By Wayne Blodwell, Global SVP Programmatic at Assembly Global
Every industry has its inherited truths — ideas passed down so many times that we stop checking whether they’re still accurate. Programmatic is full of them. We took a handful of assumptions from the early days, treated them like universal laws, and kept moving, even as the ecosystem changed completely.
So as we head into 2026, it’s worth asking: do these inherited truths still hold up?. Short answer: not really.
Supply and demand don’t work the way we pretend they do
We’ve spent years talking about programmatic supply as if it were a single, clean marketplace: liquid, transparent, equally accessible to everyone. I’m sure you have heard experts justify programmatic pricing as ‘simple supply and demand curves’.
But anyone who’s spent time inside the pipes knows that isn’t reality.
Quality varies, data varies, and the “same” impression isn’t actually the same depending on how you reach it. Two buyers can appear to be bidding on identical inventory and get completely different outcomes (for example an impression mapped to a top level domain).
If supply isn’t equal — and access definitely isn’t equal — then classic supply-and-demand mechanics don’t explain much. The price you pay has as much to do with how you reached the supply as it does with who else wanted it.
That’s not a market; that’s a maze.
Auctions aren’t the optimal buying method — they’re just the default
Auctions were a brilliant starting point for programmatic. But we’ve treated them as if they’re the pinnacle of efficiency, when really, they were simply the best tool available at the time.
For auctions to work perfectly, everyone needs the same information and the same ability to assess value. Programmatic is the opposite: signal loss, missing metadata, inconsistent publisher setups, patchy measurement and identity. You’re not bidding with clarity — you’re bidding with hope.
We’re now seeing guaranteed, collaborative and outcome-based models proving their worth. Not because auctions are “bad,” but because auctions don’t solve every job. Increasingly, the jobs that matter — business outcomes, predictability, stability — need more certainty than auctions can offer.
The real opportunity is shared risk
Programmatic has spent too long thinking about risk in a binary way: either the buyer holds it, or the seller does. But the real step forward isn’t shifting risk around — it’s sharing it in service of the outcome.
Advertisers want measurable business results. Publishers want predictable high-yielding revenue. Agencies want to deploy their expertise where it actually impacts performance. Those motivations aren’t in conflict; they just haven’t been structurally aligned.
When buyers and sellers invest in the same outcome, incentives finally line up. Pricing gets more honest. Expectations get clearer. And AI-driven systems can optimise toward what everyone genuinely cares about — not just what clears an auction.
Shared risk doesn’t blur accountability; it sharpens it. It creates a buying environment where everyone has skin in the game and everyone benefits when the campaign performs.
A final thought for 2026
Programmatic doesn’t need new jargon; it needs new assumptions — assumptions built around the reality of how the ecosystem now works.
- Supply isn’t equal, and access isn’t uniform.
- Auctions are a tool, not a belief system.
- Shared risk and shared outcomes are the most aligned path forward.
If we rethink the foundations, the development of a new and better system starts to make a lot more sense. With the advancements in AI-first systems, if there’s ever a good year to start, it’s 2026.
