The curious case of Saatchi & Saatchi’s prize winning ad for an out-of-business local printer

Making popcorn…

(Edited by Mumbrella for legal reasons) . That in itself is creative.

Looking forward to a big run at Cannes. Team Ozzie Scam has been pumping out the bullshit. Just hope the Cannes boys don’t check out client lists too closely!

Thanks for calling this out Tim, something Campaign Brief never would do. Keep up the pressure.

Hate to intrude on a worthy rant with some facts but S&S werent the only Australian agency to win.

US Sydney won gold at D&AD Design for a real client (SBS).

lol – touche

Hey Marion,

CB has written tomes on scam ads (and exposing them and their practitioners, some of whom now longer in the business because we did) over the last 20 years, get your facts straight.

Tim, SBS was Gold at One Show Design: http://www.campaignbrief.com/2......html#more

And what do you think of this Saatchi & Saatchi award, Lynchy? You reported it in very glowing terms in Campaign Brief last week.

I hate to say it, but it all seems rather dodgy to me. I can’t imagine how other agencies who may not have won must feel about this entry! And I am surprised to see that this is the best that Saatchi’s can put forward!

Um, chippendale printers was a fairly well used printers. I definitely remember them. I had print based clients that used them as well, sad they have gone under. [self censored rant about offshore printing]

@ Malkuth Damkar – Looks like your site is hacked by Moroccoans. A lot’s happening on this post, LOL …

I received this mailer as I am a Production Manager in an advertising agency in Sydney, Australia. It’s a real shame that Chippo’s have gone under too.

While upstairs at Saatchi’s have been devoting all their skills to brochures for late, great, Chippendale Printers, downstairs in Team Saatchi they’ve been busting their ….. for years on all the retail clients like David Jones to make the money upstairs get to waste on this sh*@ and the award entries that go with them.

Chippendale Printing wins GOLD after death.Yes, sadly they are no longer in business and its the fault of the equity partner philosophy in print not because of the creative genius of Saatchi and Saatchi.I commissioned the suggested “scam” brochure with Saatchi.Their creative team worked long and hard to come up with a promo brochurethat would hit a market that was down on itself.It was meant to pock fun at the major trans pacific print groups that have raped print and to have a light hearted dig at ourselves.It suceeded because the email and calls of congratulations came flooding in from all quarters. It did raise the interest in a dying print company,isn’t that what advertising is suppose to do…lighten up guys it ‘s great that an Aussie agency did so well.Unit and praise a win

Phil,

How much did they charge?

RIP

Now that’s an interesting question!!!

Hey Phil – I hope it didn’t go under because you were the copywriter, chief spell-checker or quality control there?

Lynchy you would have to agree given the new rules about intent they are flying very close to the sun.

Glad they kicked some business to you Phil. We all know how the scam system works. “We will do a great job, you don’t have to pay us, just sign this form.”

Many of us were hoping in 2010 the local industry would heed the global call and rise above.

I can recall SMH doing at least one successful job a long time ago on a certain Cannes winner featuring animals.

But uncovering scams is not something I’d ever associated with CB before.

Yep Scam-Wow, that was in 2000. The CD that did that one was outed the year before by CB in a major 5 page article when he first arrived in Sydney – for producing scam ads in Asia and embellishing his CV with awards he didn’t win.

He somehow survived that, but when he finally went too far the next year in Cannes for entering a print campaign that never ran for another agency’s client, featuring copies of award-winning photographs by a top Sydney photographer without his knowledge or consent – he was fired at the end of that week and has not worked in a major agency since. Cannes then stripped the agency of the Bronze Lion won.

During Cannes in 2001 CB online outed a major Singapore agency for a ‘Guinness’ campaign that turned out to be a freebie for a Singapore bar that sold Guinness. The campaign won several Gold Lions that week but Cannes refused to strip the agency of those awards.

CB has done several ‘Scams in Cannes’ articles over the years, we outed a NZ campaign that won a Cannes Outdoor Grand Prix in the early noughties (it was a cover story), and we regularly cover the topic of scam ads in CB Asia and on our blogs.

Good for you. I never realised you had so actively fought against the promotion of scam ads. I’ve always been curious about where you draw the line, or the Lion.

I think where this story got off on the wrong foot was the understandable assumption by most of the above that the mainstream Saatchi creatives did this work at the expense of the big clients like Tooheys and Toyota. It was entered by Saatchi & Saatchi but was actually a mailer done by Saatchi Design, created by Saatchi Design creatives, for the Sydney printing firm six months ago, well before it went under.

One Show Design and other major shows like D&AD have lots of design categories – logos, letterheads, business to business mailers – which anyone on any budget can enter. So Saatchi Design have every right to enter their best work into award shows, which this year also included the Sydney Writers’ Festival work that won Bronze at One Show Design.

So as it’s Saatchi Design, not Saatchi & Saatchi, presumably it won’t count towards S&S’s score in your creative rankings then, Lynchy?

