‘Not us!’

EditorNews Make a Comment

AUCKLAND, Friday: James Mok writes: “Dear Ed: Just to confirm, VMLY&R was not on the Heinz Wattie’s roster and we did not take part in the pitch.

“It would good if you can correct the speculation.”

Consider it done, James.

M+AD had noted that VMLY&R had done quite a bit of work for Wattie’s, and in the absence of any information in any release, we couldn’t confirm anything about an incumbent by deadline time.

To be fair, this is what we wrote in Friday’s report: “The incumbent – for at least part of the portfolio – was thought to be VMLY&R (and before that, Y&R)”.

“M+AD never asks for the identities of the other pitchers.”

The reality is that the release advising us that FCB had won a pitch for Heinz Wattie’s, like most releases of this nature, omits one major point in the news story –the identity of the incumbent.

(Actually, it’s not really FCB’s point to make. It’s probably the new client’s call, and you can understand the winning agency’s reluctance to unnecessarily dish another agency’s efforts.)

M+AD never these days asks for the identities of the other pitchers. But, of course, we do need to know who was the previous.

99 ECD?
BTW: Mok and 99 have yet to make official their new ECD deal – probably in deference to all three parties. It speaks volumes for the reputation he has earned. Mok remains MD at the WPP agency until the end of the year.

He joins 99 as ECD in 2021.

Share this Post