My Agency Can Beat Up Your Agency

The business world is abuzz with talk of the merger of Publicis and Omnicom.  Like it or not, two of the largest advertising agency financial holding companies coming together will have major impact on the industry.

These two companies coming together can mostly be viewed as a positive for smaller independent marketing service agencies. The more consolidation there is at the large holding companies the ‘safer’ the decisions that they have to make. These are public companies whose primary interest is increasing shareholder value.  Public companies answer to Wall Street. Wall Street prefers predictable results in financial reporting. This forces companies to make short-term decisions that could harm them in the long run; like laying off expensive personnel to make quarterly numbers despite whether those people can help you in the tomorrow. I worked at a large agency holding company ten years ago. I was a casualty of numbers despite being the only person in the agency’s New York office bringing in incremental revenue. The agency I worked for has been down more than up since I left and I’ve gone a more entrepreneurial route.

These financial holding companies were already big. They just weren’t the biggest. Now they are. But the obvious question is how does this merger benefit clients? I don’t see it. Clients that wanted a large pool of resources already had that. Clients that wanted stability already had that. Is there a benefit of the new ‘clout’ of the combined media agencies? No. Because they should be negotiating each client deal separately AND the media sellers aren’t going to roll-over just because these guys are now even bigger. In fact, this merger can hurt clients because the agencies are now negotiating against themselves. Fewer players in the market negotiating shifts the power balance back to the sellers.

So what is this merger about? Is it the personal war between Maurice Levy, CEO of Publicis and Martin Sorrell, CEO of WPP, the world’s biggest agency holding company until today? It’s no secret that these two do not like one another. Could it be that Levy is on an acquisition spring just to thumb his nose at his rival? If that’s the case what will Sir Martin do to one-up Maurice? And why is this “my agency is bigger than your agency” nonsense good for anyone?

While not a good move for clients of these two holding companies in the end there might be greater value placed on smaller more integrated marketing agencies who will likely have less turn-over, fewer distractions, less bureaucracy, and better talent working on client business.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

7 thoughts on “My Agency Can Beat Up Your Agency

  1. Based on past experience a lot of clients will not like the idea of being merged or sold. Those include globals marketers such as Mars Inc. A lot of top talent will also fall out with the new biggest ever and fall from it onto their own feet, creating new independent agencies with old clients as a welcome present. Independent agencies will benefit and I predict we’ll see a lot of those emerging around the globe not just in the hubs of NY or Paris. It would be interesting to compile a list of those senior executives that leave with eough cash to get off to a flying start.

  2. […] there are obvious financial efficiencies, my partner David Adelman posed last week https://diaryofamediaman.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/my-agency-can-beat-up-your-agency/ that this merger will not be beneficial to clients and I could not agree more.  From my […]

  3. Wonderful article!
    Hooray for the little guys! I say let the behemoths duke it out. Small is the new big, and I don’t need a Procter & Gamble account to be successful. It’s gratifying to work with SMBs and be able to have actual relationships with clients. Projects can move a lot quicker when you work directly with the people who can build a playground in the parking lot, rather than waiting a month for a committee to make a decision. I can reinvent my services menu based on client need, and outsourcing tasks that are not within my bailiwick means my clients have access to a large pool of resources just like the ‘big boys.’ Without shareholders to answer to, the only master I serve is the client.

  4. Gerry Walsh says:

    Nice work David. Now go pick up some of the casualties of this merger as new business for your agency. All the best, Gerry Walsh

  5. Nader Ashway says:

    Great post, David. I’m very curious to see what happens when they begin the business of trying to resolve conflicts between the Saatchis, Burnetts, Fallons, Digitases on one side, and the BBDOs, DDBs, TBWAs and Goodbys on the other. YIKES. The crumbs falling from this table will be substantial indeed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: