Agencies pick over Ewanick’s GM legacy

July 30, 2012

“He failed to meet the expectations that the company has for its employees,” said General Motors spokesman Greg Martin cryptically. That looks like being GM global marketing supremo Joel Ewanick’s epitaph. The marketing whirligig quit abruptly last weekend, after two years at the steering wheel of one of the world’s biggest car companies.

But just what did Martin mean by failed expectations? It appears that Ewanick fell down badly on the small print in the 5-year sponsorship deal he signed with Manchester United. Details remain sketchy, although they will undoubtedly emerge over time. Some financial liability is likely involved should GM fail to deliver on its side of the bargain; this seems to be what Ewanick ‘forgot’ to disclose to his superiors.

GM may be glad to see the back of him, but we hacks will miss Ewanick – with his uncanny ability to manufacture a headline. Here is the man who said ‘No’ to extortionate prime-time Super Bowl advertising; and put two-fingers up to Facebook – commercially speaking – just before it foundered in a very rocky public flotation. The Manchester United sponsorship was to be his masterly counter-coup: Ewanick bringing in the vibrant Old World (China and emerging markets included) to redress a marketing overspend in the tired old New.

Alas, attention to detail seems foreign to Ewanick’s nature. Now we shall never really know whether he was a marketing visionary with a bold grasp of the Big Picture, or simply a publicity-hungry megalomaniac revelling in world-renown.

What matters from here on in is the unpicking of Ewanick’s legacy. Hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue are at stake for the agencies that signed up to the Ewanick dream. Doubtless their lawyers are already assessing the strength of the contracts they co-signed with him. What now for Carat’s tenure of the $3bn global media account? And for Commonwealth, the complex advertising vehicle set up so that Goodby Silverstein and McCann Erickson could jointly service most of the global Chevy creative account? The holding companies of all three agencies – Aegis Group, Omnicom and Interpublic – have already made substantial investments in staffing up in and around Detroit to service the newly streamlined accounts.

Advertising relationships in the auto-industry have traditionally been very personality-driven. Despite a thick coating of metrics-speak in all their public utterances, this has been transcendentally true of Ewanick and his advertising coterie.

Goodby looks particularly vulnerable, given the close personal relationship between Ewanick and Goodby founder Jeff Goodby – who shared the stage at this year’s Cannes International Festival of Creativity.

All eyes will now be on Ewanick’s (at least temporary) successor, Alan Batey, head of US sales and service.

Little is known of him other than that he was once a car mechanic. But of one thing you can be certain. Agencies, on and off the GM roster, will be doing their damnedest to find out more. Just in case.

UPDATE 31/7/12: The problem with the Manchester United shirt sponsorship deal is that Ewanick paid too much, it has emerged. He committed to a 7-year deal at £25m ($39m) a year without disclosing how “full” the terms were to GM’s board. $300m represents a premium of 25% to what the current sponsor, AON, is paying – and is a lot more than Ewanick seems to have implied to his colleagues during negotiation.

Advertisements

Break-up of the odd couple that kept AMV BBDO on top of the league table

July 27, 2012

The decision of Farah Ramzan Golant, executive chairman of Abbott Mead Vickers BBDO, to leave the agency and become chief executive of independent production group All3Media, brings to an end one of the most remarkable partnerships in recent UK advertising.

Ramzan Golant was part of a managerial duumvirate, latterly triumvirate, that has made AMV BBDO indisputable queen of the Nielsen UK Agencies League table years after all the partners who created the agency’s original winning formula had departed the scene.

That in itself is a remarkable feat. One that the second generation of management at BBH has yet to prove it can pull off. Highly creative agencies rarely make a successful transition to second-generation maturity within a more corporate, international framework. Boase Massimi Pollitt tried it, as part of DDB, but arguably AMV has been a lot more successful. The credit for that achievement – and the collegiate leadership style that has effected it – must in some measure go to former group chairman Michael Baulk – the surprisingly self-effacing showman who was the agency’s fourth partner in all but name.

Baulk was the watchmaker. He set up the action and left. Two women have proved themselves the jewels in the works: Cilla Snowball and Ramzan Golant. Snowball was originally the agency chief executive but after a bit of a wobble and top management reshuffle in 2005, Ramzan Golant was brought in as agency CEO and Snowball moved up to the group chairman and CEO role formerly occupied by Baulk.

