管谷歌突然表示 IP 位址很好，這是一個有趣的轉變，但他們多年來一直在恐嚇生態系統，稱其一是侵犯隱私；二是應該將其消滅。谷歌確實在 AdX 中消除了 IP 位址。儘管他們已經表示要使用它們，而且現在也沒什麼問題，但他們仍然沒有透過 AdX 傳遞這些訊息。所以從一方面來說，這是好的。

And I do believe they made this move because of a lot of the monopoly trials that are going on right now, a lot of the investigations. They're trying to show that they're playing a little nicer. But if you read through it a little bit more, well, again, it's privacy for thee, but not for me. They are not passing that IP address through the AdX ecosystem. So I think that that's a little bit of a false flag from them.

我確實相信他們之所以採取這項舉措，是因為目前正在進行大量的壟斷審判和調查。他們試圖表明他們打得更友善一些。但是如果你再仔細讀一下，那麼，再說一次，這對你來說是隱私，但對我來說不是。他們沒有透過 AdX 生態系統傳遞該 IP 位址。所以我認為這是他們的一個虛假舉動。

But nonetheless, IP addresses, just in general, are probably not the most useful. A lot of times you get an IP address that comes across, it's a server side IP. It may not be necessarily the Household. A lot of platforms like a Roku run through a proxy, so you can't look at those. So it's not a panacea by any means, but certainly, it's much different than our Household ID.

但儘管如此，IP 位址一般來說可能不是最有用的。很多時候，您得到的 IP 位址是伺服器端 IP。它可能不一定是家庭。許多平台（例如 Roku）都透過代理程式運行，因此您無法查看這些內容。所以它絕不是萬能的，但肯定與我們的家庭身分證有很大不同。

But exactly, as Chris said, the IP address, Google has it on 100%. And if you want it as an industry participant, you have to call every publisher that you're buying from and ask them to enable it. So it's always a fake proposition of we're open and playing ball, but they secretly change the rules behind the scene where it advantages them.

但正如克里斯所說，Google 100% 掌握了 IP 位址。如果您作為行業參與者想要它，您必須致電您購買產品的每家出版商並要求他們啟用它。因此，這始終是一個虛假的主張，即我們開放並參與其中，但他們卻在幕後偷偷改變規則，以使自己受益。

Chris Kuntarich.

克里斯·昆塔里奇。

All right. Sorry about that. Just going back to the April comment, any color you could share there versus the context of the 14% to 19% rev ex-TAC growth guide for 2Q? And then just the second question would be around volume of new customer conversations. And how is that trending right now versus the beginning of the year?

好的。很抱歉。回到 4 月的評論，您可以分享一下與第二季 14% 至 19% 的不含 TAC 收入成長指南相關的情況嗎？第二個問題是關於新客戶對話的數量。與年初相比，現在的趨勢如何？

And how are you thinking about that contribution to rev ex-TAC growth at this point versus how you were thinking about it at the beginning of the year?

與您年初的想法相比，您現在如何看待對 rev ex-TAC 成長的貢獻？

Yes. Chris, can you reask the first question? I wasn't clear on what you're asking.

是的。克里斯，你能重新問第一個問題嗎？我不清楚你在問什麼。

You had just said that April was strong persistent growth. And just curious kind of versus the context of 14% to 19%. Was it within that range? Was it above that range? Kind of how should we be thinking about that strong persistent growth in April?

您剛才說四月是持續強勁成長。只是有點好奇，與 14% 到 19% 的背景相比。在那個範圍內嗎？是否超出該範圍？我們該如何看待四月強勁的持續成長？

Larry?

拉里？

Yes. It was within that range. But typically, what we see as we did in Q1, where we build month-over-month. So in Q1, February is bigger than January, March is bigger than February. So we started out the quarter strong.

是的。就在那個範圍內。但通常情況下，正如我們在第一季看到的那樣，我們的銷售額是逐月增長的。因此，在第一季度，二月比一月大，三月比二月大。因此我們本季開局強勁。

We were pacing to have nice quarter-over-quarter bumps, more than expected in May and June. We did have this little -- the pause or the moving of some money from Q2 to the second half, which muted that -- those May and June growth rates a bit. But it's trending in the direction we typically see, where each month is getting larger than the next. But our overall growth rate, the impact of those handful of advertisers is about 4% to 5% lower growth rate as a result of that money moving out of Q2.

我們預期季度環比成長良好，五月和六月的增幅超過預期。我們確實經歷了一些小的暫停，或將一些資金從第二季轉移到了下半年，這在一定程度上抑制了 5 月和 6 月的成長率。但它的趨勢與我們通常看到的方向一致，即每個月的成長幅度都比下個月更大。但我們的整體成長率，由於第二季資金流出，這些少數廣告商的影響導致成長率下降了約 4% 至 5%。

On your next question, Chris, volume of new advertisers. As we said on our last call, our pipeline has never been stronger. We're getting much larger looks at bigger pieces of business, meaning larger and larger advertisers. We're pretty -- we feel very bullish on the back half in terms of new customer pipeline. And in those areas, I would kind of put it in 3 buckets.

克里斯，關於你的下一個問題，新廣告商的數量。正如我們在上次電話會議上所說的那樣，我們的管道從未如此強大。我們正在更廣泛地關注更大的業務，這意味著越來越多的廣告商。我們非常看好下半年新客戶通路的前景。在這些領域，我會把它分成三類。

One is just -- has been our CTV dominance. When a marketer comes to us, and they see, and they hear about the preponderance of CTV spend on our platform that they naturally ask why. They understand what they're spending in other platforms. And so, as we go through the value propositions there in CTV with the scale of our Household ID and then the recent addition of IRIS_ID, that's drawing a lot of interest and new business interest towards us.

一是——一直是我們的 CTV 主導地位。當行銷人員來找我們時，他們看到並聽說我們的平台上 CTV 支出佔了絕大多數，他們自然會問為什麼。他們了解自己在其他平台上的花費。因此，當我們透過 CTV 中的家庭 ID 規模以及最近新增的 IRIS_ID 來闡述價值主張時，這吸引了大量的興趣和新的商業興趣。

Just recently with IRIS_ID, we just had a good handful of -- even in the first quarter of pretty good-sized Fortune 500 brands shifting spend and testing IRIS_ID, and we see great results there. So pretty bullish on that. And the last one, I'll say, will be in the second half that's going to contribute is ViantAI.

就在最近，透過 IRIS_ID，我們剛剛獲得了大量數據——甚至在第一季度，就有相當規模的財富 500 強品牌轉移支出並測試 IRIS_ID，並且我們看到了很好的效果。我對此非常樂觀。我要說的是，下半年將做出貢獻的是 ViantAI。

A lot of the organizations, agencies, brand marketers, they see the value in AI -- but there is a bit of -- they need to rework their organizations to be able to consume AI. They all want the efficiencies that it offers. And so we've seen a bit of that, but it's been tremendous for new business wins.

許多組織、機構和品牌行銷人員都看到了人工智慧的價值——但他們需要重新組織自己的組織才能使用人工智慧。他們都希望獲得它所提供的效率。我們已經看到了一些這樣的情況，但它對於新業務的成功具有巨大的作用。

And we really see a strong pickup of ViantAI in the back half of the year, helping automate workflows, moving work within agencies to more strategic work instead of the road work of campaign planning and setup and bidding and buying. So we're really excited about that.

我們確實看到 ViantAI 在下半年強勁成長，幫助實現工作流程自動化，將機構內部的工作轉移到更具策略性的工作，而不是活動規劃和設置、競標和購買的道路工作。所以我們對此感到非常興奮。

Got it. Very helpful. Maybe just one last one on the non-GAAP OpEx expenses in 2025. It was nice 1Q cost controls here. Anything we should be thinking about specifically in the back half of the year that would be driving this above where you were previously talking to?

知道了。非常有幫助。也許這只是關於 2025 年非 GAAP 營運支出的最後一點。第一季的成本控制很好。我們應該特別考慮下半年的哪些方面，以推動這一目標超越您之前談論的目標？

No. I think it's -- last we spoke, kind of the 16%, 17% range. It does -- included in them -- that is about 500 basis points relating to the acquisitions. So -- but overall, I think for the year, you're talking 16%, 17% growth.

不。我認為——我們上次談話時，大概在 16% 到 17% 的範圍內。確實如此——其中包括——與收購相關的約 500 個基點。所以 — — 但總體而言，我認為今年的成長速度是 16% 或 17%。

Maria Ripps.

瑪麗亞·里普斯。

I just wanted to follow up on your macro commentary and just ask about three verticals. One is Auto. I think, Larry, you mentioned that it's not that significant for you anymore. Maybe just comment on that. Then number two is Retail vertical.

我只是想跟進你的宏觀評論並詢問三個垂直領域。一個是自動。拉里，我想你提到這對你來說已經不再那麼重要了。也許只是對此發表評論。第二個是零售垂直領域。

I believe that's a sizable kind of vertical for you. Maybe talk about that vertical more broadly. And then three, sort of what are you seeing across your Public Sector vertical here more recently?

我相信這對你來說是一個相當大的垂直領域。也許可以更廣泛地談論這個垂直領域。第三，您最近在公共部門垂直領域看到了什麼？

Yes. On the verticals, so in automotive, we definitely under-indexed in automotive. And specifically with OEMs, we highly under-indexed there. So we don't believe we have a lot of exposure there. Within retail, as we said, we saw some small impact -- we don't believe that the most affected by tariffs in the retail category, we believe we're under-indexed in that section as well. We've done a large analysis on this. But -- and within public services, Larry, do you want to comment on that?

是的。在垂直領域，例如汽車產業，我們的指數肯定偏低。特別是對於 OEM，我們嚴重低估了這一點。因此我們認為我們在那裡不會有太多曝光。正如我們所說，在零售業中，我們看到了一些小的影響——我們不認為零售類別中受關稅影響最大的是零售類別，我們認為我們在該領域的指數也較低。我們對此進行了廣泛的分析。但是——在公共服務領域，拉里，你想對此發表評論嗎？

Yes. Public services has been consistent. It was a big growth -- really big growth driver for us a couple of quarters ago for a couple of consecutive quarters, but it's holding steady and growing nicely.

是的。公共服務始終保持一致。幾個季度前，這對我們來說是一個巨大的成長動力，連續幾個季度都是如此，但它保持穩定，成長良好。

Got it. And then secondly, I just wanted to ask about your Direct Access program, and you obviously have a pretty strong lineup of partners there. Are you looking to sort of to extend this functionality to add more content or more partners or sort of more inventory? And is there sort of any difference in the economics for you between Direct Access CTV and other CTV spend?

知道了。其次，我只想詢問您的直接訪問計劃，顯然您在那裡擁有相當強大的合作夥伴陣容。您是否希望擴展此功能以添加更多內容或更多合作夥伴或更多庫存？對您來說，直接接取 CTV 和其他 CTV 支出在經濟上是否有差異？

Well, we don't charge a fee for Direct Access. And so no, we do not make -- we don't make more by our clients buying through Direct Access. However, we do see the second derivative there, which is if they're buying more efficiently, they're going to -- in theory, they get better results, and therefore, they spend more money. So that's why we've held our stance there that we don't need to charge for this. It's a benefit to marketers when we can connect directly with content owners.

嗯，我們不收取直接訪問的費用。所以，我們不會透過客戶透過 Direct Access 購買賺取更多利潤。然而，我們確實看到了第二個衍生問題，那就是如果他們更有效地購買，他們將會——理論上，他們會得到更好的結果，因此，他們會花更多的錢。這就是為什麼我們堅持認為我們不需要為此收費。當我們可以直接與內容所有者聯繫時，這對行銷人員來說是有益的。

So we want to maintain --

所以我們希望保持--

Cut the savings through.

削減儲蓄。

In terms of other partners, really, what we're doing now is you've seen -- you'll continue to see, and you have seen us doing press with the likes of Disneys and Paramountss, not only putting them in Direct Access, but them adopting our Household ID and there are scores of those publishers who have done that, that continues to add to our scale and Household ID and also with IRIS_ID.

就其他合作夥伴而言，實際上，我們現在正在做的事情，您已經看到了——您將繼續看到，您已經看到我們與迪士尼和派拉蒙等公司合作進行新聞發布，不僅將它們納入直接訪問，而且它們還採用我們的家庭 ID，並且有許多出版商已經這樣做了，這繼續擴大了我們的規模和家庭 ID，還有 IRIS_ID。

I mean the fact that they're now picking up, we announced IRIS, TCL, CNN -- or excuse me, I said IRIS, but Paramount was the big one. We've doubled the presence of IRIS_ID in the bid stream on CTV since the acquisition. So that's extremely positive as we continue to roll that out. But we're -- basically, we're making and continuing to reinforce Direct Access program has a lot of benefits, not just cost savings to marketers, and that's why they keep spending more through it.

我的意思是，他們現在正在崛起，我們宣布了 IRIS、TCL、CNN——或者對不起，我說的是 IRIS，但派拉蒙是最大的。自收購以來，我們在 CTV 的競價流中將 IRIS_ID 的存在增加了一倍。因此，隨著我們繼續推廣這項舉措，這將是非常積極的。但基本上，我們正​​在製定並繼續加強直接訪問計劃，該計劃有很多好處，不僅僅是為行銷人員節省成本，這也是他們繼續透過該計劃投入更多資金的原因。

Barton Crockett, Rosenblatt.

巴頓·克羅克特，羅森布拉特。

I guess a couple of things, if I could. One is in terms of the commentary around this broad transition in incrementality, you guys, obviously, you point to your own experience, your growth is kind of evidence of that. But it seems this is such a powerful idea that there should be broader evidence of it. The flip side argument could be maybe people just like your products and services. So what else can you point to that argues that this is really a big macro theme versus you guys selling a few products and services that people like?

如果可以的話我想說幾件事。一是圍繞著這廣泛的漸進式轉變的評論，你們顯然指出了自己的經歷，你們的成長就是證據。但這似乎是一個非常有力的想法，應該有更廣泛的證據來證明它。另一方面的論點可能是人們可能只是喜歡您的產品和服務。那麼，您還能指出什麼來證明這確實是一個宏觀主題，而不是您們銷售一些人們喜歡的產品和服務？

You know what, great question.

你知道嗎，這個問題問得好。

Very good question.

非常好的問題。

And it's one that gets asked quite a lot, actually. One of the reasons why I'll tell you why it's -- one, it is a -- it is an industry theme. It is picking up steam, but I wrote a post on this on LinkedIn, that old habits die hard. 80% of the money, we believe, that is in digital advertising is spent based on last touch attribution, meaning whoever showed the last ad right before a consumer purchase, gets all the credit for it and the money flows that way. It's absolutely wild to think that, that's where we are today that you're not -- you're essentially going to deprioritize things like television and, say, streaming audio because those are not at the point of purchase ad products.

事實上，這是一個經常被問到的問題。我要告訴你為什麼它如此的原因之一就是——它是一個行業主題。它正在逐漸流行起來，但我在 LinkedIn 上寫了一篇關於此的文章，說舊習難改。我們認為，數位廣告支出的 80% 是基於最後一次接觸歸因的，這意味著在消費者購買之前展示最後一條廣告的人將獲得全部功勞，並且資金以這種方式流動。想想真是太瘋狂了，我們今天所處的境地是——你基本上會降低電視和串流媒體音訊等事物的優先級，因為它們不是購買廣告產品的重點。

But they do drive the data is clear of how much incrementality that they drive. And I believe the entire marketing organizations are completely built around these KPIs in digital advertising. I mentioned the sports apparel brand. I mean, it's a great case study around this. There's many more.

