On the subject of a new name for Saatchi & Saatchi, you quote David Herro, the partner at Saatchi shareholder Harris Associates responsible for the shareholder uprising, as saying, "What we call this bundle isn't what's important. It's what's in the bundle."
Isn't that the most ridiculous remark a person in the advertising business could make? I guess that shows Mr. Herro is not in the advertising business, nor should he be.
I think we will soon see that clients realize this and will still opt for a manager, Maurice Saatchi, who, for all his faults, has a sense of the advertising business.
Philip A. Kantor
Greenfield Stein & Senior
The Bates fallout
Your editorial, "Maurice Saatchi's wrecking ball" on Page 1 of your Jan. 23 issue is absolutely on target. At least I agree 110% with your message.
After retiring as chairman of Marsteller Inc., a division of Young & Rubicam, in 1984, I began my second career at Northwestern University. As an associate dean at the Kellogg Graduate School of Management, I had the responsibility for managing the Kellogg Advisory Board, a group of some 65, mostly CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. I witnessed from this group their first-hand reaction to the Saatchi & Saatchi purchase of Bates, and the millions of dollars showered on their chairman and other managers.
In your editorial you state, "Clients erupted in a furor that has not subsided to this day." You are right. As a former agency head, I received an onslaught of furor from the Kellogg Advisory Board.
During that period, as a former chairman of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, I was invited to a meeting of its advisory council of past chairmen. I did my best to report to that group the intensity of the furor toward the agency business. Some "got it"-others ignored the problem.
My first career as an agency person was stimulating, challenging, rewarding and fun. I have not missed at all the changes, the turmoil and the problems in the business since the mid-'80s. I would hope that the next 10 years will see agencies finding their rightful role as partners in their clients' marketing and communications efforts. In particular, I trust they can become a significant player in the world of interactivity and integrated marketing communications.
Richard C. Christian
Medill School of Journalism
The Gossage connection
We all enjoyed your Special Collectors Edition (50 Years of TV Advertising).
When we hit "50 who made a difference," it was pointed out to me that two people on your list, Stan Freberg and Marshall McLuhan, were brought into our industry by Howard Gossage.
Howard didn't have much use for TV, so we were all amused to see his lasting impact. We suspect Howard got a chuckle out of it, too, when Sid Bernstein showed him the article.
The Copy Workshop
Thanks from `SI'
On behalf of my colleagues at Sports Illustrated, I thank you for the honor you gave us. We are proud of the business that we are building at SI, but we certainly did not expect to be chosen as "Magazine of the Year" (AA, March 6).
It is a wonderful feeling.
Donald M. Elliman Jr.
President, Sports Illustrated
Your editorial "Power to the planners" (AA, Jan. 30) was right to the point, well stated, and reflected an important necessary point of view.
Personally, I appreciate the recognition.
Beer promos in a rut
I read Bill Borders' letter in the Feb. 20 issue [saying the Budweiser "frog" commercial was similar to an earlier Rainier beer spot] with a smile because the Coors Light Channel spot is also imitative.
Two years before the Coors Light Channel, Perpetual Motion created a fictitious broadcast network for G. Heileman's Henry Weinhard's Private Reserve beer.
We created WSPN: the Weinhard's Sports and Party Network. This fictitious network was heralded by radio, a wearable program and on-premise promotions.
Guess there's nothing new under the sun.
Public TV isn't public
Your support of "public" broadcast sucking on the government gland is absurd-and contrary to the interests of your advertisers and subscribers.
Your tears for "small market" government-supported stations going dark (Editorial, AA, Feb. 15) have no place in a competitive medium. "Public television" is misnamed. Just try to have your views-unless liberal, anti-American-expressed.
You missed on this one, and it seems an increasing leftist tilt of your paper is very anti-business-the very market that pays your bills.
Jerry L. Luquire
Brentwood Publishers Group
Advertising Age welcomes letters to the editor, but we ask that they be held to no more than 250 words in length. The editors reserve the right to edit letters. Address letters to Advertising Age, Viewpoint Editor, 740 Rush St., Chicago 60611. Fax: (312) 649-5331. Letters can also be posted through the Ad Age Bulletin Board on Prodigy, or by Prodigy E-Mail at [email protected]