The ensuing partnership has been unique in itself: two women at the summit of the top UK advertising agency. But by all accounts, extra piquancy has been added by the, at times, difficult relationship between them. They are very unalike: the ‘odd couple’ comes to mind. Ramzan Golant is fiercely bright, an aggressive go-getter. Snowball has the emollient people skills that keep clients and staff on side.

If rumour is true, the ever-ambitious Ramzan Golant at one time aspired to follow in the footsteps of another of Baulk’s protégés, Andrew Robertson – as chief executive of the BBDO network’s premier US agency. Clearly she has readjusted her sights.

Like Baulk’s manoeuvrings behind the scenes nearly a decade ago, there is a strong hint of managed succession about Ramzan Golant’s decision to step down. For some time, Ian Pearman has been understudying her role. Pearman was brought in as agency managing director in 2008 and early last year moved up to CEO. Which left Ramzan Golant in the surely impermanent role of agency executive chairman. Pearman now takes on that role as well. He has already made a series of changes to the senior AMV management team, including the promotion of Richard Arscott, head of account management, to managing director.

Ramzan Golant leaves AMV in October after 22 years at the agency and starts at All3Media, which has made such TV hits such as Peep Show and Midsomer Murders, the following month.

UPDATE 3/8/12: The other shoe drops. AMV has hired three industry stalwarts to add extra fibre to the new management team headed by Ian Pearman. Most interesting is Michael Pring, who only three months ago quit Dare to become international managing partner of Leagas Delaney. Joining him as managing partners in the new set-up are Tom Vick – once of Duck Finn Grubb Waters, more recently joint managing director of JWT London – who has been “resting” at headhunter The Lighthouse Company; and Clive Tanqueray, who was client services director of Sapient Nitro. Both Tanqueray and Pring have had long experience of working at AMV. Interestingly, the three new members of the senior team report to Pearman directly rather than to new managing director Arscott. Their rapid appointment following Ramzan Golant’s announcement of her departure reinforces the notion of engineered management change.


£1.7bn global ad review is creative solution to Johnson & Johnson’s money problem

July 25, 2012

It would be nice to think that Johnson & Johnson’s newly announced review of its £1.7bn annual advertising spend was driven by a need for greater creative consistency. But it isn’t.

Money’s the thing – saving it that is. J&J may be one of the world’s biggest brands, but it’s also a company in trouble. Since 2009 J&J has suffered numerous recalls in the US, mainly of its over-the-counter drugs like Tylenol and Benadryl; but the prescription and medical devices businesses have also been hard hit. All in all, it’s said to have lost $1bn in sales, partly through bad luck and mostly through sheer incompetence.

At first it was the staff – including the marketing department – who paid, by being made surplus to requirements. Now it is the spend that’s being trimmed. Judge for yourself from the officialspeak: “Johnson & Johnson is conducting a global agency review and consolidation to build greater value and deliver innovative and fully integrated solutions for our consumer brands.” Well, they wouldn’t want less innovative solutions would they? And they could hardly be less fully integrated than they are at the moment.

In truth, there’s an easy win here for the new kid on the block, Michael Sneed – who became J&J’s top marketing (and PR) officer at the beginning of this year. There could hardly be a less efficient way of running your global marketing services than the one that exists at the moment. Uncle Tom Cobbleigh and All are at the advertising trough. It would be simpler to name a global marcoms group that isn’t on the roster.

WPP has business through JWT and AKQA; Publicis Groupe through Razorfish; Interpublic through Deutsch, Lowe, The Martin Agency and R/GA; Omnicom through DDB and BBDO; and Havas through Euro RSCG. That leaves, er, Dentsu and MDC off the list.

Sneed is a company lifer who, at various stages of his J&J career, has shown considerable sensitivity towards advertising creativity. It will be interesting to see whether this natural instinct gets overridden by the all-powerful imperative of saving the company money. Don’t expect a self-aggrandising Ewanick moment – Sneed seems too modest for that. Do expect a financial deal, of the “Team WPP” or more likely “Commonwealth” variety, that dresses up financial expediency as a coherent creative solution.

The most interesting thing about this review may be the losers. If Interpublic is among them, perhaps group CEO Michael Roth will at last seek to do a deal with Publicis Groupe. The air is certainly thick with rumours to that effect at the moment.


