May 24, 2005
a very radical advertising idea: business models that don’t suck.
From The New York Times: Advertisers getting less and less happy with their agencies’ product:
“In the 80’s, we used to fight with clients over creative. In the 90’s, it was about strategy. Now, it’s only about money,” said Jonathan Bond, co-chairman of Kirshenbaum Bond & Partners in New York.
[Thanks to Dave Parmet for the link]
That’s it in a nutshell. From creative, to strategy, to mere commodity within a few short years. The world evolving, faster than the service they offer.
When I read this kind of stuff I am reminded of the words a global brand director a very large company once told me about agencies: “Their business models suck and they’re expensive for what you get.”
I suppose the thing to do is have business models than don’t suck, that offer stuff that isn’t expensive. Sadly for Madison Avenue, people who make a lot of money in big agencies aren’t allowed to do that. Not if they want to keep their jobs.
That’s what happens if you don’t bother with innovation for the best part of 50 years.
Despite telling their clients about the importance of innovation and change, the ad industry has mainly just stuck with the product it had in 1950.
Can you imagine any other corporate discipline getting away with that? Imagine if the retail guys continued to use the shop formats they were using in 1970.
Dear gods I want that cartoon on bizcards.
Apart from the ‘it sucks’ business model, I’ve always found client side has very little talent, or capacity, for judging/critiquing creative.
How many examples can I come up with this week?
So we now have this divergence, where perhaps in the beginning clients and creatives spoke the same language. Now, it would seem they’re not even on the same planet. Which is so odd. Corporation to corporation. You’d think, huh. Maybe, it’s — to invoke a cliche — systemic. A circle of hate. We hate our customers. Our customers hate our ads. Our ad company hates us. The circle is complete.
Solution: form an ad agency peopled with credentialed Tibetan Buddhist monks only.
I’ll send my $100,000 invoice for these thoughts.
By the way, Hughster, the T-shirt is great. Though, I got the XXXXXL and it’s a bit tight. I must cut back on the weight lifting.
It arrived two biz days after I ordered it. Prrrrompt. And that was, like, the cheapo delivery option too.
Nice work bringing it back around, Brian.
Agencies have been unhappy with the MBA-toting number crunchers they call clients for how long now? Too long.
Great advertising requires a serious leap of faith, and there are countless practitioners on and off Madison Avenue willing to take that leap, but so few clients willing to experience the rush with us. Not knowing if the shoot will open, they want the safest route home. And safe doesn’t sell.
David, it also requires a mature aesthetic sense.
Case study: Upstart airline. Research indicates customers love the experience of flying X Air. Love it. Especially the leather seats available in first class and coach. Agency executes creative. TV AD: Frequent flyer is seen making love to leather seat. Sold to client as edgy. Airs. Customers hate it. HATE! Say they will not fly X Air again. Deluge of phone calls and email. Problem: Yeah. (Solution: blogger, but that’s beside the point.) Root cause: client had no one in a position that could explain to agency that, in love, there is a difference between eros and agape.
This doesn’t suck.
gapingvoid — a very radical advertising idea: business models that don’t suck When I read this kind of stuff I am reminded of the words a global brand director a very large company once told me about agencies: “Their business models suck and they’r…