AdverNET '99 COVERAGE: Overview

From: jon huntress <jon.huntress_at_tenagra.com>
Date: Fri 12 Nov 1999 10:43:23 -0600

This article will be an overview of the Advernet Conference
itself and will cover the impressions and issues I saw when
I was there. There is a whole lot going on and most of it
is brand new. Agencies are breaking new ground everyday,
but some of them are only turning it into mud. This is to
be expected because we don't know yet what works and what
doesn't. A crazy idea might be the next Amazon.com, or it
could just be a crazy idea. You won't know until you try.

To begin with, I thought there would be a much higher
turnout with all the New York agencies in the area. But in
fact, it seemed there were very few people from New York
City at all. One of the conference participants told me
that New York is a different place, and the major
advertising agencies do things their own way. He said that
every month there is a meeting with the agency heads and it
is always well attended. Each month it is in a different
city, San Francisco this month and New Orleans next. One
month they had something come up that needed to be handled
quickly and they held it in New York. Almost nobody came.
Everybody knows New York is the center of advertising. It
is also the center for the media. I have always been told
that people in New York have a tendency to think they are
the center of everything, and the rest of the country
doesn't matter all that much, and while this is a stereotype
and a generalization, there is some truth to it.

I have written about the Y2K problem for the last three
years, and up until two years ago, the major media people
wouldn't touch the story. The Wall Street Journal even came
out with the statement that they had no intention of
covering the story until businesses began to fail. They
were eventually forced to look at Y2K because the media in
the rest of the country was covering it. But even then, the
coverage from the major media outlets was largely skeptical
of the dimensions of the problem.

Is the same thing happening with major advertising agencies
with regard to interactive advertising? The answer to this
isn't as clear cut as it was with Y2K and the media. There
is a lot of creative and ground breaking interactive work
being done by many of the Eastern agencies. Some are doing
strategic partnerships with interactive agencies while
others are buying into these new hot companies. It is
generally recognized there is a huge market here, but who is
going to decide how to address it and where are those
answers coming from? Charlie Skuba gave some good advice.
He said if you integrate agencies, you have to build a
system that allows them to work together and one of the most
important factors is to have a single creative lead.

It is obvious that many traditional agencies all across the
country just don't get it. We heard them give presentations
at Advernet and they did talk the talk, but when we went to
their web sites we found them artful but void of content and
difficult to navigate. Some agencies are billing themselves
as full service agencies, but Heather Arnet of
BulldogResearch.com said she doesn't believe there are any
truly full service agencies yet and there probably won't be
for five years. The traditional people said the rules
haven't changed, that you have to please and take care of
your clients first and that branding is the most important
thing. But Heather added that there should be certain core
competencies in the agency, otherwise the client is paying
for On the Job Training. At this time I'm sure many clients
are paying for OJT but without knowing it. Of course the
clients themselves are getting OJT at the same time. One of
the comments I heard was that the "Good Old Days" (1997-98)
of easy money with anything you did are over and now
everyone wants measurable results.

One presenter told us that if you wait until the market is
mature enough to make money, it will be too late. Another
disparaged the role of web programmers, and that he
considered programmers to be a commodity you just buy when
you need it. A participant in the very next panel that day
said that statement was totally wrong, and went on to
explain that many traditional agencies want to be the
gatekeeper to the interactive arena. He predicted they will
be out of business soon. The stakes are very high here.
Creating a good online campaign is intuitive and failure is
easy. If the campaign fails, often so does the company. The
timing is completely different. Internet time is compressed
so that there are no RFPs and little time for research and
planning. Dot com clients have to change their entire
focus, sometimes several times and if you can't deal with
this you will lose. These changes are due to competitive
changes that force a different business model. The rules are
being made up on the fly here. One presenter told the
planning cycle is much harder for the dot coms. She has no
idea what her budget will be for the next quarter. This can
drive the bean counters in a traditional agency crazy.

Just what techniques to use is controversial too. Rich
Media is getting a lot of buzz but the focus groups and
readers don't like it, preferring traditional ads, yet it is
obvious that this is the direction we are going. There was
the usual talk from some people that the banner was dead,
others said no, the banner is alive and well but the click
through as a measurement was meaningless. Some companies
are investing in good enough hardware and software to track
the viewers who don't click through, yet come back later to
buy.

The biggest issue that came up again and again was staffing.
In one presentation the first three bullets consisted of
that one word. There is a real lack of people out there who
know what they are doing now. Everyone is having huge
problems with getting and keeping staff. The good ones know
they are good and in demand. Many are running off to start
their own agencies and others are lured away with offers
that are double and triple what they are paid now. The
advise was when you find someone who has the expertise, pay
them whatever it takes to get and keep them, but still be
prepared to lose them.

All in all there was a ot to chew on here. We have new
media with new people determining what advertising in the
next century will become. Everyone wants to be a part of
it but there is a sorting out that is starting now. Just
who the winners and losers are is yet to be determined. Are
the small interactive agencies going to show us the way?
Sometimes the tail does wag the dog. But will the major
direction for the next decade come from the West Coast. And
where will you be on this?

============================================================



Received on Fri Nov 12 1999 - 10:43:23 CST