Why Confused.com is trying to put a back-seat driver into everyone’s car

July 24, 2012

Fit a black box in your car and slash those top-heavy insurance premiums at a stroke. That’s the intriguing new pitch from Confused.com, one of the UK’s biggest price comparison services.

Apparently, the European Court of Justice has ruled that from December 21st, 2012, car insurance premiums must be gender-neutral. Which is bad news if you are a 22-year-old female driver of spotless record, because you’ll now be subsidising all those 19-year-old acned, testosterone-junkies who treat driving as a form of personal combat. Car insurers are therefore on the hunt for new ways of assessing risk.

Such as through telematic devices fitted in your car to monitor driving performance. Telematics? Generally, any form of inbuilt electronic servo, such as SatNav, in-car entertainment centres and plumbed in mobile units. They’re particularly big in the States, although ironically regulators there are now voicing concerns about how many accidents they cause.

That’s clearly not the branch of the science Confused.com has in mind. Rather, your car will have a purpose-built in-board computer constantly monitoring fuel-consumption, mileage driven and how harshly you corner, accelerate and brake.

The idea is that the insurance provider fits this device free of charge to its customer’s car. The better the driving, the greater the chance of premium reductions on renewal. Customers who use the device can also monitor their driving manner online through a secure personalised portal.

As an additional safety benefit, the telematics device will inform the insurance company of an accident, and may even contact the emergency services where necessary. In addition, the device acts as a tracker, meaning the car can be located if stolen.

Confused.com reckons it has got 5 insurance companies signed up already: insurethebox, Autosaint, Coverbox, AA Drivesafe and Bell. It’s running a 30-second TV ad – produced in house – to announce the fact this week.

Intelligent individual mass-marketing in the digital age, or Big Brother at the wheel? We leave you to decide. LOVE to show you the ad, but I’m afraid it’s not up on the Confused.com site yet. So here’s a rather pedestrian infomercial instead:


A successor to Maurice Lévy as head of Publicis Groupe? Yes, but no, but maybe

July 24, 2012

These days, we’ve come to see Maurice Lévy, chairman and chief executive of Publicis Groupe, as something of an oracle. Every time the 70-year-old eminence grise makes one of his ceremonial public appearances – ostensibly to observe the religious rites of the financial year – we strain our ears for words of greater meaning, expertly hidden between the monotonous reporting lines.

This year’s halfway performance was no disappointment. In themselves, the figures were not terribly exciting. Organic growth of 2.8% and a 19% uplift in income were a perfectly respectable outcome, given that the Eurozone economy has developed blackspot and Publicis had lost the General Motors account. Clearly the BRICs and MISSATs (as we must now refer to Mexico, Indonesia, Singapore, South Africa and Turkey) must be doing rather well to make up the averages. And – hidden gem – Britain seems to be uncharacteristically up among them – for now at any rate – since it posted a 4.1% increase in growth.

But all this numerical incantation was historical stuff, and not what we actually wanted to hear.

What was M. Lévy’s outlook for the global advertising economy? The downward trend between the first and second quarters would halt. Much higher growth could be expected in the third quarter, starting right now. Phew!

And what of Dentsu’s acquisition of Aegis Group, what did he think of that? “The price is extremely full,” he opined in true oracular fashion. “It’s a nice acquisition for Dentsu.” But not for anyone else, we were led to believe. Not at least for anyone with a head for figures. And certainly not for Publicis Groupe, which had done something infinitely more sensible with a full buyout of BBH.

And the Publicis Groupe succession (which is all we really wanted to hear about) – any progress on that? Here M. Lévy outdid himself in Delphic obscurity and double meaning. Yes, a successor to himself would emerge. In September. Or was that just the beginning of the process? It rather looked like it: “In September the board will start the process.” Hold on a minute, hadn’t this “process” been going on for several years now? Why did it need to “begin” in September?

But, a successor would be found, wouldn’t he? Think of those poor clients and investors waiting anxiously for reassurance.

Yes, M. Lévy had his preferred private candidate, but he wasn’t going to disclose their identity to anyone else. That was a matter for the board.

So, we’ll take that as full confidence in Jean-Yves Naouri, PG’s chief operating officer  and Publicis Worldwide CEO whose name Lévy had let slip during an earlier ritual occasion? Well, possibly. Unless that successor were to be Arthur Sadoun, managing director of Publicis Worldwide. Or maybe Simon Badinter, son of its most important shareholder, Elisabeth Badinter – without whose approval no Lévy successor can be anointed.

