Does Bell’s exit strategy Chime with reality?

February 1, 2012

How ironic, you might think, that a momentous development at the UK’s leading PR company should only come to light through an untimely leak.

Lord (Tim) Bell and Piers Pottinger, respectively chairman and deputy chairman of Chime Communications, are plotting their exit from the publicly-quoted company by means of a £20m buyout of part of Chime’s PR business.

How do we know this? Because Sky News City editor Mark “Scoop” Kleinman divulged it on Twitter yesterday. Interestingly, Chime did not deny the Tweet, merely noting in its statement that the two marketing veterans (they are 70 and 57 respectively), together with other, unnamed, members of the management team, may “pursue the possibility of … acquiring some of the businesses within the public relations division.” Significantly, no mention was made of the £20m figure that Kleinman had bandied about.

Whatever could this mean? The first thing to note is that £20m would not be nearly enough to buy out Chime’s PR activities, or even – it might be thought – the headline element of them, Bell Pottinger.

Admittedly things are not what they used to be in that division, ever since Bell Pottinger lost its biggest contract with the US government last year (the State Department Middle East one). Even so, and allowing for the depressing impact this loss will have had on growth, PR is still a very substantial part of what Chime does for a living. In the first half of last year, it was about 42% of group income. And, although full-year figures may soon put us right on this matter, there is no good reason to believe the sector is sinking fast. Chime, allowing for fluctuations in its share price, currently has a market capitalisation of about £165m. So a value of about £65m for the total PR business (before taking into account any premium to whet shareholders’ appetites) would seem not too wide of the mark.

True, other elements of the company’s profit stream are beginning to take up the slack left by PR. Sports marketing, in particular, can be expected to do sterling service in the year of the London Olympics. It is also well placed to capitalise on the World Cup of 2014 and the 2016 Rio Olympics. Advertising, in the guise of those meerkats at VCCP, is performing solidly. And even market research, mainly Opinion Leader, is described as in recovery mode.

That said, Chime without Bell Pottinger would be Hamlet without the Prince: surely inconceivable.

So what has been going on? Perhaps Chime chief executive Chris Satterthwaite had been discreetly readying a lifeboat, so the two veterans could slip overboard into the sunset of their years, taking with them some part of the PR business as booty. (It should be noted that Chime has a number of PR sub-brands, among them Harvard, Pelham, Good Relations and Ptarmigan – although it is near impossible to determine their individual profitability.) All this as a prelude to “repositioning” the business after Bell’s departure. That at least is financial specialist Bob Willott’s explanation of known events so far.

No doubt about it, Margaret Thatcher’s former adman is still a name to open doors around the world. But he is also a man who, not so long ago, had a triple heart-bypass. The issue of his retirement is not something that he, or the rest of the Chime board, can duck for much longer.

Leaks rarely happen entirely by accident. It may be one side felt that negotiations weren’t going as well as expected, and decided to accelerate the process. If so, the tactic seems to have backfired. The unexpected news of Bell’s possible departure has simply left shareholders baffled. “It makes no sense,” said one. “One day Tim’s leaving, the next day – an acquisition. It’s chaos.” Chime has just announced it is buying Succinct Communications.

UPDATE 4/2/12: Two-thirds of Bell Pottinger’s income in 2010 (the last complete record) came from the Middle East, according to Marketing Services Financial Intelligence, published by Bob Willott. Put another way, that’s 27% of Chime’s total revenue. Willott suggests that Chime’s increasing dependence on the Middle East for its PR revenue is an important factor in the buyout negotiations.

About these ads

You know what your problem is Moneysupermarket? Your ad’s too British

January 11, 2011

What’s to dislike in Dare’s latest recasting of its Moneysupermarket.com campaign, starring Prezza? It’s spot on creatively, with a tightly directed script that makes the most of the former deputy prime minister’s touchy truculence and natural gift for hostility. From two jabs on the punchbag we move quickly to that other Prescott signature theme, his two Jags nestling under a tarpaulin, and the point of the ad – car insurance, and how you can cut a better deal with Moneysupermarket.

