Ad Agencies get a clue??

Trebor · **Ad Agencies get a clue?? -** 07-27-2005, 06:06 PM

Interesting article from Wall Street Journal

Quote:

Interpublic Group, the advertising holding company, is forming a new unit devoted to helping advertisers figure out just what their marketing dollars do. Known as the Marketing Accountability Partnership, the unit will be run by Neil Canter, a former Accenture partner. He will report to Stephen Gatfield, Interpublic's executive vice president of global operations and innovation, and Interpublic Chairman and Chief Executive Michael Roth....

Among advertisers, pressure is mounting to find data demonstrating that advertising helps increase market share, improves sales and heightens brand awareness. With direct marketing and Internet-based advertising proving relatively trackable, marketers want proof that other sorts of promotions work, too, says Arthur Anderson of Morgan Anderson Consulting, a New York firm that works with advertisers.

And another link on old media buying up new media properties...

http://www.netimperative.com/2005/07/19/Murdoch_myspace

To quote Dillon: "The times they is a changin".

Michel Fortin · 07-27-2005, 10:06 PM

I hope they do. But this is bittersweet news. Proof is proof when it is proven. So it is with this news.

See, studies can prove anything you want them to, depending on what angle you're on, how biased the client firm is, or how partial the company paying for the study is. Or who knows who who's a friend/sponsor/client of who.

I think it's more like "let's spend a whole bunch of money to prove (read: twist, opine, conjecture, guess) that spending a lot of money on advertising is good (regardless of the kind, and especially the kind that can't be proven, or the kind that wins awards, gets advertisers to spend more/blindly, etc).

Sure, they can start tracking and doing things we direct marketers have been doing, but even that can be twisted... Especially when these consulting firms must report to these agencies first before the agencies report to their clients.

Trebor · 07-28-2005, 01:24 AM

I'm actually with you Michel...

After working with clients for the last 15 years, I've discovered that, for some, the dark-star of Clever and Cool is often too great to resist.

Bottomline: The reason advertisers believe the agencies "proofs" and sway to agencies drum beats to the gods of branding is because they want to believe.

I've got clients I've hammered on for 8 years. The most common correction I still make to their work is to make it stop talking about them and start talking about the customer.

A companies ego is a dark hole that sucks in its ad budget. They may fight it during lean times, but when cash begins to flow, and the high of success beats in their hearts - Clever and Cute and Cool are just too much to resist.

Here in So. Cal, in the early 90's, 50% of the ad agencies went out of business in a year and a half. The call went out for accountability. By the end of the 90's, and flush with internet cash, accountability was a faint memory.

And that is why you, and others on this forum who can produce results, will remain in demand.

Andy Catsimanes · **Re: Ad Agencies get a clue?? -** 07-28-2005, 02:42 AM

Quote:

Among advertisers, pressure is mounting to find data demonstrating that advertising helps increase market share, improves sales and heightens brand awareness. With direct marketing and Internet-based advertising proving relatively trackable, marketers want proof that other sorts of promotions work, too, says Arthur Anderson of Morgan Anderson Consulting, a New York firm that works with advertisers.

Without getting political this sounds like the Advertiser's "Downing Street Memo." "We must prove that advertising does X and so we will fix the evidence around X even if X doesn't exist."

Maybe Morgan Anderson could hire a DM writer to sell this stuff to their clients.