But we could be clear on one thing, couldn’t we – M. Lévy himself would be vacating his See? Ah! Well, yes and no: “The first and most important thing is the depth and breadth of the teams at Publicis is such that my presence is almost non-important. I think it’s very important that there’s a succession plan and I’m doing everything I can, with a fantastic team, to make sure that no one who entrusts us with their confidence will be disappointed – our clients, our people, our investors,” he said with studied contradiction. Someone “almost non-important” needs a successor, eh?

Let’s get this straight then. A candidate does exist. It’s Jean-Yves Naouri, who has been working like a Stakhanovite to prove his mettle. But doubts remain about his suitability. Is La Badinter any more enthusiastic about “the approved candidate” than when his name first emerged over two years ago? Probably not, but she’s going to have to face up to reality soon, because there’s no obvious alternative to Naouri in the wings. Unless, of course, we’ve been barking up the wrong tree here. Perhaps there won’t be a single successor. Maybe Naouri will be installed with a junior partner at his side – conceivably the more charismatic Sadoun. And just to be absolutely certain the glue sticks, Maurice Lévy won’t be leaving any time soon. He won’t be président directeur-général any longer, of course. Just life president. After all, the one thing he did unambiguously tell us was: “It’s my life and I don’t intend to simply leave the company. Whatever happens to me I will always support Publicis and help Publicis as long as Publicis will need me; in whatever capacity Publicis will need me. And that is clear.”

Yes, for once, it is.


£3bn Aegis deal will test Dentsu’s mettle

July 13, 2012

Cynics might say that £3.2bn – cash – is an awful lot to pay for digital competence and a superior market rating. And they have a point. Would Dentsu ever have planned such an audacious and costly coup as the acquisition of Aegis Group had the Japanese advertising group earlier succeeded in its seemingly knock-out offers for Razorfish and, later, AKQA? It’s subjunctive history: we’ll never know.

Aegis chief executive Jerry Buhlmann and Dentsu president Tadashi Ishii: Firm friends?

The cynics are, in any case, substantially unfair. There’s much more to the Aegis acquisition than digital. This is arguably the transformative deal of the decade. It’s as if there has been a tectonic plate shift in marketing services, revealing a series of minor preceding tremors as clearly apparent elements in a wider pattern.

These minor tremors include the foundation of a much stronger, and more independent, operating unit in the US – Dentsu North America – under the direction of Tim Andree; Andree’s earlier acquisition of some of America’s sharpest shops, McGarryBowen, Attik, and 360i; the harnessing of McGarryBowen to Dentsu’s embryonic European network, led by former WPP executive Jim Kelly; and, not least, Dentsu’ decision to pull out of its unsuccessful strategic alliance with Publicis Groupe, cashing £535m in the process.

Andree, now gone global as senior vice-president at Dentsu and no doubt a strategic architect of the acquisition, has admitted that the £535m was “helpful in this deal” – coded language referring to the cash pile making it possible at this time. But something of the sort has needed to happen for a long time if Dentsu were not to be stranded in its idiosyncratic role as a one-country wonder, with 80% of global earnings still accounted for by overwhelming dominance in the Japanese market.

There are lessons in failure, and the Japanese management of Dentsu finally seem to have learned them. Neither strategic alliances, meaning stakes of about 20% in rival but complementary marketing services companies, nor the occasional one-off acquisition, such as Collett Dickenson Pearce all those years ago, suffice  for players in a global market. They needed to delegate more, and yet be more masterful in their acquisition strategy.

The delegation came in the realisation that people like Andree, John McGarry and Kelly would know more about how Western advertising culture actually functioned than Tokyo Central would ever know.

The more masterful acquisition strategy came from the realisation that opportunities for global expansion were rapidly narrowing, and if they wanted a suitable counterweight elsewhere in the world, they would have to put aside an institutional aversion to big takeovers and get the cheque-book out.

That’s why £3.2bn to buy the Aegis Group – 18 times prospective earnings compared with a market average of about 13 – is not too much to pay for this deal. It gives Dentsu indispensable weight as a global player: at $7bn revenues combined, close competition with the Interpublic Group as the number 5 player. As a media/digital operator, it moves into the third slot, behind GroupM (WPP) and Vivaki Media (PG). And geographically, it reduces its dependence on Japan to 60%.