Why are most of you scared to put your full or proper names to your comments ???$$ maybe , easier under the cloak of darkness.

DTL (what do those initials stand for?): As far as CB Rankings, whoever is listed as the agency, gets the points. So in this case, unless there’s some sort of official protest that’s upheld by One Show Design, Saatchi’s gets the points. Disappointed?

I’m starting think that S&S may have knocked you back from a job years back, as your obsession with them is bordering on vitriolic. What was the comment from S&S when
you rang them for comment?

No worries, thanks for clearing up. It just seemed like a long bow to draw for an entire story to be based off a CB reader comment and then run as a ‘curious case’ rather than news. I guess my expectations are based on journalistic standards and shouldn’t be confused with ‘blog’ standards, which do tend to lapse without checks/balances.

Hey Lynchy have you been watching Underbelly? The Wood Royal Commission would be a fair comparison. You really have the stomach to stop scam? It would involve taking down many of your friends here and abroad and turning many agencies on their heads.

Detective, I have been watching Underbelly but as far as I can tell, there hasn’t been many scam ads in Australia lately. If there were, they would be exposed by the likes of CB, B&T, AdNews or Mumbrella. Perhaps you can point to any you’ve seen to give us one or two to start with. Are there any agencies that you feel are guilty of late?

If there is any scam that I can tell, it’s from some of those two-bit new media and PR shops that puts a video on YouTube of a stunt in the local mall, twitter about it – all with zero budget and call it an ad campaign. But even then, I don’t think there’s a law against not spending money promoting a client, is there? CB doesn’t cover many of these shops – so perhaps this a question for Tim to answer.

‘Big agency enters scam award’. Its a simple and appealing story that taps into many peoples’ gripes with the industry. Always nice to reap the rewards of controversy isn’t it Mumbrella?
Probably best to get your facts straight before you stir up innuendo that this is a scam entry though. This is a totally legit piece of work.
And yes, I work at S&S.

In that case, how many agencies pitched for the business? What was the brief? How much was the contract worth?

It’s clearly getting a tad nasty in here on this thread, ha ha! However, I am still waiting to hear Phil Heaton’s response regarding what S&S charged for the work that he apparently commissioned as well as the response from Al in regard to the question above ie: who pitched, what was the brief and what were the billings???

Someone should set up a ‘scam ad’ category in their awards programme. It would be a brilliant spectical and clients might retropsectively buy the work in some cases.

Bit like having an olympics where it’s okay to se steroids.

Alison. Yeah, way too nasty on here. Just gets a little annoying when you see your agency get accused of foul play incorrectly.

To be honest, I don’t know about the financial side of things, or the pitch. I’m on reception. But I couldn’t see anything on the One Show entry regulations that suggested it needed to be a piece of business that went out to pitch. It was a pamphlet. Not a multi million dollar account, so why would they have bothered with one?
But here is a quote from the entry instructions on the One Show website.
http://www.enteroneshow.org/information/faq/
“we are requiring client contact information to verify your entry. You will be able to input this information when going through the entry process. The information will be kept confidential.”
I don’t see why Saatchi would be expected to put that kind of information up on a blog thread. In any case, One Show had the info and found nothing suspicious.

What I do know is that a client commissioned S&S to make a pamphlet. S&S made one good enough to win an award. I saw one of my mates and coworkers create it. It’d be nice to see him get recognition rather than accusations. End of story (I hope).

I’ll tell you about an ad that’s not a scam but doesn’t present itself as it appears on the box.

It’s the latest BT campaign. The spots look great on CB’s site but they’re not what’s gone to air.

You see, the versions that run on my TV have a disclaimer across the screen for much of the ad.

So what you might ask.

Well, I just reckon to promote a commercial that will never go to air [because it fails to meet ACCC guidelines] is a bit tricky. Even trickier when it removes a bloody great big white line across the screen; especially when the whole campaign is based on the use of lines and can’t go to air without the line they’ve removed.

We all have to deal with the ‘disclaimer elephant’ in financial advertising nowadays, you can’t avoid it, or run an ad without it.

So, I find it a little ironic a campaign that claims to be so innovative presenting traditionally boring graphic messages in an attractive way should have to remove a traditionally boring graphic disclaimer message because it spoils the look of the ad.

if they’d found an innovative way to do that then they would’ve really achieved something.

Alison F –
pitch & brief ?
– are you kidding!!! It’s a printer we are talking about – they usually have no marketing budgets…

I have a feeling no money would’ve exchanged hands – it would of been a contra deal – you design my flyer and I’ll print your biz cards for free !!! Happens all the time…

Dragon- I think that is exactly what everyone is upset about – that the work had no budget, that it was contra and not subject to the usual terms of business.

As director of the illustration agency that worked with Saatchi’s on this, I can confirm that there was a budget on this project. Of course I’m biased, but I’m struggling to understand what the fuss is about either way. This was entered into the one show *design* awards, in the *booklet/pamphlets* category. and won fair and square. The entry met all the requirements, and hardly qualifies as a ‘scam’ ad. So whats the problem exactly?

Alison, no one’s upset about this except you, DTL and a few of the anon cowards above. If you want to join the conversation and be taken seriously, use your real name, not a scam name. (WTF does F stand for?) Same goes for DTL, Freddie from Chippendale, et al…..

The owner of Campaign Brief is lecturing people about anonymous comments. Wow… just wow.

@ Anonymous LMAO
@ Lynchy ROTFLMAO

Unlike most people commenting on blogs (including CB blogs), I’ve never been anonymous. And in case you haven’t noticed, Mumbrella has just as many anon comments as CB (over 3/4 of the comments on this thread are anon). Mmmm…

But you’re lecturing people about being “anonymous cowards” while simultaneously allowing exactly the same sort of behavior on Campaign Brief, Lynchy.

If it bothers you, then you could instantly stop it. Otherwise, why are you complaining about it?

Alison, you fool.
How about you divulge how much you make packing shelves at your local supermarket and then maybe S&S will tell us how much they made on the pamphlet.

Phew, just spent half an hour waiting in the rain for a bus and got to the end of this thread as it arrived. I missed E’s catty gossip shows tonight but got a lovely bowl of vitriol instead. Yummo

7:06… Anonymous cowards don’t bother me at all, in fact without them where would the likes of Mumbo and the CB blogs be? Very dull….

I’m merely stating I’m not one of them.

Why is Lynchy stirring the pot on a competitors site. Somebody stop him.

Why are all the editors of Ad blogs bullies?

– Ed G… Ooh, look at what a knot you’ve gotten you’re pretty pink knickers into. Come and find me in aisle 9 and we’ll see if we can’t get you a 3-pack replacement pair.
Of course, fitting an a**hole of your size will take some effort…

@Lynchy, why don’t you interview all the big ECDs for a CB article and ask them directly about scam?

sLEPHANT IN THE ROOM… CB and CB Asia did a major 5 page story on the whole scam debate titled: ‘Scam Crackdown!’ in the November/December 2009 issue, which included comments and opinions from ECDs in Australia, NZ and Asia. You can read it online: http://campaignbrief.realviewtechnologies.com/

I didn;t realise there was still a print edition of Campaign Brief. Does anyone know a newsagent in Sydney where I can buy it?

@Lynchy, a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question to all CD’s, ECD’s and CCO’s (Loving that new title). Have you, your department or your agency or network, past or present, done a scam ad over the last five years? Then publish all answers and better still, who refused to partake.

eLEPHANT, when confronted the CDs will just blame their staff and say it was unauthorised and the people responsible have been reprimanded.

Read the article.

It’s a win/win. CDs look like they are “tough on scams” and CB can say they have investigated the issue.

(Removed for legal reasons)

That time of the month aye Alison F?

1. I can’t believe Lynchy descended into this argument
2. (edited by Mumbrella for legal reasons).
3. He seems to have changed tack on that last argument about anonymity on blogs. Yes, Lynchy, we can see you aren’t being anonymous, but the simple fact that your own blogs allows anonymity for the flamers means you can’t be upset about flamers being anonymous. You revel in that sort of activity on your own blog. Don’t be upset just because you’re the target this time.
4. All of the above is why I have banned press releases from my agency going to CB. I urge others to do the same. It is a hateful place that encourages poor behaviour under the control of a biased media representative.

Not true, anti-CB. (You must be from a pretty insignificant agency as I get PR releases from every major agency in the region.)

Just to prove you are wrong, here are two recent articles on the CB blog, relating to work from Saatchi’s and BMF. I think you’ll find there’s pro and con comments in equal measure:

http://www.campaignbrief.com/2.....the-b.html

http://www.campaignbrief.com/2.....s-the.html

Amazing expose between the lines – go Mumbo! – but it’s true, I remember working at S&S and the meeting where it was announced ‘we are putting $100k this year into the winning of awards’ … and I remember (edited by Mumbrella for legal reasons)’s first scam ad, and even then it was one that he ‘borrowed’ … can we please hear more from Anti-CB and Alison F??

–Not Craig Davis…
Ha ha ha! It’s funny you want to hear more from Anti-CB and myself since I think you are the only contributor to this thread that feels that way!
That said… I went to the articles that Lynchy linked us all to and for the life of me I truly cannot see where the ‘cons’ are in these stories – they seem to be Agency arse-crawls of the highest nature.
Unless he was referring to all the cons in the comments area…?
And re the scam ad expose, I agree with Not Craig that it was a brilliant pot-stirrer – go Mumbrella!

(Removed for legal reasons)

(Edited by Mumbrella for legal reasons)

Saatchis must be delighted with Lynchy. By turning this into a big debate, it’s now one of the most discussed items, so it’s not going to quietly go away for weeks.

Edited by Mumbrella for legal reasons

Funny, this string doesn’t appear to include any clients applauding the creative industry for their single minded focus on helping them meet their sales & marketing objectives.