Ad Agency Mother New York hires known criminals
November 20, 2009
Wow, this must be the low of lows. Evidently Mother New York feels that painting up the town with graffiti is great, paying someone to do illegal street graffiti is cool. This is complete trash, because honestly that is what Mother is doing, making a mess.
The next day these people have to go out and cover up the work. In fact I call for Mother NY to be held responsible for any and all action both civil actions as well as criminal actions based on vandalism charges if they proceeds.
Spray painting the side of someone’s house or office isn’t what I considering advertising, it’s called vandalism. It’s not hip, it’s not cool. It’s giving someone a headache that has to clean up the mess.
Mother New York is teaming up with Animal, also known as Animalnewyork — a daily Web magazine — to bring BNE to New York on Dec. 10. Details are being kept under wraps for now because BNE, who has not been publicly identified, has had some run-ins with the law over his or her work.
Many New Yorkers who lived in the city during the 1970s and 1980s are not as enamored of graffiti and street art as advertising agencies are. They consider such work nuisances and scribbling, if not vandalism and illegal.
The New York Times is reporting
Because of course everyone feels this is valid advertising.
I am sorry Mother New York, this isn’t valid advertising. This is crap, literally. I really feel sorry for Mr. Deitchman, that feels that vandalism is a valid advertising option.
“There are a lot of people who’ve started their art in the street,” said Andrew Deichtman, a co-founder of and strategist at Mother New York,
“We’re generally, and genuinely, interested in these kinds of phenomenons,” Mr. Deitchman said.
Seriously Andrew, just resign now.. you don’t deserve to be getting a paycheck for hiring criminals to vandalise other people’s property.
Google : Yahoo is a competitor to WPP
November 18, 2009
In a very interesting statement, it appears that Google is saying that Yahoo is a competitor to WPP group plc, but not themselves. A recent check on the stock price of WPP group plc (NASDAQ: WPPGY) showed the following as a list of “Related companies”
So the question is, why is everyone else calling Google an advertising agency. From the linked article “To understand these moves is to realise that Google is an advertising agency;”
But Google themselves and the Advertising agency holding companies?
We believe that if a company looks like a duck, quacks like a duck.. it is a duck. In this case Google provides copywriting services for adwords (IE: creative) they serve those ads via their own content network. They allow for media purchases though adwords though their properties and other peoples properties via adsense, and they provide a way to measure clients ROI via Google Analytics.
That’s not an advertising agency? You have to think about it, just because it’s not a 30 second spot (which they can provide via Youtube in 1080p ) doesn’t mean it’s not an Advertising agency because it’s different than what you are accustomed to.
Then the other question is why does Google say that Yahoo is a competitor to WPP group plc, but not themselves?
Doesn’t this raise any other questions? For example, We’ve been saying for years that JWT should stop using “largest Advertising in the USA” because they are not the largest, that is Google.
So what is your thoughts, most importantly we find it fitting that they called second rate Yahoo! as the competitor. Tells you what Google is thinking.
Ad Agencies discovers 1080p on Youtube
November 16, 2009
This is almost comical, evidently the advertising agencies are fighting now over who can run a pre-roll ad in 1080p on Youtube. We have had several reports of agencies now wishing to display their ads in 1080p pre-roll… before the video begins of a guy falling off a donkey.
What these ad agency folks are not getting, is the fact that people should be wanting to see their video, not using their client money to force it on others.
It’s like they completely forgot Youtube isn’t TV.. the average video lasts about 3 minutes. Now they want to put a 30 second spot in front of the 3 minute video.
Doesn’t anyone see the problem with this? The average video doesn’t run long enough on Youtube to justify a big spot like that. Another problem is more problematic.
Shouldn’t these ad agencies be making that 3 minute video in the first place? Like why are they using client media spend dollars for something that they should be doing themselves?
People won’t remember the ad, they’ll remember the video they were trying to reach in the first place? The point being that when advertising agencies are forced to rely on client spends rather than innovation and creative… at that exact moment the agency lost their way.
This isn’t TV, this isn’t print ads.. this is online. Anyone in the world with an internet connection can reach the url you are trying to promote… there are a million sites and methods of getting a website popular without media spends, yet these agencies consistently throw their clients money around like Washington DC does with your tax money.
Heineken looking for a new ad agency
November 16, 2009
Scottish & Newcastle UK, owned by Heineken, is looking for a new advertising agency to launch its Strongbow Gold cider in international markets.
We were told that the company is looking for a strong digital presence with a bias towards social media and “good google rankings” IE: SEO.
We were told that a handful of agencies are being solicited for an RFP. We were also told that “Social Media” will include viral videos and the goal is to get them “embedded on as many relevant blogs as possible”
Pretty interesting stuff.
Adage : Digital ad agencies are ready to lead
November 12, 2009
Adage is now stating that Digital Agencies are ready to lead. But they have yet to define digital advertising.
This is becoming more and more of a problem, as many firms are calling themselves digital, but yet all they do is throw clients money into Google Adwords.
This is not exactly digital, it’s an online media buy.. but it’s not digital. If you do digital you’re left promoting what you can using SEO, blogging, twitter, facebook, youtube, Google News, Digg, and whatever you can muster together to get your client’s site popular without forking over a credit card.
Hence why since I made that post no one was able to define it, I’ll do it for you guys.
Digital Advertising = Armed with a domain name, FTP and no budget
Media Buy = anything that requires a budget
Don’t like the terms, then please elaborate on it. Perhaps I am old school and believe that a site should rank well and become popular on it’s own merit. Perhaps I am in the minority when I say SEO can brand a site.. even though the evidence points to me being correct.
The point I am trying to make is simple, media spends are not digital. They are just what they are called, media spends. Unless someone can argue the contrary to me the fact is that digital advertising doesn’t include media spends. The second you start spending to buy media, the second that aspect of the advertising campaign happens you are venturing from digital to media buy.
This is a huge distinction. It takes far more talent to get something promoted with no budget than to get it promoted with one. If you’re reading this news article now, remember how you got here. Was it Twitter? Was it Digg? Was it facebook? Was it a Google Search? Was it Google News? Was it a hyperlink from another site?
Notice none of these required a media spend. Yet you’re reading this now. This is the definition of digital.
Adhack: Victors and Spoils isn’t first startup on crowdsourcing
November 11, 2009
This is a quick follow up on the article written earlier today regarding Victors & Spoils, Adhack left the below comment:
And to make it more clear, a bunch of crowdsourcing startups also existing prior to Victors & Spoils. I know because I’m 1 of 3 people in an office doing it at AdHack (http://adhack.com). Another is Genius Rocket.
We have to ask the question: is Victors and Spoils being truthful when they state that they are the first startup for crowdsourcing, we already proved in the previous article (linked above) that they were not the first advertising agency to do crowdsourcing, but now it appears they were not even the first startup to do crowdsourcing. In fact from looking at Adhack’s site, it appears that they are not even the first startup to use crowdsourcing as the basis for their business model.
So what exactly justified the press that this startup got? There appears to be nothing unique about a few guys that were kicked out or left from their pervious ad agency and started their own.
They weren’t the first for crowdsourcing, and they weren’t even the first startup for crowdsourcing.
So please clarify yourself Victors and Spoils, are you the first or no? The evidence points to not… prove us wrong.
RIP ad agency BBDO Detroit
November 9, 2009
Agency Spy has a breaking news report that ad agency BBDO Detroit is closing it’s doors on January 29th. Meaning that the game is over for the advertising agency.
The agency historically obtained most of it’s business from Chrysler, and when that business dried up, so did everything from payroll to rent. Meaning, like any other company it’s forced to close its doors. 485 people are currently working in that office, and the vast majority of them will be given walking papers.
This is a major blow to what’s left of the Detroit advertising business. The City has been in the great depression in earnest for quite some time now. A 4 bedroom home could be bought in Detroit for $3,000 dollars… the same home went for $100,000 several years ago.
Anyone want BBDO’s current office? Out guess that you can get into a holding company office for pennies on the dollar. Just like the rest of the business model.
This is going to be rough for those nearly 500 people being fired, there are not many viable alternatives to employment within a large radius of the city. The city recently reported a 35% unemployment rate (nearly 50% when you account for underemployment IE: Mechanical engineers working at McDonalds)
This is bad.
SEO branding – better than an ad agency?
November 5, 2009
Over the past 1/2 a decade since Tribble Ad Agency was created, the main argument by advertising agencies is that SEO cannot brand, I beg to differ, and offer this as evidence that an SEO branded organization was branded so well that Microsoft was forced to close down a whole division.
5 days ago, with very little press Microsoft Encarta was shut down and the reason citied by the New York Times was competition from SEO branded Wikipedia.
Microsoft Encarta went though various advertising agencies throughout it’s life, but the on-going war of the better branded SEO Wikipdia was a losing battle. You can’t search for a decent term without finding Wikipedia somewhere on page 1.
If you think about it, the chances are you found Wikipedia though a Google search, then again.. then again.. then again… eventually the site became a brand to you… and clearly.. became a brand to everyone.. as Microsoft Encarta found out.
The point we are trying to make is that Wikipedia was better branded, and never needed an advertising agency to do it, all it needed was great results in Google’s Organic rankings. This powerful SEO branding campaign lead to the complete shutdown of Microsoft Encarta, despite the fact that various ad agencies attempted to brand it.
So the next time an argument takes place that SEO can’t do branding, asking them to define branding, hell even ask them to do a search for it. When they start reciting Wikipedia.. then enjoy the fact that you won the argument without them even knowing.
Ad Agency Executive Nicholas Francisco still missing
November 5, 2009
nearly 2 years ago, we reported on the disappearance of Nicholas Francisco. As far as we know here are the facts.
1 – He was seen going home from Ad Agency Publicis West
2 – He never made it home
3 – His car was found, abandoned a short time later without him inside.
4 – Publicis hired a Private investigator, then ended the search after a short time
5 – Police at one point had a lead, but evidently it didn’t pan out
6 – At the time, He has a pregnant wife and two children at home.
7 – online debates continue to rage over exactly what happened.
There are individuals (that have posted here and elsewhere) that noted there is more to this story, however that being stated the above are facts, mostly anything else is rumor.
Microsoft’s ad agency Waggener Edstrom – BANNED
November 5, 2009
ROFL!! Evidently The idiots at Ad Agency / PR firm Waggener Edstrom blew it… and blew it hard. They got themselves banned from TechCrunch… meaning Microsoft most likely will be getting nothing but negative press from the news outlet for the foreseeable future. Roll over funny reading the post
Evidently there was a scoop that MSN was not going to use “blue” as much on MSN.com (like anyone uses MSN for anything?) but low and behold the exclusive turned to shit…. when Waggener Edstrom released the news themselves anyway… after wasting TechCrunch’s time writing up an exclusive.
BTW Microsoft, we really think you shouldn’t be using blue for anything anymore.. considering the only thing most of us think when you mention Microsoft and Blue is this.
Recognized by Advertising Age Magazine as top Power 150 news outlet for Advertising and Marketing.
Recognized and listed in Google News. Don't stress, we're Satire
Ad Agency Advertising
