"Preliminary talk is enough"
I have been on the customer side for a good five years and cannot understand such an approach.
I've been on the client side for a good five years and can't understand such an approach, but I think that as a communications professional you know which agencies (three at most) are shortlisted. If really necessary, a preliminary discussion is sufficient. On the other hand, the pressure on all renowned agencies must be really, really high for them to take part in a pitch for 1000 francs. Where are the much-mentioned BSW ethics? Andy Wild, Head of Marketing Communication Axpo
"Contempt for creativity "Advertising for theaters, museums or zoos is among the best and most creative in the industry worldwide. This is because there is a high standard of quality that should be expressed in advertising that enhances rather than devalues the cityscape, that pleases the eye and the intellect of the viewer rather than offending them. And that is why the public, the creatives and the competitors should be talking about the most creative, entertaining and cheeky campaign of the year after the competition presentation for the zoo campaign. And not about how the competitor presentation was handled.
In view of the result, however, one can only speak of contempt for any creativity, contempt for those who have put their heart and soul into the presentation of the competition and, finally, contempt for the citizens of the city who have to put up with this mockery from the billboards.
Martin Spillmann, CD and co-owner of Spillmann Felser Leo Burnett AG
"Excited about the website "18 web agencies (not advertising agencies) were contacted for the zoo website. More than ten then attended the competition presentation, which was not compensated. We are looking forward to the website... Julian Karrer, Future Connection
"Best real satire "This play about the pitch for the zoo budget is the best real satire. To be honest, the zoo is of course a prestige budget that can be used for humorous, witty advertising. But as an invited agency, you are always allowed to ask how many other agencies are already taking part in the pitch. And it's up to each agency to say no. Nevertheless, I hope that things will soon be at least as civilized in our industry as they are in the freshwater aquarium of the marbled hatchet-bellied fish.
Mark Stahel, CD Lowe AG
"Complete nonsense in proportion"
Zoohje: Well done, lion! Once again, I absolutely agree with Andreas Prokesch. But there is one small point to add: Agencies usually know how many competitors they are pitching to and on what terms. The Zoo pitch was complete nonsense. As long as agencies do not demonstrate their solidarity, it should come as no surprise that clients will repeatedly try to impose dumping prices on competitor presentations. And that will eventually affect those agencies that don't give a damn about fairness today. Frank Bodin, CEO EuroRSCG, Switzerland
"The solution for fair presentations can also lie with the agencies themselves. It's not a one-size-fits-all recipe, but it could be that you pragmatically work out three or four points that you want to follow when you receive an inquiry. It's obvious that this can sometimes be quite tough, especially when the long-awaited "dream client" comes knocking but wants to consume creativity and ideas for free or for a few francs. You have to go through with it in favor of the industry and say no. It could be the key to counteracting the sometimes almost disgusting conditions at competitor presentations. And perhaps the "desired customer" will then be a little less "desired customer". Silvio Galbucci, Galbucci Advertising Agency AG
"A maximum of three candidates "Clients would do well to first carry out a thorough evaluation to find out who suits them. And then, if necessary, let a maximum of three candidates into the arena. Agencies that take part in pitches for free are always punishing themselves. If they win, with a client who doesn't appreciate the value of creative work. If they lose, with an unpaid expense of around 60,000 francs.
Daniel Matter, Matter & Partner
"Contempt for creativity "Advertising for theaters, museums or zoos is among the best and most creative in the industry worldwide. This is because there is a high standard of quality that should be expressed in advertising that enhances rather than devalues the cityscape, that pleases the eye and the intellect of the viewer rather than offending them. And that is why the public, the creatives and the competitors should be talking about the most creative, entertaining and cheeky campaign of the year after the competition presentation for the zoo campaign. And not about how the competitor presentation was handled.
In view of the result, however, one can only speak of contempt for any creativity, contempt for those who have put their heart and soul into the presentation of the competition and, finally, contempt for the citizens of the city who have to put up with this mockery from the billboards.
Martin Spillmann, CD and co-owner of Spillmann Felser Leo Burnett AG
"Excited about the website "18 web agencies (not advertising agencies) were contacted for the zoo website. More than ten then attended the competition presentation, which was not compensated. We are looking forward to the website... Julian Karrer, Future Connection
"Best real satire "This play about the pitch for the zoo budget is the best real satire. To be honest, the zoo is of course a prestige budget that can be used for humorous, witty advertising. But as an invited agency, you are always allowed to ask how many other agencies are already taking part in the pitch. And it's up to each agency to say no. Nevertheless, I hope that things will soon be at least as civilized in our industry as they are in the freshwater aquarium of the marbled hatchet-bellied fish.
Mark Stahel, CD Lowe AG
"Complete nonsense in proportion"
Zoohje: Well done, lion! Once again, I absolutely agree with Andreas Prokesch. But there is one small point to add: Agencies usually know how many competitors they are pitching to and on what terms. The Zoo pitch was complete nonsense. As long as agencies do not demonstrate their solidarity, it should come as no surprise that clients will repeatedly try to impose dumping prices on competitor presentations. And that will eventually affect those agencies that don't give a damn about fairness today. Frank Bodin, CEO EuroRSCG, Switzerland
"The solution for fair presentations can also lie with the agencies themselves. It's not a one-size-fits-all recipe, but it could be that you pragmatically work out three or four points that you want to follow when you receive an inquiry. It's obvious that this can sometimes be quite tough, especially when the long-awaited "dream client" comes knocking but wants to consume creativity and ideas for free or for a few francs. You have to go through with it in favor of the industry and say no. It could be the key to counteracting the sometimes almost disgusting conditions at competitor presentations. And perhaps the "desired customer" will then be a little less "desired customer". Silvio Galbucci, Galbucci Advertising Agency AG
"A maximum of three candidates "Clients would do well to first carry out a thorough evaluation to find out who suits them. And then, if necessary, let a maximum of three candidates into the arena. Agencies that take part in pitches for free are always punishing themselves. If they win, with a client who doesn't appreciate the value of creative work. If they lose, with an unpaid expense of around 60,000 francs.
Daniel Matter, Matter & Partner