但它們確實驅動了數據，清楚地顯示了它們驅動了多少增量。我相信整個行銷組織都是完全圍繞著數位廣告中的這些 KPI 建立的。我提到了運動服裝品牌。我的意思是，這是一個很好的案例研究。還有更多。

Starbucks was another example of something similar where organizations are geared towards better and better and more and more efficient KPIs in marketing. But at the same time, over time, they have slumping sales or top line revenue. And so I think it is a little bit of a reeducation to a degree. And part of this is really -- I think CMOs understand this. They understand that TV drives impact and maybe a branded search term isn't responsible for incremental sales, but they keep buying it, and you have to ask why.

星巴克是另一個類似的例子，其組織致力於在行銷中實現越來越好、越來越有效率的 KPI。但同時，隨著時間的推移，他們的銷售額或營業收入會下滑。所以我認為這在某種程度上是一種再教育。其中一部分確實是——我認為 CMO 理解這一點。他們知道電視可以帶來影響力，也許品牌搜尋字詞不會對銷售產生影響，但他們還是會繼續購買，你不得不問為什麼。

And I just think it's the over-measurement of things. And oftentimes, it's the presence of the CFO in the room of wanting more accountability for advertising. So although one thing may appear more accountable like Google Search or display ads at the point of purchase. But we think that this is definitely changing. It's not just us, but it is something that we have to continue to educate in the industry around.

我只是覺得這是對事物的過度衡量。很多時候，財務長在場是為了希望對廣告業務承擔更多責任。因此，儘管有些東西可能看起來更負責任，例如Google搜尋或在購買時展示廣告。但我們認為這種情況肯定正在改變。這不僅是我們的事情，也是我們必須繼續在業界進行教育的事情。

And part of just one piece, Barton, is Meta came out and open source their model for incrementalities because so many advertisers are asking to measure incrementality versus the old traditional cost per customer acquisition. So I think it's -- you'll see more and more evidence come out, yes, from our org. And I think you'll see a litany of research coming out that shows that branded search doesn't provide as much value as initial thought. Social provides less value than initial thought, and television really is the main stimulator of consumer demand.

Barton 是 Meta 的一部分，它推出了增量模型並開源，因為許多廣告商要求衡量增量與舊的傳統每個客戶獲取成本。所以我認為——是的，你會看到越來越多的證據從我們的組織中出現。我認為你會看到大量的研究表明品牌搜尋並沒有提供像最初想像的那麼大的價值。社交提供的價值比原想的少，而電視才是真正刺激消費者需求的主要因素。

Okay. And then something on the guidance and the outlook. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you guys might have been saying in the last earnings that you expected your revenue to grow faster than your expenses and there to be some margin expansion of EBITDA as a percentage of contribution ex-TAC. Is that something you still see at this point?

好的。然後是關於指導和展望的一些內容。如果我錯了，請糾正我，但我認為你們可能在上次收益報告中說過，你們預計收入增長速度將快於支出，並且 EBITDA 的利潤率將有所擴大，即扣除 TAC 貢獻的百分比。現在您還看到這個嗎？

Absolutely. For the year, we expect that to be the case. Our guidance is they're roughly equal in this quarter, primarily due to some of that money moving out of Q2 into the second half, but we continue to -- that's a big metric of ours that we're very focused on to ensure that we're increasing our EBITDA margins throughout the year.

絕對地。對於今年來說，我們預計情況將會如此。我們的預期是，本季度它們大致持平，主要是因為部分資金從第二季度轉移到下半年，但我們將繼續進行——這是我們的一個重要指標，我們非常關注它，以確保我們全年提高 EBITDA 利潤率。

Okay. And then if I could just throw in one more. In terms of Google, they have offered to make some concession short of a breakup in terms of not using first look, last look, I think a couple of other things around the minimums allowing publishers to differentiate, giving publishers full view of what goes through. In your mind, do those -- would those be helpful if you didn't get the breakup, but you just got that? Would that be helpful to you?

好的。然後如果我可以再補充一點的話。就Google而言，他們已經做出一些讓步，除了分手之外，他們還不使用「首次瀏覽」和「最後瀏覽」等最低限度的規定，允許出版商進行區分，讓出版商全面了解整個流程。在你心裡，如果你沒有經歷分手，而是經歷了這一切，這些會有幫助嗎？這對你有幫助嗎？

No.

不。

No. Without a breakup, Google is a machine. And I think the hard part is the antitrust cases are attacking Search or adtech or YouTube or, let's say, significant parts of the machine, but they all work in lockstep to control the flow of Internet traffic, what consumers get exposed to and what they don't get exposed to.

不。如果不分拆的話，Google就是一台機器。我認為困難的部分是反壟斷案件正在攻擊搜尋或廣告技術或 YouTube，或者可以說，機器的重要部分，但它們都齊心協力控制網路流量，控制消費者接觸到什麼和不能接觸到什麼。

I wrote a lengthy post on how Google is the real reason for Myspace's decline, not Facebook, being from the inside, looking at the internal metrics, what happens when you get taken off of page 1 of Google. You evaporate off the Internet is the answer. And so Google controls traffic at the start of the Internet journey for most consumers, and they push that traffic wherever they want, usually to their owned and operated businesses that they've either acquired or control through their ad exchange.

我寫了一篇長文，闡述為什麼 Google 是 Myspace 衰落的真正原因，而不是 Facebook，從內部來看，看看內部指標，當你從 Google 首頁上掉下來時會發生什麼。答案就是讓你從網路上消失。因此，谷歌在大多數消費者開始網路之旅時就控制著流量，並將這些流量推送到他們想要的任何地方，通常是推送到他們透過廣告交易平台收購或控制的自有和經營的企業。

So short of a breakup, there is no stopping that machine from going through. If you want to use instead of Search, reach out via e-mail, let's say, well, they control Gmail, and they control if you go in the Junk filter as well. And I can't tell you how an organization that big worked perfectly in lockstep to ensure all these pieces were there, but they did, they executed perfectly, and it shut out so many players.

因此，除非發生分手，否則無法阻止機器繼續運作。如果您想使用搜尋以外的方式透過電子郵件聯繫，那麼，他們控制 Gmail，並且他們也控制您是否進入垃圾郵件過濾器。我無法告訴你，這麼大的組織是如何完美地齊心協力確保所有這些部分都到位的，但他們確實做到了，他們執行得非常完美，並且阻止了這麼多的參與者。

So I personally, my opinion is that short of a breakup, it would have absolutely no impact because they can continue to use the cash flow of business A to subsidize business B until the market participants are gone, which we saw over and over and over.

所以我個人的觀點是，除非分拆，否則絕對不會有任何影響，因為他們可以繼續使用企業 A 的現金流來補貼企業 B，直到市場參與者消失，這種情況我們一再看到。

So the mantra that Google came out with that IPO of Do no evil (sic - "Don't be evil") is certainly we're substantially past that. I think the only solution for future monopolies from the government to do is to break them up. So there's actual repercussions for breaking the law.

因此，Google在 IPO 時提出的「Do no evil」（原文如此，即「不作惡」）的口號無疑意味著我們已經遠遠超越了那個時代。我認為政府未來解決壟斷問題的唯一方法就是打破它們。因此，違法確實會產生後果。

Mauricio Munoz, Raymond James.

毛里西奧·穆諾茲、雷蒙·詹姆斯。

I just wanted to follow up on the -- on your commentary about the modest demand being pushed out to the second half. And apologies if this was answered already being juggling within calls. But Larry, did you quantify the impact of this event in your second quarter guidance?

我只是想跟進您關於適度需求被推遲到下半年的評論。如果這個問題已經在通話過程中得到解答，我們深感抱歉。但是拉里，你在第二季的指導中量化了這件事的影響嗎？

Correct. We said it was essentially 3% to 4% of expected revenue in CXT, which equates to about a reduction in our growth rate that we would otherwise have had of 4% to 5% for a CXT in revenue.

正確的。我們說這基本上是 CXT 預期收入的 3% 到 4%，這相當於我們的 CXT 收入成長率減少了 4% 到 5%。

That's very helpful. And from a customer perspective, was this driven by your larger customers or the long tail of your small advertiser base? And what channels or formats were most impacted by the pushout?

這非常有幫助。從客戶角度來看，這是由您的大客戶還是小型廣告客戶群的長尾效應所推動的？哪些管道或形式受到此次推廣的最大影響？

Why don't you just take the first part, Larry.

拉里，為什麼不只選擇第一部分？

Yes. So it was about 5 customers, no like extra large customer, not really super small ones kind of in the middle type customers. In terms of channels, it really was kind of typical of the mix that we normally see because the customers were all a little bit different in how they approach advertising. So it didn't heavily impact one channel versus another. It's kind of consistent -- generally consistent with the mix we ordinarily see.

是的。所以大約有 5 位顧客，不是超大顧客，也不是超小顧客，而是中等類型的顧客。就管道而言，這確實是我們通常看到的典型組合，因為客戶在處理廣告的方式上都略有不同。因此它不會對一個管道和另一個管道產生嚴重影響。這有點一致——通常與我們通常看到的混合物一致。

Great. And then yes, to my question, and this is on the competitive landscape. And Chris, you did touch on this in your prepared remarks. And I'm talking about the perceived competitive threat from Amazon. So yes, there's been a lot of attention and some of our checks continue to suggest that Amazon is looking to expand share at price points.

偉大的。是的，對於我的問題，這是關於競爭格局的。克里斯，你確實在準備好的發言中提到了這一點。我說的是亞馬遜的競爭威脅。是的，這引起了很多關注，而且我們的一些檢查繼續表明亞馬遜正在尋求以價格點擴大份額。

And this is at the very high end of the advertising base. So with the understanding that you are more on the mid-market, I might not even see this. Maybe you can talk about the defensibility of Viant if other scale DSPs were to come down market and start competing with you for more of the mid- to smaller advertising and agency opportunity, given pressure from Amazon or worsening of the macro backdrop, but if you can comment on that.

這是廣告基礎中非常高端的部分。因此，考慮到您更側重於中端市場，我可能甚至看不到這一點。也許您可以談談，如果其他規模的 DSP 進入市場並開始與您競爭更多的中型到小型廣告和代理機會，考慮到亞馬遜的壓力或宏觀背景的惡化，Viant 的防禦能力如何，但如果您能對此發表評論的話。

Yes. Well, I would just classify Amazon as they compete with many, many, many verticals out there. And then I think what the perception by investors around Amazon is around their data that they have this amazing data set. And of course, within the retail product category, their data set is very, very strong, probably second to none out there. But if you look at other verticals like automotive, quick service restaurants, travel and tourism, the data set that Amazon possesses has no benefit to that vertical category, and they have no position of strength there.

是的。好吧，我只會對亞馬遜進行分類，因為他們與許多許多垂直行業競爭。然後我認為投資者對亞馬遜數據的看法是，他們擁有這個驚人的數據集。當然，在零售產品類別中，他們的數據集非常非常強大，可能是首屈一指的。但如果你看看其他垂直產業，如汽車、快餐店、旅遊和旅遊業，亞馬遜擁有的資料集對這些垂直類別沒有任何好處，而且他們在那裡沒有優勢地位。

So certainly, in retail, if you sell consumer goods, they are going to have a great data set for you as an advertiser. I think, secondarily, what's driving their revenue growth is the sale of merchandise through their store. And in turn, they require people to spend in advertising based on -- as a percentage of those gross merchandise sales through their retail store. So I think a lot of the growth is really due to the sale of merchandise to the end consumers that's powering their ad platform.

因此，在零售業，如果你銷售消費品，他們肯定會為你作為廣告商提供大量數據集。我認為，其次，推動其收入成長的是透過其商店銷售的商品。反過來，他們要求人們根據其零售店商品銷售總額的一定百分比來支付廣告費用。因此，我認為，很大一部分成長實際上是由於向最終消費者銷售商品，從而為他們的廣告平台提供動力。

For retail, consumer goods businesses, Amazon is going to be a really good partner for you and probably already is in critical to your success. But if you're in financial services, automotive, quick service restaurants, many, many, most other vertical categories that make up the advertising industry, even at the Fortune 500 level, Mauricio, their data set has no value to your business overall.

對於零售、消費品企業來說，亞馬遜將成為您真正的好合作夥伴，並且可能已經對您的成功至關重要。但是如果你從事金融服務、汽車、快餐店以及構成廣告行業的許多其他垂直類別，甚至財富 500 強企業，毛里西奧，他們的數據集對你的整體業務沒有任何價值。

So I think overall, it's less just about a mid-market versus big customer setup, and more about what proprietary data does Amazon have and where does that give them a competitive advantage. That's squarely for the most part in retail, and not so great in most other categories.

所以我認為總的來說，這不僅涉及中端市場與大客戶的設置，更重要的是亞馬遜擁有哪些專有數據以及這些數據在哪些方面為他們帶來了競爭優勢。這在零售業中是普遍存在的，但在大多數其他類別中情況就不那麼好了。

And in Retail, one other point, too, just to dispel any misunderstanding. In the mid-market, Google has been in the mid-market. Trade Desk has been in the mid-market, and mid-market customers do buy advertising from Amazon DSP. But as Tim had talked about, most of that is sponsored listing ads. So we don't really see them in the true DSP self-service arena.

在零售業中，還有另外一點，只是為了消除任何誤解。在中端市場，Google已經進入中端市場。Trade Desk 一直是中階市場，而中階市場客戶確實會從 Amazon DSP 購買廣告。但正如蒂姆所說，其中大部分是贊助清單廣告。因此，我們在真正的 DSP 自助服務領域並沒有看到它們。

Much of what we see even right now is really Amazon going around trying because they've under-delivered with their upfront commitments. Because viewership is down in Prime Video outside of a few big franchises like Thursday Night Football, they're trying to place those ads somewhere, which is why they're going to say, Hey, I won't charge a fee for that, which I think is a larger problem for them.

我們現在看到的很多情況實際上都是亞馬遜在四處嘗試，因為他們沒有充分兌現前期承諾。由於 Prime Video 上除了《週四橄欖球之夜》等幾大系列節目之外的收視率都在下降，所以他們試圖在某個地方投放這些廣告，這就是為什麼他們會說，嘿，我不會為此收取費用，我認為這對他們來說是一個更大的問題。

So we've competed with large companies even in the mid-market, and we've been able to win share there. It really is -- we don't see them in the true self-service space. They do get ad commitments, as Tim is saying, they do get those, predominantly in the retail media side and sponsored listings area.

因此，即使在中端市場，我們也與大公司競爭，並且能夠贏得市場份額。確實如此——我們在真正的自助服務領域沒有看到它們。他們確實獲得了廣告承諾，正如蒂姆所說，他們確實獲得了廣告承諾，主要是在零售媒體方面和贊助商名單領域。

All right. Nat, I see you on there. We'll take your question.

好的。納特，我在那裡看到你了。我們將回答您的問題。

Yes. Guys, just wondering, we've been hearing a lot about advertisers and really large agencies beginning to bulk a little at the cost of the adtech stack. And specifically relating to one particular competitor that has gotten pretty expensive. How have you guys -- and you are now growing solidly better than that competitor, mostly because of your CTV side, which is the growth area of the industry. How well have you been -- how are the conversations going with the large agencies?

是的。夥計們，我只是想知道，我們聽到很多關於廣告商和大型代理商開始以廣告技術堆疊為代價進行規模擴張的消息。特別是與某個已經變得相當昂貴的特定競爭對手有關。你們怎麼樣了——現在你們的發展比競爭對手更加穩健，這主要歸功於你們的 CTV 業務，這是該行業的成長領域。您與大型機構的對話進度如何？

And how much room is there to move upmarket in the current environment?

