Todd argues that unused rewards are often an early sign of disappearing engagement, not happy savers. He says loyalty, media, pricing and other investments trigger linked customer responses, so teams should study the whole system instead of optimizing single metrics.
Todd argues that the "in-game advertising versus CTV" debate frames the choice wrongly. A new channel can amplify, complement, or cannibalize existing ones, so marketers should ask which combination of investments produces the greatest incremental business outcome.
Todd argues that CMOs must move from measuring individual marketing activities to understanding the full commercial system. Models should cover multiple investments, responses, and outcomes together, and separate truly incremental sales from demand that would have happened or merely shifted.
Todd argues that analysts too quickly blame predictive models when the real fault lies upstream. Inconsistent definitions, broken processes, stale data and weak governance compound over time, so fixing the surrounding data system should come before replacing the model.
Todd argues that judging AI one tool at a time yields what Melissa Reeves calls random acts of AI. He says the unit of analysis should be the connected system, and links this to Provalytics' Agile Impact Modeling approach to measuring how investments interact.
Todd argues that brand managers who stick to traditional campaigns miss how demand works as a network of variables that affect each other. Adaptive AI advertising surfaces those feedback loops and supports continuous learning over one-variable-at-a-time seasonal optimization.