Over at Aegis, it’s difficult to guess whose smile is broader: that of Vincent Bolloré, 26% shareholder; Harold Mitchell, who doubles his invested capital from the sale of his business two years ago with a £112m takeaway; or Aegis chairman John Napier. Napier has had to perform a very difficult tightrope trick in the City with a monkey on his back. The monkey is Bolloré.

On the one hand, Aegis has performed extremely well in recent years, with organic growth rates defying all its bigger rivals. A cleaning-up operation, which brought Mitchell’s Australian media buying services in and off-loaded the under-performing Synovate market research business on Ipsos, improved them still further.

On the other, there was always an air of impermanence about a company as small and narrowly defined as Aegis being on the public markets. Chief executive Jerry Buhlmann knew it, Mitchell – judging from his share investment strategy –  knew it, Napier knew it and – most importantly – Vincent Bolloré knew it. Which is why he built up a stake in the first place. From the angle of Aegis’ corporate independence it is difficult to know which was worse: Bolloré Mark 1, the corporate raider stealthily engineering a boardroom takeover with a view to break-up; or Bolloré Mark 2, the disillusioned ‘strategic investor’ seeking to offload his game-changing stake at the first reasonable opportunity. Each was destabilising; neither the stuff of a good corporate narrative to wow other investors. Bolloré is now laughing all the way to his bank – £725m in pocket, representing a 50% premium on his investment. Quite what this means for the future of Havas, trailing with only $2.3bn global revenues, is of course an interesting  – but quite separate – question.

The nature of the Aegis deal – cash, and a 50% premium to the share price – makes it exceedingly unlikely that Dentsu will face any challengers for its prize. What matters now is whether it will make the deal work. The enlarged Dentsu can boast that 37% of its revenues are derived from the cutting edge, digital – a greater share than any other global marketing services group. Buhlmann has agreed to stay on until at least the end of next year, which should help the glue to set. But what then? Aegis, at nearly 40% the size of its new parent company, is by a wide margin the biggest acquisition that Dentsu is ever likely to make. That’s quite a cultural challenge.


Brands show their sensitive gay side

July 11, 2012

Pink: it’s the new black. Brands are falling over each other to “out” themselves as fellow travellers in the Lesbian, Bisexual, Gay and Transgender community (hereto after, LBGT).

First we had Kraft, with its Gay Pride rainbow cookie, posted on a Facebook page. Then Google joined forces with Citigroup and Ernest & Young to promote a joint campaign that  is to highlight the privations suffered by LBGTs around the world. And now – improbably enough – a famous Premier League club has joined the throng.

No, not Chelsea attempting to smother the unpleasant odour of racism emanating from the John Terry court case. Or, for that matter, Queen’s Park Rangers. Liverpool is the first Premier League club to be officially represented in an LBGT event in Britain. A banner featuring the club’s crest is to be carried by staff and members of the women’s team at next month’s Liverpool Pride.

According to Liverpool FC managing director Ian Ayre, the initiative is all about ridding football of homophobia. Earlier this year he helped organise a Football v Homophobia tournament hosted at the club’s academy. Good luck to him: it’s an all-too-evident flaw marring the Beautiful Game, and he’s trying to do something about it.

Less clear is what Kraft (and the others) are up to. Is there an identifiable gay cookie sector? Or do LBGTs simply consume cookies like everyone else? The Facebook campaign, which consisted of an image of an Oreo cookie with six layers of rainbow-coloured creams and the caption ‘Proudly Supports Love’, certainly managed to court controversy. Within a few days, there were 38,000 comments on the site, and nearly 250,000 ‘likes’. Most of the comments were positive, but some were decidedly hostile – and within a few days a ‘Boycott Oreo’ page had sprung up on Facebook, fueled no doubt by neat Bible-Belt bigotry.

Was Kraft really standing up to be counted? I doubt it. More likely, Barack Obama’s forthright backing for same-sex marriage has given brands “permission” to go mainstream on the subject.

By way of explanation Basil Maglaris, Kraft’s associate director of corporate affairs, tells us: “As a company, Kraft Foods has a proud history of celebrating diversity and inclusiveness. We feel the Oreo ad is a fun reflection of our values.”  A “fun reflection”, eh? The smile may be on the other side of its corporate face if Kraft visibly falls down on its employment diversity programme any time soon.


%d bloggers like this: