It’s the Age of Google and Sorrell has no time – or money – for Twitter

April 29, 2013

Martin SorrellThe most interesting thing about WPP Group’s first quarter financial results were not the numbers, but its chief executive’s obiter dicta.

The numbers themselves were a curate’s egg. They beat the revenue forecast, bizarrely enough they delighted in Britain, but they disappointed in the United States. Which is just about the only part of the world economy currently showing signs of dynamism.

The obiter dicta, on the other hand, were curiously memorable. WPP CEO Sir Martin Sorrell used the occasion (well, near enough: he was actually speaking at the FT Digital Media Conference the previous day) to highlight a singular phenomenon. So far as his company is concerned (and it  is, after all, the number one spender of advertising money in the world), Google will soon become a bigger destination for his clients’ money than the biggest traditional media owner in his stable, News Corporation. Google is currently in receipt of $2bn of WPP’s quarterly spend; while NewsCorp gets about $2.5bn. But, given the Google figure represents a 25% increase year on year, it can only be a short time – Sorrell assures us – before the search giant moves into pole position.

I say “search giant”, but that of course is history. Sorrell’s underlying point is that Google – after some initial fumbling – has made the transition from a techie company, peopled by nerds, into a multi-media corporation with global reach. He calls it  ”a five-legged stool”: there’s search (of course); display advertising; social media (google+); mobile (via Android and AdMob); and video through YouTube.

Note well where Sorrell places his chips, however. From an advertising point of view, the Age of Google (as he calls it) is primarily defined by video. YouTube has made big inroads into what traditionally would have been television viewing. He’s bullish about mobile, too: Android is now the most popular smartphone platform and in some developing markets, like China, it accounts for two-thirds of all mobile sales.

But social media: Oh dear, what an advertiser’s no-no! Yahoo, though generally lacklustre these days, garners about $400m of WPP spend. Facebook, infinitely more successful with its audience figures, receives only $270m. And Twitter a lot, lot less. What’s the logic? Well, Yahoo “gets” the commercial need for a five-legged strategy (indeed, TechCrunch speculates it is about to buy Dailymotion, a smaller competitor to YouTube). Whereas Facebook and Twitter do not. Facebook, Sorrell reckons, is important for brands – but in a negative sense – absence of criticism, which has little to do with any advertising content. Twitter, on the other hand, is simply a PR medium with almost no value to advertisers.

“It’s very effective word of mouth,” Sorrell told Harvard Business Review last month. “We did analyses of the Twitter feeds every day, and it’s very, very potent…I think because it’s limited in terms of number of characters, it reduces communication to superficialities and lacks depth.”

Maurice Levy, CEO of Publicis, speaks during the Reuters Global Media Summit in ParisThat last may sound a little harsh. And is certainly not a universally accepted view among admen. Significantly, it is not shared by Sorrell’s deadliest rival, Maurice Lévy – chief executive of Publicis Groupe. Lévy has just announced a four-year pact with Twitter which will involve PG’s media planning and buying arm Starcom MediaVest Group committing up to $600m of client money to monetizing Twitter’s audience. Details, at this point, are sketchy.  It is clear, however, we are not just talking “pop-ups” here. Lévy makes specific reference to video links and “new formats” yet to be developed. He admits to there being “some risk” involved in the project, though whether this relates to his own reputation, clients’ money or both is not apparent.

About these ads

1 Comment | Advertising, Brands, Digital, Issues, Media, Technology | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

Age cannot wither them, nor shareholders vote them off the holding company board

April 16, 2013

David-Jones---Havas-007Whoever said advertising was a young person’s business? The conventional wisdom is that at 40, most ad executives would be advised to investigate a second career. And at 50, they’ll be positively clapped out and  have “post-economic” freedom foisted upon them whether they like it or not.

Superficially, membership statistics for the Institute of Practitioners of Advertisers (IPA – the UK adman’s trade body) bear this theory out. When I last looked (which was admittedly a while ago, but I doubt the demographic profile has improved), the number of members surviving their 50th birthday was a vanishingly small 6%.

But these are just the worker bees. Look at the nerve centre of the hive – the main board of the world’s leading advertising holding companies – and you’ll find that gerontocracy has never had it so good.

I was forcibly reminded of this the other day by Marketing Services Financial Intelligence editor Bob Willott.

Willott has done a demographic survey of the Omnicom main board and found the average age to be an astonishing 70. In his own words:

The oldest of the 13 board members is the chairman and former chief executive officer Bruce Crawford.  He is 84 and has been a director for 24 years. His successor as CEO John Wren is a sprightly 60 and has served on the board for 20 years.

I have yet to do the arithmetic upon the board composition of other global holding companies, but the most superficial of surveys suggests a similar age-profile, if their chief executives are anything to go by. At WPP Group, there is an evergreen Sir Martin Sorrell – still incontrovertibly ruling the roost at 68; and likely to do so for a good while yet unless shareholders go nuclear over his annual pay review. Interpublic Group chairman and CEO Michael Roth sails imperturbably on at 67, despite repeated attempts by the media to unseat him or sell his company to a rival. And at Publicis Groupe we have the grand-daddy of them all Maurice Lévy – 71 – with no successor in sight, despite repeated attempts to pretend he has found one.

All this looks terribly good for that comparative whipper-snapper, David Jones (pictured above). At only 46, the global CEO of Havas can anticipate at least another 25 years at the helm.

Leave a Comment » | Advertising, Finance, Issues | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

Neogama loses Bradesco, Omo to Interpublic – and 40% of its revenue

January 30, 2013

alexandre-gamaNot all fairy tales have a happy ending. One such is the marriage of convenience between Brazilian hotshop Neogama, its micro-network affiliate BBH and Publicis Groupe. Readers of this blog will recall that, a little over six months ago, Publicis chief Maurice Lévy bought out the 51% of BBH PG did not already own. A useful by-product of the deal was that he acquired not only BBH’s 34% stake in one of Brazil’s hottest agency properties, but the majority shareholding of its founder and creative supremo, Alexandre Gama, at the same time. Neatly, Lévy solved the creative succession crisis at BBH with the same stroke of his pen – by appointing Gama as BBH’s global creative chief, replacing Sir John Hegarty.

Alas, the deal has worked out somewhat better for Gama than for Lévy and Publicis. Gama managed to bank his cheque, but Neogama has just lost about 40% of its revenue, and two of its principal clients. Or so I hear.

It is common knowledge that one of the reasons Gama was hawking his majority stake in the first place was that he feared his agency was too reliant upon a single account, that of Brazilian bank Bradesco. Indeed, rumours soon began to surface that the bank was about to review. Well, now it has: and placed the account with McCann.

For Interpublic, McCann’s parent, Neogama’s plight is, however, a double joy. Another major – this time multinational – client has also fallen into its lap. I mean Omo (“Dirt is Good”), which has moved to Lowe.

In retrospect, we can see this was an accident waiting to happen. As is well known, PG is a Procter & Gamble agency group, and Omo is owned by Unilever. Under the status quo ante, Neogama had an element of protection from client conflict, in that BBH – itself a major Unilever network – was still majority-owned by its founding partners (i.e., Nigel Bogle and Hegarty). All that ring-fencing was swept away by the Lévy deal.

8027388763_a9feed3b19_zIt will interesting to see who gets the blame for this cock-up. My money is on Jean-Yves Naouri, the once but not future king of Publicis.

One thing you can be sure of: it won’t be the Silver Fox himself, who now seems comfortably ensconced in a permanent chairman role, despite recent protestations that he was – at 70 – on the point of retiring.

3 Comments | Advertising, Finance, FMCG | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

L’Affaire Renault reaches a suicidal nadir

October 12, 2012

Ah, the cynicism of the modern corporation. Remember all those years ago when Jo Moore, spin doctor to Stephen Byers, Department of Transport, Local Government and Regions secretary, emailed her boss those immortal words, referring to 9/11: “It’s now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury.”?

Well, now the French are having a similar moment of national revulsion at what’s called “L’Affaire Renault”. Readers of this blog will recall my post detailing Publicis Groupe CEO Maurice Lévy’s grubby attempt – successful at first – to stitch up Renault director of customer marketing Philippe Clogenson when the latter had the temerity to consider placing his business outside the Publicis empire. Clogenson was one of four senior Renault executives summarily fired (Clogenson for corruption, the other three for alleged industrial espionage) at the beginning of 2011 – only to be rehabilitated in the most humiliating way possible for Renault boss Carlos Ghosn and his number two, who subsequently had to resign.

And, guess what? The judicial investigation into the Renault scandal, now consuming many hours of M. Ghosn’s time, has turned up a new shocker. According to verified documents published in Le Parisien today, the car manufacturer had prepared draft statements for release in the eventuality that any of the executives attempted or committed suicide. The draft document, prepared by then director of communications Frédérique Le Grèves, read, “The entire company is profoundly shaken by the seriousness of this act. Our thoughts are with the family of M. XXX.” Fill in, as appropriate.

Contacted by Le Parisien, Le Grèves – now Ghosn’s chief of staff – managed to dig herself into a still deeper hole by insisting that the draft communiqué was “pure and simple anticipation, just a form of words in case we needed to respond to journalists.” The rehabilitated executives must have been delighted with that touch. But the broader point, which seems to have escaped Renault’s senior management, is the French public is aghast at the cynicism of it all. Le Grèves simply can’t understand what all the hullabaloo is about. I wonder how much longer she will remain Le Ghosn’s chief of staff.

The examining magistrate, Hervé Robert, took up half a day of Ghosn’s valuable time during his last hearing – and has threatened a 10-hour marathon during his next. I’m sure Lévy can barely wait for the judge’s attention to be turned to himself.

1 Comment | Advertising, Automobiles, Issues, Legal, Marketing services, Media, Public relations | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

Lévy accused of falsely denouncing ‘corrupt’ Renault marketing executive

August 25, 2012

In a new twist to an old corruption scandal that engulfed Renault two years ago, Maurice Lévy, head of Publicis Groupe, has been accused of bringing about the unfair dismissal of a senior marketing executive at the French car company.

To recap, three senior Renault executives were dismissed at the beginning of 2011 after they were accused – falsely it later turned out – of passing top-secret electric-car technology to the Chinese. At the same time Philippe Clogenson, director of customer marketing, was fired after he was found to have accepted corrupt payment from a supplier.

Later, Renault boss Carlos Ghosn was forced into an embarrassing climbdown and his second-in-command resigned after it emerged the allegations that had brought down all four executives were false.

Clogenson was subsequently reinstated and compensated for wrongful dismissal (as were the other three executives).

It now emerges that the man who accused him was none other than Lévy himself. That at least is the substance of a witness statement from Marc Tixador, a former policeman now himself the subject of an investigation, who was hired by Renault to conduct an internal inquiry into the allegations.

According to Tixador: “In May 2009, we were put onto the Philippe Clogenson case by his direct superior, Stephen Norman. He, in turn, had been tipped off by M.Lévy, boss of Publicis, that a Renault employee whose first name was “Philippe” and who, more specifically, was in charge of marketing, had been taking bribes from certain suppliers. Our internal inquiry and discussions with Publicis enabled us to establish that the suspect must have been Philippe Clogenson.”

Lévy has been quick to play down his own role. While not denying Tixador’s statement, he had this to tell the French national newspaper Libération: “Some information came my way, but no surname was mentioned. I purely and simply passed that information to Renault, with infinite precaution. I didn’t denounce M. Clogenson or anyone else. I didn’t know the surname and I didn’t try to find it out either. It was the internal security team at Renault who tracked it down and made the deduction.”

This, to say the least, is a lame mitigation of his conduct. As Libération sarcastically points out, the very mention of a Philippe working in marketing would have enormously simplified the task of the internal investigation. But the newspaper also casts doubt upon the authenticity of Lévy’s account. It says that Tixador’s colleague, an ex-military type called Dominique Gevrey (himself under investigation at one point), gave a much more explicit version of Lévy’s role: “Lévy telephoned Tixador directly, who put the speaker-phone on in my presence.” Lévy then (according to Libération’s account) proceeded to badmouth Clogenson (accablant Clogenson de tous les maux). Gevrey claimed that Norman played only a minor part in the investigation, passing on the information that he had been told Clogenson and a supplier were involved in financial irregularities – without at any point specifying who the source of these accusations was.

What remains to be unravelled is Lévy’s motive for tipping off the investigation team about Clogenson. Libération, which broke the story yesterday, speculates that it could have something to do with Clogenson giving business to digital agency Fullsix – a competitor to Publicis, which is the dominant Renault agency.

Leave a Comment » | Advertising, Automobiles, Issues, Legal, Public relations | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

InterPublicis Groupe – who would run it?

August 3, 2012

The market, as I said last week, is awash with rumours that Publicis Groupe is about to pounce on poor old Interpublic.

No, really – seriously awash. So much so that IPG stock had jumped more than 10% to $10.87 when I last looked, on speculation that PG is considering a $15-a-share paper-and-cash knock-out deal which would value IPG at $6bn. Rothschild is said to be working feverishly behind the scenes with other banks.

And IPG, what is it saying? ”It is our policy not to comment on market rumors or speculation.” So, that might be a yes then. Publicis Groupe? Impenetrable silence. The rumour has got the investment community hooked, that’s for sure:  ”We think the reports are credible,” Pivotal Research Group analyst Brian Wieser tells us in a research note.  Wieser is a former Interpublic executive who worked at its MagnaGlobal arm.

But how credible? Sure, from a financial engineering point of view it looks plausible. It would catapult Publicis Groupe to second largest marketing services group by revenue, behind WPP – creating a spectacular rejoinder to Dentsu’s stunning $5bn takeover bid for Aegis. And mean that PG pdg Maurice Lévy could exit the stage after a high ‘C’ that cracks all the chandeliers.

Client conflicts? Not as bad as they might seem at first sight – given the size of these two behemoths. For example, they share L’Oréal and Nestlé; they have shared General Motors. On the other hand, I wouldn’t have minded being a fly on the wall when Paul Polman, CEO of Unilever, and Robert McDonald, CEO of Procter & Gamble, first heard the rumour. It’s not just a question of client conflict – the two rivals reputedly loathe each other.

But here’s my real question. Who is going to run the new show? A sophisticated French adman who is too old and keeps telling us he is about to retire? Or a US former corporate lawyer (step forward Michael Roth) whose track record in running a publicly quoted marketing services company is at best indifferent? Would anyone except a Frenchman be allowed to run such a company, given that Publicis Groupe is such a national treasure? And if a Frenchman, who has the stature?

Over two years ago I flagged up the possibility of just such a merger. Then, like now, IPG’s share price was depressed and the moment seemed opportune.

At that time, PG had recently acquired an expensive M&A expert from Goldman Sachs called Isabelle Simon, whose skills were exactly matched to crafting just such a financial operation. And the PG succession crisis seemed a lot less pressing than it is today.

Simon clearly got fed up waiting. Last year she defected to a Monaco gambling organisation.

UPDATE 6/8/12: It turns out IPG bid fever is no more than a symptom of mid-summer madness. Publicis has released, tardily it must be said, the following statement: ”Publicis Groupe denies having engaged in any discussions with Interpublic Group of Companies and confirms that it has not commissioned any bank to undertake any such discussions.” There is of course room to manoeuvre within the terms of this statement. Notice, for example, that Publicis does not exclude the possibility of having planned such a bid, merely having “discussed” it with IPG or one of its investment intermediaries. Nevertheless, the denial puts the dampers on a merger which, these days, doesn’t add up so compellingly for PG.

Leave a Comment » | Advertising, Finance, Issues, Marketing services | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

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.

Leave a Comment » | Advertising, Finance, Issues, Marketing services | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

Alexandre Gama central to deal, as BBH sells 51% stake to Publicis Groupe

July 5, 2012

The other shoe has dropped. Not only has Publicis Groupe bought up Neogama BBH (see my post of yesterday), it has also taken the opportunity to acquire the 51% stake in BBH it did not already own. As will be seen, the two acquisitions are intimately related.

By any standards, this is a historic moment for all concerned. The old guard at one of Britain’s most illustrious agencies is moving aside after 30 years to make way for new management.

Down step the two surviving partners, group chairman Nigel Bogle (pictured) and worldwide chief creative officer Sir John Hegarty – both legends in their own lifetimes. Up step Simon Sherwood to Bogle’s position (he is currently group CEO), Gwyn Jones to Sherwood’s role and Neil Munn, CEO of BBH’s branding specialist Zig Zag, to an additional group chief operating role.

But here’s the clever bit. Neogama founding partner and chief shareholder Alexandre Gama is taking on Hegarty’s mantle as worldwide chief creative officer.

This too is highly symbolic. In seeking a successor to Hegarty, BBH and its paymaster PG have cast their net wide and picked someone quintessentially representative of the new wave of creativity coming out of emerging markets. The centre of gravity – they are saying in so many words – has changed, from Britain to Brazil, and countries like it.

The change from first generation agency to second generation management is always accompanied by high risk, no matter how successful that agency. Remember Collett Dickenson Pearce anyone?

But this deal has been carefully crafted to hedge, as best anyone can, against such a risk. The rounded symbolism of 30 years clearly suggests Bogle and Hegarty have long mulled their departure at this point. No one can accuse them of failing to bring on the next generation of management.

The Gama move is, however, a genuine surprise and must have been opportunistically fashioned out of Gama’s decision to sell his stake last year. Clever old Gama for parlaying his position so well. But a hat tip to Publicis group chief Maurice Lévy as well for crafting such an imaginative solution.

Now all they need to do is sort out the Unilever problem.

Leave a Comment » | Advertising, Finance, Issues | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

Last top 10 Brazilian indie Neogama sells out to Publicis Groupe, not BBH

July 4, 2012

It seems that months-long negotiations over who will own the controlling stake in fashionable Brazilian agency Neogama BBH (see my earlier post here) are now completed. So says the Brazilian trade press.

And the answer, shortly to be announced on the French Bourse, is: Publicis Groupe. Not BBH.

Do such technicalities matter, given that all these agencies are part of the same, happy, family? Well, yes they do. There’s more for micro-network BBH in this award-winning agency than a 35% stake.

Neogama’s biggest single client is burgeoning Brazilian bank Bradesco, but the agency also plays an important role in servicing BBH global clients such as Unilever and Diageo.

As is well known, Publicis Groupe is essentially Procter & Gamble-aligned. The only reason BBH, and therefore Neogama BBH, is permitted to handle Unilever business is a ring-fencing 51% stake in BBH held by its senior staff, chiefly group chairman Nigel Bogle.

If Publicis Groupe has directly bought out Neogama BBH, which it appears to have done, what will happen to that sizeable chunk of Unilever business? That is the question – as posed by rival Unilever agencies WPP, Interpublic and Omnicom.

Neogama’s principal shareholder is its flamboyant founder, Alexandre Gama. His is the only top-ten agency Brazilian agency that, up to now, has managed to remain independent. His motives for selling out? He has been running his agency a long time – over 12 years. Bradesco is overweight as the main client. And money, yes money. Gama’s services are highly in demand, and he knows it. He has been hawking his stake about for some time – in the not unreasonable expectation that he will get a bigger wedge from PG if he does so.

