# 43% of Retail Media Buyers Underuse In-Store Channels, IAB Study Finds — The Untapped Shelf

*A deployment gap between digital and physical retail media creates an opening for physical product brands.*

By **Jenny Huang Goodman MPA MSc MHSA, Principal** — The Stash Edge, Hako Shikin LLC.
Published 2026-10-25.

Canonical: https://www.pops4.com/stash/articles/retail-media-networks-iab-study-2026-10-25t03-3
Subject: Retail Media Networks (IAB Study)
Tags: retail media, in-store marketing, shelf placement, retail partnerships, physical product

---

An IAB study reported by PPC Land found that **43%** of retail media buyers admit they underuse in-store media channels, despite widespread investment in retail media networks. The gap is straightforward: brands pour budget into digital retail media — search ads on Amazon, sponsored product listings, display units on retailer websites — while physical shelf-level media sits underdeployed. According to the same reporting, the discrepancy signals not a lack of capability but a failure to execute in the physical aisle where purchase decisions still happen.

What they did: Retail media networks expanded rapidly over the past three years, building out digital ad platforms that let brands buy placement on retailer sites and apps. The infrastructure exists for in-store media — endcap signage, shelf talkers, cooler wraps, scan-triggered offers — but deployment lags. Buyers allocate budget to the channels they can measure in dashboards, leaving physical placements underfunded even when the retailer offers them.

Why it worked (and why it hasn't): Digital retail media delivers attribution. A marketer sees click-through, conversion, return on ad spend in real time. In-store media requires different proof: foot traffic studies, basket analysis, sell-through rates that take weeks to compile. The result is a preference cascade. Brands default to what reports cleanly, and in-store inventory goes unsold or underpriced. The mechanism is misaligned incentives, not missing capability. The infrastructure is installed; the budget just doesn't follow.

For a physical product brand, this is the wedge. Retailers have in-store media inventory they need to move. The **43%** gap means your competitor is likely ignoring it. A small brand can negotiate favorable rates on shelf talkers, endcap placements, or scan-triggered digital coupons because the retailer's sales team has quota to hit and limited takers. You show up with a modest budget and a willingness to test, and you often get better placement than your cost would justify in a competitive market.

The steal: Identify which retailers in your distribution have retail media networks. Call the contact listed on their media kit (usually findable on the retailer's corporate site under 'advertising' or 'brand partnerships'). Ask specifically about in-store placements — not just digital. Request rate cards for shelf-level media, endcap sponsorships, or scan-triggered offers. Negotiate a test: one location, one month, one product, flat fee. Expect to pay **$500–$2,500** per store per month for a basic placement, less if the retailer is motivated. Measure sell-through against a control store. If lift is **10%** or better, expand. If the retailer cannot provide sell-through data, ask for your own scan data export or use a third-party service like Retail Velocity to pull it.

For brands already in retail distribution, the playbook is direct: audit your current retailer partnerships, identify which operate retail media arms, and ask what in-store inventory remains available. The **43%** underuse figure means there is slack in the system. You are negotiating into a buyer's market for physical placements, even as digital retail media costs climb. Secure the placement, track the result, and expand only where the data confirms lift. The risk is contained; the upside is category-level visibility at a fraction of national media cost.

## The takeaway

Retailers have in-store media inventory sitting idle; small brands can negotiate placements at favorable rates while competitors chase digital-only retail media.

---

## Publisher

**Hako Shikin LLC** — Virginia Beach, Virginia. Founded 1997. ASI 217876 · DUNS 18-204-6339.
Principal and author: **Jenny Huang Goodman MPA MSc MHSA**.

- Author: https://www.huanggoodman.com/about
- LLM context: https://www.pops4.com/stash/llms.txt
- MCP endpoint, for AI agents: https://mcp.pops4.com/mcp
- Client dashboard: https://dashboard.pops4.com/
- Catalogue: 70,000+ products, 200+ brands