AdTech and digital media
We work with DSPs, SSPs, ad networks, retail media and CTV businesses that need defensible revenue presentation, reliable platform economics and working-capital control before an audit, financing or sale exposes weaknesses in contracts, traffic quality, data lineage or collection risk.
Reported scale can change without a single impression changing. The break usually starts where commercial contracts, auction data, billing logic and accounting policy describe the same transaction differently.
Management treats billing, credit risk or cash collection as proof that the platform is principal. The IFRS 15 or ASC 606 analysis does not identify the specified service or test whether the company controls it before transfer.
Advertiser, agency, platform and publisher terms assign responsibility, pricing discretion, inventory risk, rebates, makegoods and invalid-traffic remedies differently. Accounting applies one policy to arrangements that contain different promises and risk allocations.
Ad server, exchange, verification, billing and general-ledger totals use different time zones, identifiers and adjustment windows. Late events and manual credits enter after close, with no bridge back to impressions, campaign delivery or customer invoice.
Media cost, data, verification, platform fees, sales incentives and traffic-quality losses are spread across teams. A blended margin can rise while a channel, publisher cohort, geography or campaign type destroys contribution.
We start with the transaction and the contract chain. The work then connects accounting policy, data, commercial economics, treasury and controls rather than treating each as a separate review.
Analyse each material arrangement under IFRS 15 or ASC 606, identify the specified service, assess control before transfer and document the gross-or-net conclusion.
Review the serviceConnect delivery events, contract terms, billing, credits and journals through a controlled revenue bridge with cut-off, completeness and approval evidence.
Review the serviceBuild take rate and contribution margin by advertiser, publisher, campaign, inventory type, geography and supply path without confusing gross billings with revenue.
Review the serviceModel advertiser receipts, publisher payouts, credits, dispute timing and cash exposure by cohort, then set payment and escalation rules around the resulting gaps.
Review the serviceSegment agency and direct-advertiser exposure, connect ageing and dispute data to collection behaviour, and document expected-credit-loss assumptions and overlays.
Review the serviceThe accounting conclusion follows the actual promise and evidence in each contract, not the platform label. Industry protocols support transaction traceability; they do not decide the accounting result by themselves.
The analysis identifies each specified good or service and asks whether the company controls it before transfer to the customer. Primary responsibility, inventory risk and pricing discretion are indicators, not a checklist that replaces the control assessment. The conclusion determines gross or net revenue presentation. IFRS 15, ASC 606, principal versus agent, specified service, control before transfer, gross versus net.
Advertiser contracts may promise impressions, campaign delivery, managed service, data or another combined output. We map performance obligations, transaction price and recognition timing, then address rebates, volume incentives, makegoods, service credits and other variable consideration on their contractual basis. performance obligation, transaction price, variable consideration, rebates, volume incentives, makegoods, contract assets, contract liabilities.
OpenRTB events, ads.txt or app-ads.txt, sellers.json and the SupplyChain object can help identify authorised sellers and intermediaries. We use the available identifiers to map DSP, SSP, exchange, reseller and publisher roles, then reconcile that path to delivery, settlement and billing data. OpenRTB, ads.txt, app-ads.txt, sellers.json, SupplyChain object, DSP, SSP, supply path optimisation.
Invalid traffic, ad fraud, made-for-advertising inventory, verification disputes and brand-safety remedies can change collectable revenue and publisher cost. We connect each signal to the contract, adjustment window, approval evidence and the resulting credit, clawback, deduction or accounting estimate. invalid traffic, IVT, ad fraud, made-for-advertising, MFA, verification, clawback.
Each artefact is built from the contracts and source data in scope. Unsupported positions, missing fields and judgement points remain visible so management and the auditor can see what still needs resolution.
Contract population, specified-service analysis, control assessment, indicator evidence, conclusion by arrangement and gross-or-net accounting map.
Advertiser, agency, platform and publisher promises, billing rights, settlement duties, rebates, makegoods, dispute windows and control owners.
Delivery event to invoice and journal, including identifiers, transformations, cut-off, late events, manual adjustments and approvals.
Gross billings, pass-through media, recognised revenue, credits, rebates, invalid-traffic adjustments, deferred amounts and ledger tie-out.
We define one decision first: the revenue position, a close failure, a cash constraint or a diligence question. The work follows a representative transaction from contract through auction and delivery data to invoice, settlement and ledger before the broader population is modelled.
Confirm the legal entities, platform roles, channels, material contract families, reporting framework, currencies and close dates in scope.
You receive the editable accounting papers, contract matrix, revenue bridge, data dictionary, margin model, forecast, control matrix and operating instructions created for the scope. The close-out review records owners, unresolved judgements, source limitations and any matter still requiring auditor, legal or tax input.
Identify the accounting, data, margin or cash break and quantify the population affected.
Agree the accounting logic, source hierarchy, reconciliation, control owners and decision rules for exceptions.
Create the memoranda, models, revenue bridge and controls; run them on client data and resolve material differences.
U.Avero works with C-level teams to turn critical decisions into operating practice. We combine senior advisory with hands-on implementation, process automation and clearly scoped BPO. Depending on the need, we transfer a working process to the client team or continue to run the agreed scope with clear ownership and controls.
Frequently asked questions
No. The conclusion depends on the specified promise and whether the company controls that good or service before transfer. A business can reach different conclusions for different arrangements or promises. Platform labels, invoice flow and contract wording are evidence, but none replaces the control assessment.
No. Credit exposure and payment timing can be relevant facts, but they do not decide the principal-versus-agent conclusion alone. The analysis identifies the specified service and evaluates control before transfer, supported by the indicators relevant to the arrangement.
Yes, if the required fields and retention periods exist. We define the source hierarchy, identifiers, time-zone and cut-off rules, late-event treatment and reconciliation to billing and the ledger. Missing or overwritten records are documented as limitations rather than reconstructed without evidence.
Yes. The same work can organise the accounting position, gross-to-net bridge, customer and publisher concentration, contribution margin, working-capital profile and evidence index for diligence. It does not promise a valuation or transaction result, and buyer-specific questions remain part of the process.
Three commitment levels
Next step
We can start with C-level advisory, implementation, automation or a defined BPO process. We normally aim to reply within one business day. Sensitive detail can wait until an NDA is signed.