Ideally, BBH should have been the one to buy him out. But it doesn’t have the money. So Publicis Groupe, which probably had first refusal anyway, stepped in and snapped up the agency. Gama will now have to report directly to PG group chief executive Maurice Lévy, which he will not enjoy very much. By all accounts, the two men loathe each other.

Even when the Neogama acquisition is completed, WPP – owner of Y&R, JWT and Ogilvy – will continue to be the biggest biller in Brazil.

Neogama’s $667m turnover in 2011 was up 5% on the previous year, according to Inter-Media Project. Its revenue was $53m. It has 270 staff, according to Publicis Groupe.

UPDATE 9/7/12: Some further facts and figures about Neogama’s performance have come my way. Almost certainly included in the deal were two Neogama subsidiaries, Triacom – a promotion company – and MIM – a digital specialist. BBH’s precise share in Neogama was 34.4%. It had no share in Triacom or MIM. The latest financial performance figures were:

Gross revenue, for Neogama, Triacom and MIM respectively:  $66.7m, $8.7m and $1.1m. Net revenue: $57.3m, $7.9m and $0.9m. Operating profit: $28.4m, $1.5m and $0.4m. Operating profit after tax: $18.1m, $06m  and $0.3m.

A rumour has surfaced that Neogama’s biggest client, Bradesco, is reviewing.

Leave a Comment » | Advertising, Finance, Issues | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

Jam tomorrow, but never today, as Maurice Lévy contemplates final bonus of €16m

March 28, 2012

Readers of this blog will recall that Publicis Groupe supremo Maurice Lévy’s €900,000 “salary sacrifice” isn’t quite as altruistic as it appears (although, all credit for some skilful self-publicity on his part).

Among the emoluments he won’t be foregoing is a one-off “deferred compensation payment”, which crystallises when he (supposedly) retires at the end of this year.

Thus far, the exact amount has been shrouded in mystery. It was with great interest, therefore, that I read the following extract in The Economic Times:

PARIS: Publicis boss Maurice Levy is set to collect 16.2 million euros ($21.6 million) in deferred pay this year after the advertising agency hit some performance targets and based on the length of his service as chief executive, according to a regulatory filing.

“The deferred compensation is due to Maurice Levy because of his commitment to carry out his responsibilities until December 31, 2011,” Publicis said in its annual report. “It was from the beginning a loyalty tool that was not linked to his departure from the group but to his commitment to remain in his post until the end of his fixed contract.”

A loyalty tool, eh? More perhaps what Arthur Daley, of saintly memory, would have called “a nice little earner”.

UPDATE 3/4/12: With a general election only weeks away, Lévy’s €16m terminal bonus has now become ready ammunition in a mudslinging match between the two leading French presidential candidates. Parti Socialiste candidate Philippe Hollande has called the bonus “unacceptable”. Others in the PS have termed it “obscene”.

But Nicolas Sarkozy, incumbent president and candidate of the right-wing UMP, has not pulled his punches either. He rounded on Elisabeth Badinter, Publicis Groupe’s biggest shareholder, as the guilty party (though not by name). “M. Hollande, it is shareholders who decide on remuneration, and they are your friends,” Sarkozy said in a speech on March 28th, the day after Hollande’s outburst. “The champagne Left, the bohemian-bourgeois Left, has no morality lessons to give us.” Badinter is a friend of Hollande, and has widely-known radical chic leanings. Her husband was a minister under Socialist president Francois Mitterand.

Eventually, Laurent Parisot – head of employers’ association Medef, in which Lévy plays a prominent role – had to come to the embattled adman’s rescue:

 “Publicis, which has [had] exceptional results, is one of the biggest French companies and, most importantly, is a world leader in the advertising business. What isn’t acceptable is high compensation when companies are in trouble.”

An interesting rumour was doing the rounds about a year ago, to the effect that Lévy would seek an ambassadorship after stepping down from PG. Not the kind of controversy he would be wanting if so.

1 Comment | Advertising, Finance, Issues | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by stuartsmithsblog

« Previous Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 415 other followers

%d bloggers like this: