CTV and streaming adtech is one of the most crowded, overlapping categories in B2B software right now, with SSPs, measurement platforms, identity vendors, and FAST ad servers all describing themselves in nearly identical language. We help CTV vendors define a category they can actually own, draw a real line against The Trade Desk, Roku, and Amazon without pretending to be their equal on scale, and give sales a reason a buyer picks you instead of the incumbent already in the stack.
The Problem
Your category has no agreed-upon name, so every vendor picks their own
CTV measurement, cross-screen attribution, and streaming identity resolution are all still forming as categories, which means a buyer evaluating five vendors sees five different self-declared category labels for what looks like the same product. Without a positioning function forcing a decision, a company ends up borrowing whatever term ranked highest on a competitor's site last quarter, which reads as derivative rather than as the company that actually defined the space.
Feature-for-feature comparison against The Trade Desk or Amazon is a fight you cannot win on their terms
A ten-person measurement vendor cannot out-build Amazon's data footprint or The Trade Desk's reach, and trying to win a bake-off by matching their feature list line for line puts a buyer's attention on exactly the dimension where the giant wins by default. Positioning that implicitly frames the comparison as 'us vs. them, same categories' hands the incumbent the argument before the sales call even starts.
Product, sales, and the website tell three different stories about what you are
In a fast-moving CTV adtech company, the pitch deck calls the product an attribution platform, the website calls it a measurement suite, and the sales team improvises a third description depending on who is in the room. Buyers doing vendor diligence notice the inconsistency fast, and in a category already this confusing, an internally inconsistent story reads as a company that has not figured out what it actually sells.
Analyst and G2 category placement locks you into a box you did not choose
Review sites and analyst frameworks bucket CTV adtech vendors into broad categories built for the largest players, which means a specialized FAST channel ad server or a niche identity vendor gets compared against a generalist SSP on criteria that were never relevant to its actual product. Left unmanaged, third-party category placement becomes the default positioning, and it is almost never the positioning that wins the deal.
How We Help
We start with a market map, not a messaging workshop. That means pulling the actual competitive set, including the vendors your prospects shortlist against you (not just the logos your team watches), and cataloging how each one defines its category, states its differentiation, and shows up on comparison and review sites.
From there we define the category you actually compete in, which is rarely the broadest label available. A cross-screen measurement vendor selling primarily into FAST channel operators is not competing in the same category as a company selling attribution into linear-to-streaming budget shifts, even if both would call themselves 'CTV measurement' by default.
We build the differentiation argument next, and it is not a feature list.
Execution means cascading one positioning statement into every surface that describes the company: website copy, the pitch deck, sales talk tracks, and the category label used in analyst briefings and G2 profile management. We do not hand this off as a document and move on.
Measurement here is not a funnel metric, it is consistency and recognition: does a prospect who hears the pitch repeat back the category correctly, does the sales team stop improvising a definition mid-call, and does the win-loss data start showing the differentiation argument actually landing against named competitors rather than losing on price or feature parity.
What we deliver
- Competitive market map covering the vendors your buyers actually shortlist against you, not just the ones you watch
- A defined, ownable category name and definition, scoped narrower than the generic label the whole space defaults to
- A differentiation argument built on structural advantage, not a feature checklist you cannot sustain against a bigger competitor
- Positioning cascade across website, pitch deck, sales talk tracks, and analyst or G2 category management so every surface agrees
- Win-loss review framework to test whether the positioning is actually changing how competitive deals get decided
Positioning against The Trade Desk or Roku on their terms is a losing argument before the call starts. The job is not proving you are as big or as complete – it is naming the narrower category where being smaller and more specific is the actual advantage.
Our Methodology
We run product positioning for CTV and Connected TV companies on the same 90-day sprint we use across every service line, because positioning work has a way of drifting into an open-ended branding exercise without a hard checkpoint. The first 30 days are the market map and category definition: pulling the real competitive set from sales call notes and win-loss data, not assumptions, and testing category language against how buyers actually describe their own problem in discovery calls.
Days 30 to 60 build the differentiation argument and cascade it into the surfaces that matter most first, usually the pitch deck and the top of the website, since those are what a prospect sees before a sales conversation even starts. We work directly with whoever runs sales enablement during this phase, because a positioning statement that only lives in a document never survives contact with a live buyer objection.
Days 60 to 90 push the positioning into the harder-to-change surfaces: analyst briefing materials, G2 and Gartner category management, and sales talk tracks tested against real competitive deals in the pipeline. This is also when we start reading win-loss data specifically for whether the new differentiation argument is showing up in why deals are won or lost, versus the vaguer 'good fit' or 'lost on price' reasons that dominate before positioning work is done. A CTV adtech company's positioning has to hold up in rooms with media buyers and procurement teams who have heard five nearly identical pitches that week, so the test is always a live sales call, not an internal review.
How We Work
The first 30 days are market mapping and category definition, ending with a written positioning brief the whole company can point to, not a slide deck that gets filed away. Days 30 to 60 are the cascade into pitch materials and website copy, done alongside whoever owns <a href="/services/creative/">creative</a> production so the new language actually ships rather than staying theoretical. Days 60 to 90 focus on sales enablement and the harder external surfaces like analyst relationships and review-site category management.
On the client side we need the founder or head of product, whoever owns sales enablement, and access to recent win-loss notes and competitive call recordings, since real positioning comes from how buyers actually talk about the problem, not from what the product team assumes they care about. On our side, one strategist owns the engagement, pulling in our <a href="/services/product/">product</a> team when the differentiation argument needs to be checked against the actual roadmap and not just the current feature set.
Cadence is weekly during the first 60 days while the category and differentiation argument are being built and tested, moving to biweekly once the cascade into sales and marketing materials is underway. Most engagements run 3 to 4 months for the full cascade, with a lighter quarterly check-in afterward to keep the positioning current as competitors reposition around you, which happens constantly in a category this fluid.
What clients should expect: a category definition narrow enough to actually own, a differentiation argument sales can repeat without a script, and a straight answer about which comparisons are genuinely winnable against a company like Roku or Amazon and which ones you should stop trying to have.
- Consistent category language across sales, website, and analyst materials
- A differentiation argument sales reps can repeat without improvising
- Improved win-loss outcomes against named competitors
- Reduced deal cycles spent re-explaining what the product actually is
- Category placement on review sites that matches the buyer you actually serve
If your ctv / connected tv company needs product positioning leadership, we should talk.
Expand your marketing team output with our experts
Let us take a custom approach to your growth goals by assembling and leading the best-in-class marketing team to support your next stage.
Frequently asked questions
How much does a product positioning engagement cost for a CTV or Connected TV company?
Positioning engagements typically run as a fixed-scope project rather than an open retainer, since the deliverable is a defined category and differentiation argument rather than ongoing execution. Cost scales with how many surfaces need updating, since cascading the new positioning into the website, pitch deck, and sales talk tracks costs more than defining the category alone.
How long before we see results from a positioning engagement in this category?
The category definition and differentiation argument are typically ready within the first 30 to 45 days. The harder result, whether the new positioning is actually changing win rates against named competitors, takes a full sales cycle or two to read in win-loss data, often 60 to 90 days depending on your deal velocity.
How does the positioning team integrate with our existing product and sales staff?
One strategist owns the engagement and works directly with the founder or head of product on category definition, then with whoever runs sales enablement on the cascade into talk tracks and objection handling. We pull in our own creative and product resources only when the differentiation argument needs to be tested against actual roadmap commitments, not as a standing committee sitting between us and your team.
What makes Winston Francois different from a branding agency for this category?
A branding agency will give you a new tagline and visual identity. We start from the competitive market map and win-loss data specific to CTV adtech, because in a category this crowded, the differentiation argument has to survive a live sales call against The Trade Desk or a well-funded measurement competitor, not just look good on a slide.
How do you measure the ROI of a product positioning engagement?
We track whether prospects repeat the category and differentiation argument back correctly after a first call, whether sales reps report using consistent language instead of improvising, and whether win-loss notes start citing the differentiation argument as a reason deals are won rather than defaulting to price or feature comparisons. These are read alongside deal cycle length, since a clearer positioning argument tends to shorten the back-and-forth spent re-explaining what the product is.
What type of CTV or Connected TV company is the right fit for this service?
This fits CTV adtech companies from seed through growth stage, roughly $2M to $50M ARR, that have a working product and a sales team fielding real competitive deals but no consistent answer to 'how are you different from Roku or The Trade Desk.' It is a weaker fit for a pre-product company still finalizing what it builds, since positioning needs a stable product to differentiate rather than a roadmap still in flux.