在當前環境下，高端市場還有多少發展空間？

Yes. Thanks for that, Nat. Yes, we are -- as we've said in our last few quarters, we certainly are moving upmarket within what we still want to call the mid-market. A mid-market advertiser spends between $50 million and up to $1 billion a year in advertising. But they're US-based national advertisers.

是的。謝謝你，Nat。是的，正如我們在過去幾個季度所說的那樣，我們確實正在向高端市場邁進，而我們仍希望將其稱為中端市場。中型市場廣告商每年在廣告上的花費在 5,000 萬美元到 10 億美元之間。但他們是美國的全國性廣告商。

That's how I would characterize them. So we are getting bigger swings at larger accounts, certainly. One of the -- yes, there are -- there's always [groans] of any time -- and if I look over the last 10 or 15 years, you hear where there's inefficient pricing, customers may be getting charged too much. That's always an opportunity for a challenger brand. But it's kind of in our ethos.

這就是我對他們的描述。因此，我們在更大的帳戶上肯定會獲得更大的波動。其中之一 — — 是的，有 — — 任何時候都會有 [抱怨] — — 如果我回顧過去 10 年或 15 年，你會聽到定價效率低下，客戶可能會被收取過多的費用。對於挑戰者品牌來說，這始終是一個機會。但這有點像我們的精神。

It's why we don't charge for things like Direct Access because I don't need to. Why not pass the value to the customer? One, why don't I give an easy win to our salespeople when they go out and compete against somebody who's charging for the exact same thing and we don't. That's just a big win, and we can win more customers a lot faster. We want to do that.

這就是為什麼我們不對直接訪問之類的服務收費，因為我不需要。為什麼不將價值傳遞給客戶？第一，當我們的銷售人員出去與那些對完全相同的東西收費而我們卻不收費的人競爭時，為什麼我不讓他們輕鬆獲勝呢？這只是一個巨大的勝利，我們可以更快地贏得更多的客戶。我們想這樣做。

We may offer other -- we may have other pricing mechanisms that aren't fixed cost, but maybe are value-based pricing. So we only make our fee if we're providing value there. So there's things that we do where we don't need to charge. We are widely noted as being more efficient from a pricing standpoint compared to larger DSPs. That's always served us well.

我們可能會提供其他——我們可能有其他非固定成本的定價機制，但可能是基於價值的定價。因此，只有當我們提供價值時，我們才會收取費用。所以，我們做的一些事情是不需要收費的。人們普遍認為，與大型 DSP 相比，我們從定價角度來看更有效率。這對我們總是很有幫助。

And I think that's an area where we can stay because from an efficiency standpoint as a company, we don't need to charge those things, and we can still grow our EBITDA percentage.

我認為這是我們可以堅持的領域，因為從公司效率的角度來看，我們不需要收取這些費用，而且我們仍然可以提高 EBITDA 百分比。

But Nat, specifically around the competitor that you mentioned, what around -- the Trade Desk, what people are sick of is the incremental fees, not so much the platform fee. It's the incremental fees that are getting charged. And I believe with the rollout of Kokai, there were substantial increases in incremental fees, and that's really what the chatter that you're hearing about as well as it automatically opts you in to purchase through their OpenPath SSP solution. So I think those are the major issues amongst the competitor side. We really don't play that game, though, of trying to go tit-for-tat on pricing.

但是 Nat，特別是圍繞您提到的競爭對手——Trade Desk，人們厭倦的是增量費用，而不是平台費用。這是正在收取的增量費用。我相信，隨著 Kokai 的推出，增量費用會大幅增加，這就是您所聽到的討論的內容，它會自動選擇您透過其 OpenPath SSP 解決方案進行購買。所以我認為這些都是競爭對手面臨的主要問題。然而，我們確實不會玩這種在定價上針鋒相對的遊戲。

We price what we think is fair. We try and not charge as many incremental fees as the other customers. Of course, if someone asks for third-party something, there are incremental costs. But we just try and do our best job at negotiating the take rate straight across the board and providing as much transparency and visibility into what's driving value for them. Thank you, Nat.

我們按照我們認為公平的價格定價。我們盡量不收取與其他客戶一樣多的增量費用。當然，如果有人要求第三方提供某些東西，就會產生增加成本。但我們只是盡力全面協商接受率，並盡可能透明和清晰地了解什麼能為他們帶來價值。謝謝你，納特。

Sorry, I wanted to just follow up.

抱歉，我只是想跟進一下。

Yes.

是的。

You guys talked a lot about Amazon here and following up on the specific pricing issue, one of the things we've been hearing from advertisers and agencies is specifically their lack of nickel and diming kind of as you brought up, that has been a problem, particularly at the large agency side. I know that in the end, though, what's going to matter is the total percentage of the dollars that are being taken by the ad tech stack. How do you compare right now, if I wanted to put you versus Trade Desk, where do you think you come out in price on DSP plus data and I know it can vary, but on a -- for an advertiser. And is it -- is there a significant difference?

你們在這裡談論了很多關於亞馬遜的事情，並跟進具體的定價問題，我們從廣告商和代理商那裡聽到的一件事就是，他們缺乏你提到的那種斤斤計較的作風，這一直是一個問題，特別是在大型代理商方面。但我知道，最終真正重要的是廣告技術堆疊所佔的總收入百分比。如果我想把你和 Trade Desk 進行比較，你認為現在 DSP 加資料的價格會如何？我知道這可能會有所不同，但對於廣告商而言。那麼——是否存在顯著差異？

Yes. I'm sure every advertiser is somewhat different because I think the more scale -- and I think in all DSPs, the more an advertiser spends, the better the deal they may end up getting. But what we say is we get head-to-head all the time. And it's pretty simple. Pick whatever you want to buy, Mr.

是的。我確信每個廣告商都有所不同，因為我認為規模越大——我認為在所有 DSP 中，廣告商花費的越多，他們最終獲得的優惠就越好。但我們所說的是，我們總是針鋒相對。這非常簡單。先生，您想買什麼就買什麼吧。

Marketer, buy whatever publisher you want, what's the CPM? You don't have to do a lot of brain surgery. What can you acquire that content for, put an audience on it, use the same audiences in both platforms, what do you see? And we come out ahead on those all the time. And really, I would say, it's more indicative of our customer base as well.

行銷人員，購買您想要的任何出版商，CPM 是多少？你不需要做很多腦部手術。您可以獲取這些內容來做什麼，吸引觀眾，在兩個平台上使用相同的觀眾，您看到了什麼？我們在這方面始終處於領先地位。事實上，我想說，這也更能說明我們的客戶群。

We believe in the mid-market that they are much more data-driven than in the Fortune 100. It's not that the Fortune 100 doesn't -- that they're just buying ads, but a lot of them don't have a heavy reliance on e-commerce. They're not doing monthly and quarterly planning, looking at incremental return on ad spend as much. They're looking to move 1 million cases of toilet paper. So they may not be buying as much data in the market because everybody buys toilet paper.

我們相信，中階市場比財富 100 強企業更重視數據驅動。這並不是說財富 100 強企業沒有——他們只是購買廣告，但其中許多企業並不嚴重依賴電子商務。他們沒有進行月度和季度規劃，而是專注於廣告支出的增量回報。他們想要運送 100 萬箱衛生紙。因此，他們可能不會在市場上購買那麼多數據，因為每個人都購買衛生紙。

So our customer set, we believe, is largely different. And without a doubt, there's a high scrutiny on, as you say, the ad tech [TAC], there's a very high scrutiny. And what I will say is if you're not delivering the returns and if your costs get out of whack and fees that you charge are too much, their results will suffer. And so, it's obvious what happens. They may move their spend to another platform.

因此，我們相信我們的客戶群有很大不同。毫無疑問，正如你所說，廣告技術 [TAC] 受到嚴格審查，審查非常嚴格。我想說的是，如果你沒有實現回報，如果你的成本失控，你收取的費用太高，他們的表現就會受到影響。因此，發生的事情顯而易見。他們可能會將支出轉移到另一個平台。

And I think there's -- just to add some color to that. There's huge infrastructure costs that someone like The Trade Desk or Google has to carry to support the large holding companies, which is operations in 40 countries or 30 countries, wherever that footprint is. Those international operations are all money losers, absolute money losers. And so you have to -- and the profitable business is actually in North America or the US specifically.

我認為——只是為了給它增添一些色彩。像 The Trade Desk 或 Google 這樣的公司必須承擔龐大的基礎設施成本來支援大型控股公司，這些公司在 40 個或 30 個國家/地區開展業務，無論其業務範圍位於何處。那些國際業務都是賠錢的，絕對賠錢的。所以你必須——獲利業務實際上是在北美或美國。

So what you end up with is inflated take rates to pay for this international infrastructure that never spits out anything but losses. And that's where I think the main frustration is stemming from is you do have an inflated take rate, but these platforms are required to support that holding company in 40 countries.

因此，最終的結果就是，你需要以虛高的利率來支付這種國際基礎設施的費用，而這種基礎設施除了虧損之外什麼也得不到。我認為主要的挫折感源自於你的收費率確實過高，但這些平台需要支援 40 個國家的控股公司。

And the ad spend across those 39 other countries, besides the US, doesn't support the staff that's required to be there. And this is always why our strategic perspective was to stay on US national advertisers, what we call the mid-market, and focus on there because we hit operating leverage in our business model at substantially lower ad spend flowing through our platform than The Trade Desk did historically when they went public and were building their business.

除美國外，其他 39 個國家的廣告支出不足以支持在那裡工作所需的員工。這就是為什麼我們的策略視角始終是留在美國全國性廣告商（我們稱之為中端市場）上，並專注於那裡，因為我們在業務模式中達到了營運槓桿，而透過我們平台的廣告支出遠低於 The Trade Desk 在歷史上上市和建立業務時的水平。

So we think we have a strategic advantage, not having to support this enormous money loser of international operations and digital advertising because the ARPU of ad spend there is just not supported in those other countries.

因此，我們認為我們具有戰略優勢，不必支持這種龐大的國際營運和數位廣告虧損現象，因為那裡的廣告支出的 ARPU 在其他國家根本得不到支持。

At this point, there are no more raised hands in the queue.

此時，隊列中已經沒有人舉手了。

All right. And with that, we'll close the call. Thank you, everyone, for joining Viant's earnings call. See you next quarter.

好的。就這樣，我們就結束通話了。感謝大家參加 Viant 的收益電話會議。下個季度見。