This is much the best in the series so far. Omid Djalili, the British-born Iranian stand-up comic, excels as the impish critic of our national reluctance to haggle: “You know your trouble? You’re British.” And in bulldog Prezza he has at last found the perfect foil. What an improvement on the leaden counter-weight of one-time Formula One champ Nigel Mansell, nice bloke though he no doubt is.

So, it’s an engaging mainly-for-TV campaign which appears to dispel the myth that digital agencies can’t really handle big brand stuff. Or does it?

If I have a quibble with the Moneysupermarket work, it’s this. Compared with the best work in this field – financial price comparison sites – the campaign fails to create an unforgettable mnemonic out of a difficult-to-remember brand name. Think of meerkats and Comparethemarket (VCCP); and then of that gravitationally challenged Edwardian opera star Gio Compario (GoCompare; ads created by an in-house team that originated at Boase Massimi Pollitt and was also responsible for Sheilas’ Wheels). Both enshrine the brand name. Moneysupermarket and Dare, on the other hand, have created a brilliant platform for Omid Djalili and whichever guest celebrity happens to appear in his 30-second TV show at the time.

I suspect this shows up in the research. A lot of people will identify that funny foreign bloke making jokes about selling insurance. But I wonder how many will remember the brand.

UPDATE 13/1/11: Spookily, Moneysupermarket has just put its ad account up for review. New broom Paul Troy, formerly Barclaycard’s head of advertising, has decided to hold ‘chemistry meetings’ with up to six agencies in early February. My point about digital agencies not cutting the brand mustard may seem a little unfair, given that Dare, one of the most widely respected digital shops, received an infusion of traditional agency talent after its merger with MCBD last November. However, although MCBD actually won the account in 2009, it is Dare management that is now driving the agency.


Ogilvy wins $300m global Coke Zero account…

December 15, 2010

…Something that has come as a bit of a shock to VCCP, which handles the £35m business in Europe, McCann Erickson – responsible for South-Asia, and Crispin Porter + Bogusky – the same, in the USA – who didn’t even know they were in a competition.

Why has Coca-Cola been so reluctant to disclose the fact that there has been a pitch at all, let alone that Ogilvy & Mather has won it? It’s a mystery. Although on the existing roster, Ogilvy has thus far been in charge of Latin America only. It’s not the most promising piece of Zero terrain (Latin Americans’ aversion to the ‘toxic’ aspartame infusing the brew is well known). Then again, maybe Ogilvy just had to fight that much harder to come up with a winning idea.

Two years ago, Coke instituted, at considerable expense, a European review which ended with VCCP triumphing over Wieden & Kennedy and Argentinian agency Santo. It was part of a global consolidation of agencies aimed at delivering stringent “marketing efficiencies”. At the time, coke CEO Muhtar Kent noted: “Agency numbers have gone down by more than half, and I think we have driven a lot of efficiencies in our market research costs, in our marketing over the past 12 months.”

Evidently not quite enough of them, judging from Coke’s recent conduct. The current “secret” review appears to be aimed at developing a single, global, advertising concept. I have not idea at this stage what that might be. Apply to Ogilvy Paris, which will be handling the global campaign.

Huge thought the win is, Ogilvy should remember that today’s favourite may be tomorrow’s casualty. In its agency relationships, Coke is beginning to resemble a gangster playing Russian roulette. Who will be the last agency standing?

There’s more on the nature of the win, and the turbid roster politics of Coke Zero, in an article by Joe Fernandez on Pitch.

UPDATE 16/12/10: Coke, under pressure, is now claiming “This [the Ogilvy] appointment does not affect local market agency relationships on Coke Zero.” Not much it doesn’t. Most of the money will now be flowing to Ogilvy. Still, you’ve got to keep the rest of the troops happy.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 415 other followers

%d bloggers like this: