A few days ago, a reader slid into my inbox with the kind of question that makes adtech people squirm and PR teams reach for the "we’d love to clarify" email template. On the surface, it was innocent enough—just a little inquiry about how MNTN counts their conversions.

You know, garden-variety metrics housekeeping. But scratch just below the surface and you’ll find something that smells like three-day-old sushi left out in the Los Angeles heat: a suspicion that Connected TV (CTV) campaigns might be getting credit for conversions that actually came from much cheaper—and much more pedestrian—display retargeting.

Now, before you say, “That can’t possibly be happening,” let’s pause. This is adtech. We live in an industry where half of marketers can’t explain what supply path optimization does but still approve seven-layer DSP strategies like they're building a digital lasagna. Transparency isn’t a virtue—it’s a negotiating tactic.

So when someone suggests that a high-CPM CTV impression might get the gold star for a conversion that actually clicked in on a $2 banner ad served to a phone three hours later… well, we listen. Because that’s not just an accounting quirk—that’s a budgetary heist in broad daylight, one retargeting pixel away from an indictment.

Here’s what the reader asked, verbatim(ish), with just enough cleaning to fit into polite company:

Translation: Am I paying premium CTV prices to have conversions actually driven by glorified banner ads my interns used to ignore at the bottom of the page?

This isn’t just a MNTN thing. It’s a symptom of a larger, murkier problem across the CTV ecosystem. When we talk about attribution in the streaming world, we’re not dealing with a pristine chain of events. We’re dealing with a cross-device, ID-stitched, signal-degraded circus where multiple platforms compete for credit like siblings fighting over the last piece of kugel.

Here’s what’s at stake:

And this isn’t just about one vendor. We’ll be following up with other major CTV platforms—TVScientific, Tatari, Innovid, The Trade Desk, and yes, even the elephants like Roku and Amazon—because it’s time we understand who’s actually doing the work and who’s just taking the credit.

This rabbit hole goes deeper than a Google search for “what does CTV actually mean,” and we’re taking the elevator straight down.

MNTN, to their credit, responded in detail—thanks to comms for the thoroughness, and the passive-aggressive sign-off about “false claims” we’re just going to chalk up to caffeine shortage.

In short: MNTN says the reader is wrong, legacy systems are being phased out, and unless you or your agency turned something on that you forgot about, you're probably safe. Probably.

But let’s be honest—"probably" doesn’t cut it when your boss is asking why your CTV performance spiked after you launched a display campaign and your dashboard suddenly looks like it was coded by a drunk intern at a hackathon.

Despite the clarity in parts of MNTN’s response, the industry is still stuck playing a game of attribution Clue. Was it the CTV ad, in the living room, with the Roku remote? Or was it the retargeting banner, in the bathroom, on an iPhone, while someone was doomscrolling LinkedIn?

Here’s what we still want to know:

Because if we’re going to keep shoveling millions into “Performance TV,” we need to know what part of that performance is driven by a 65” OLED and what part is driven by a retargeting ad shoved next to a Buzzfeed quiz.

MNTN says the system works. They say 99% of their customers are using CTV-only campaigns, and that Verified Visits are clean, de-duped, and honest. Maybe that’s true.

But if your agency quietly flipped on Multi-Touch in Q2 2023, and now you’re seeing conversions spike with no understanding of device-level influence, that’s not performance TV. That’s performance theater, and we all know it.

We’re not done with this story. We’ll be reaching out to other platforms in the CTV space and doing side-by-side comparisons—because this isn’t just a one-company quirk. It’s an industry blind spot.

So buckle—wait, not allowed to say that—get your ad budget a helmet. This is going to get bumpy.

Stay tuned, stay bold, and double-check your attribution settings.

MNTN’s engineer-CEO Mark Douglas didn’t just debunk a myth—he took it out back and buried it under a pile of device IDs.

According to Douglas, the ad industry isn’t one ecosystem—it’s two.

There’s the legacy crowd obsessed with brand metrics like reach and frequency, and then there’s the performance crew, where attribution and targeting are everything. The latter, by the way, is three times the size of the former. Guess which one’s still clinging to their old-school excuses?

Douglas called out the persistent myth that attribution on CTV is broken or impossible. His answer: it’s not broken, you’re just stuck in a pre-streaming mindset. Cross-device attribution—starting with the TV, then tracking action on phones, tablets, or laptops in the same household—is not only doable, it’s standard. MNTN uses IP mapping, Unified ID, and other signals to connect the dots, and he says the accuracy is “pretty high.”

He made it clear: this isn’t theoretical. MNTN’s clients—three-quarters of whom are new to TV—are finally showing up because attribution actually works now. These are DTC brands with big spend on social and search, and they’re treating CTV like the performance channel it’s become.

Douglas also threw in a subtle flex: many of these “new to TV” advertisers are larger companies that never touched linear because of its lack of targeting and measurement. Now that streaming can deliver both? Game on.

Bottom line: If you’re still hand-wringing about CTV attribution, Douglas thinks you're either not paying attention—or just not ready to let go of your GRP security blanket.

We asked Angelina Marmorato, AVP of Sales & Partnerships at Lemma North America, to scrutinize MNTN’s attribution claims and give us a clear-eyed take—and she cut right through the noise.

MNTN says display retargeting is turned off by default (fair enough), but Angelina immediately pointed out what they didn’t say: what about video retargeting? Specifically, she raised a red flag around In-App Mobile Video ads—those ads you see when streaming Hulu on your phone or catching a clip in a second-rate news app. These technically aren’t CTV, but they often get tossed into the same "OTT" bucket on media plans, creating confusion—and sometimes inflated performance claims.

Her critical question: Does MNTN’s Verified Visits model treat these mobile video impressions the same as a CTV ad on a 65-inch television? Because if so, marketers might be shelling out CTV-level CPMs for what’s essentially a mobile video placement that should be priced—and valued—very differently.

Smart catch. We’ll be following up with MNTN to get answers.

Welcome to the attribution casino—where every ad platform is holding a half-full drink, swearing they were the one who brought the customer through the door, and the house always wins.

If you’ve spent more than ten minutes trying to trace how your Connected TV (CTV) ad budget actually translates into results, congratulations: you’re now a character in a whodunit where every screen in the house is a suspect, and your media plan is the body.

Marketers are pouring millions into CTV with the dream of screen-dominant brand resonance—“TV’s back, baby!”—but as soon as that screen goes dark, the follow-up parade begins. Display ads on phones. Pre-roll videos on tablets. Sponsored posts on desktops. And when the consumer finally clicks, visits, or (gasp) buys something? Every platform along the chain raises a hand like a kid in class who definitely didn’t do the homework but wants extra credit anyway.

Let’s get one thing straight: cross-device retargeting is no longer a feature—it’s table stakes. If you’re running CTV, you’re also retargeting across the household whether you like it or not. Platforms are using IP matching, identity graphs, and probabilistic models to trace consumers like bloodhounds through the digital forest.

That means the shiny conversion in your dashboard may have started with a big-screen TV spot but ended with a $2 mobile banner. And guess what? The CTV campaign still gets the full pat on the back. Congratulations, you just paid filet mignon prices for a hot dog.

Cross-device attribution sounds elegant in theory. A single view of the household journey! Unified reporting! Seamless measurement! But reality? It’s more like trying to read a novel where every chapter was ghostwritten by a different agency and translated into a separate dialect of Excel.

Let’s walk through how this really plays out:

The result? Multiple platforms claiming victory for the same conversion. Everyone gets a medal, and your ROI report starts looking like a participation chart at a preschool graduation.

Let’s talk CPMs. CTV ads run anywhere from $30 to $60 per thousand impressions. Meanwhile, mobile display sits comfortably in the sub-$10 range. If a customer watches your beautifully crafted, $100k TV spot—and later clicks on a dinky banner ad that cost less than a cup of coffee—but the CTV vendor takes credit for the sale, you’re budgeting for Broadway and getting dinner theater.

This isn’t fraud. It’s just… fuzzy math. And when attribution is fuzzy, marketers start making fuzzy decisions: overfunding CTV, underestimating display, and assuming success where there may have just been persistence.

This isn’t isolated. It’s systemic. It’s woven into the bones of nearly every platform in the video ad ecosystem. Attribution models are just different flavors of the same Kool-Aid.

Some platforms are trying to address this. Shorter attribution windows. Improved transparency in reporting paths. Visual breakdowns of every touchpoint. But these are still exceptions, not the norm.

If your vendor can't or won't answer these questions without sending you a deck that looks like it came from a startup pitch night, it might be time to ask who’s really watching your media spend.

In a world where every platform is playing “King of the Conversion,” attribution becomes less about truth and more about positioning. The burden is on marketers to press for clarity. Not just prettier dashboards or nicer case studies, but actual, defensible insight into where performance comes from and what you’re paying for.

Because when everyone claims to be the MVP of your campaign, it’s usually the accountant who gets blindsided—and the strategist who gets blamed.

And in this industry? We can’t afford to keep misattributing both.

—End column.

Because your CTV dashboard is lying to you—and no one else is saying it out loud.

We’re not here to stroke egos or hand out participation trophies to platforms that "sort of" measure attribution. At ADOTAT+, we do the thing that makes vendors squirm:
We follow the money, trace the pixels, and ask what really drove the damn conversion.

While most of the industry nods along to “Verified Visits™” and “proprietary identity graphs” like it’s gospel, we’re pulling receipts and asking the uncomfortable stuff:

Let’s be clear: this isn’t just a MNTN issue. It’s an industry-wide magic trick.
Attribution has become performance theater—and ADOTAT+ is here to call curtain on the illusion.

🎯 Exclusive Deep Dives on the Attribution Games
Like our latest: “The Banner Did It: CTV’s Attribution Scandal in Plain Sight.” We expose how platforms stitch together device IDs, IPs, and wishful thinking—and still end up in your media plan.

📊 Side-by-Side Vendor Comparisons
We’re breaking down how MNTN, Roku, TVScientific, Innovid, and The Trade Desk handle attribution—and whether you’re paying filet mignon prices for hamburger results.

🕵️ Behind-the-Scenes Truths From Industry Insiders
Want to know what measurement execs really say when no one’s recording? We’ve got the raw takes. No brand-safe polish. No media training edits.

🚨 Reporting With Teeth
We don’t just explain attribution models—we question them. Who’s deduping? Who’s inflating? Who’s quietly blending CPMs and praying no one notices?

So if you’ve ever looked at a post-campaign report and thought,
“There’s no way that ad drove 1,500 conversions without a single click,”
—yeah, you’re our people.

This isn’t your dad’s trade publication. This is ADOTAT+.
Where attribution gets fact-checked, not fairy-dusted.

👉 Subscribe now if you’re done letting your ad dollars get gaslit by dashboards.

Stay bold, stay curious, and ask harder questions.
Because someone needs to say the quiet part out loud. And we brought a whiteboard.