Colenso BBDO snares Westpac from Saatchi’s
Colenso BBDO, Auckland has won the Westpac brand account after a pitch against incumbent Saatchi & Saatchi New Zealand. Westpac’s retail business was already with Colenso’s retail arm .99, won from Creative Juice in September last year.
Nick Garrett, managing director of Colenso BBDO, said the agency isover the moon with the opportunity to work on a brand like Westpac:”Westpac’s vision for the brand is very exciting and a wonderfulchallenge for us strategically and creatively,” he said.
“The chemistry with their team has been fantastic so we have high hopesfor a successful relationship and are looking forward to gettingimmersed into their business.”
Garrett said new partnership strengthens the bank’s relationship withtheClemenger Group. Colenso BBDO and .99 will work closely together on theWestpac account as they do on a number of other accounts.
Westpac Head of Retail Marketing, Ian Moody, is looking forward to afresh approach: “Colenso has identified some opportunities aligned toour vision which we are looking forward to exploring,” he said.
50 Comments
Man… sucks to be Saatchis.
Saatchi & Mojo.
A merger is the only way out of this hole.
wow, merger, that’s a crazy thought, interesting.
The Rich get Richer.
Oh my god.
Telecom leaves & Saatchi will close
C’mon Kiwibank, everyone else is…
Well done to the Colenso crew. Nicky shouldn’t take it too hard as it has been stitched up for a while now through senior connections, the pitch was just a mechanic. Ironic as that used to be a Saatchi way of doing business.
One does have to wonder why Banks are doing these closed deals without properly going to the market (BNZ, ASB and now Westpac).
3.42, we’d need to wait for Saatchis to lose the last bit of DB they hold first. Probably a few weeks away then.
Telecom would need to go back to Saatchis before they could leave
Telecom nearly walked last year, so that relationship isn’t exactly chipper.
Winning Sanitarium showed the new team have the goods, but some relationships just can’t recover from years of damage.
This really should have been a .99 victory.
Clemenger politics I guess
The relationship was very positive/stable until some senior Saatchi peeps went. With no relationship left, or anyone able to develop one, it was down to the work and up to KR to convince them the work was good. Except he couldn’t.
Yes you’re right 7.56. When you’ve won sanitarium what does a bank, a biscuit company and a phone company matter? Can’t have those for breakfast now can you, eh..eh…You show ’em tiger.
Is it really true that everyone who has seen the winning pitch creative can’t get the “Willy Wonka” theme tune out of their heads for the rest of the day?
Who is telecom actually with? half a dozen agencies claim telecom as clients on their websites
If the work ain’t good, and the WW CEO can’t convince the client, then blame loss of the account on the previous management. Again.
Seriously, they had two bites at the cherry and six months to get close to the Westpac CEO and try all manner of persuasion. But to lose the account and use that little excuse is incredibly childish.
Good luck with (what will soon remain of) Telecom, DB, and Sanitarium. Three highly creative accounts hell-bent on changing the world.
Ted, you need to add National Bank to that list. They’re a cautious bunch those banks. They wait till one jumps ship, then they all do.
Willy Wonka? So it’s ‘anything is possible in Westpac land’ then.
The girls that market that bank need to smoke something lateral.
Brian is that you Sonya?
Brian, you have a unique perspective on the impact of the senior people who have left. “Positive/stable” isn’t how most people would describe it.
99 presented the first crack at the brand pitch but the client asked where Colenso was. Imagine 99’s reaction at being pigeon holed as a retail agency. Imagine Colenso’s reaction given they didn’t even know 99 were pitching.
9.57. ROTFL.
I was thinking exactly the same thing.
Except everyone knows the relationship was rocky BEFORE ‘those peeps’ left. Otherwise .99 wouldn’t have been able to get their teeth into it.
Some people do love to spin their own spin.
But we all know the truth.
2.34 That is so funny. The problem for Colenso and 99 is that the tension comes from the money. Fights on Air New Zealand, counter fights on Vodafone, new fights starting on Westpac. Not exactly joy to all mankind. 99 are driven to be acknowledged as grown ups, and Colenso want them to stop having ideas above their station. Could be fun to watch this one.
“what flavour saver are you?” was a 99 crack at one job
Ironic would be if the remaining Westpac direct work went back to Aim. Doubt Jim would allow that one though.
Brian – it’s always down to the work, not the relationship.
That’ll be the reason why the account went up for pitch in the first place – my guess is that it would have been at risk for ages before that
Don’t edit comments.
8.00, NBR quotes Jim saying he wants aim to get it back.
It was always a tough call for Saatchi’s. The job running any large agency is tough. Especially when you make the jump from GAD to CEO, and Group Head to ECD.
Is it the agencies not getting it right or banks that simply don’t know what they want from their agency? Seems like the trend of bank moves is a whole lot of trial and even more error.
8:16 – there is a reason people keep writing about the previous management.
As 3:33 hinted, rocky relationships indeed.
The result of the shady backroom deals?
The ANZ work is very depressing, although the clients hand is strong at the wheel
The National Bank work is poor compared to the past agency
The BNZ stuff is utter crap from 15 years ago, and clearly their new (& previous) agency are not up to it
Who knows that the ASB work will be like, but recent work gives an indication that the client will be too heavily involved.
Will one Bank twig to the fact that the way they go about appointing agencies has an influence on the shit they end up with?
Come on 11.36 ASB has a Facebook page now. That’s gold right there.
9.04 – you don’t know much do you?
Yes, 1:15PM, but is it a Facebook for New Zealanders?
The poor guys at 99 must be gutted. They left College Hill such was the antipathy between them and Colenso. They have been super successful whilst remaining some of the nicest people in advertising. They then win the biggest most profitable part of Westpac. Now they have to share the client with their supposed sister agency when in reality what they will do is try and get as much from it from 99 as they can. Watch out Neil. You know better than to trust em.
2.57 – You think clients stick with agencies for the account service???
Someone tell him (her) he’s dreaming…
The No Idea Company.
6:45 you are obviously new to this game.
Clients typically have very little appreciation of the difference between good and bad creative. they will post-rationalise any dross on the basis that it is their dross.
Creative wins accounts. Account Service looses accounts.
I know it hurts the sensibilities of the precious little snowflakes we call creatives, but once the pitch is won what we often laughingly call “creative” is just an opportunity for a good suit to sell an idea to someone who is usually almost comically stupid.
The difference between agencies is far less than juniors and creatives believe – the reality is that the end product is as good as the client lets it be. The good CEOs and senior people in agencies know this. It is like a dirty secret. They know that if the client thinks you are good – then you are good.
It is like an epic version of The Emperor’s new clothes.
We are all guilty of doing crap work and good work in approximately equal measure. Most of our stuff will work, regardless of its quality, because consumers are lemming-like in their desire to buy stuff.
The only reason we make out it is so hard is to make ourselves feel better for doing the least significant job in human history.
[Creative wins accounts. Account Service looses accounts.]
Only a creative would write something so naively self-serving and anti-account service. But I am hoping a writer would know how to spell ‘loses’.
4:49 shame on you for working for an agency that you feel has sub standard creatives. Also kinda weird you call your clients “almost comically stupid”. New to the game?
“We are all guilty of doing crap work and good work in approximately equal measure. Most of our stuff will work, regardless of its quality, because consumers are lemming-like in their desire to buy stuff.
The only reason we make out it is so hard is to make ourselves feel better for doing the least significant job in human history.”
These are two of the saddest paragraphs I’ve ever read on this blog. And that’s saying something.
11:42, Actually I think 4:49 has nailed it. Hits the mark on many fronts. Now client side I am working with the “comically stupid” and yes they are. They even get paid more money, have bigger budgets and are responsible for more people than their agency counterparts.
That’s what’s really scary.
Dear Stark Naked,
While you may actually believe what you’re saying is true – I feel the need to say your comments are deeply misguided. I’ve just wrapped up a dissertation on ‘what clients want’ where I interviewed almost a dozen on their perceptions of the industry. None were stupid – most have a keen sense of creativity and all expect more of this industry than we are currently delivering. In fact their expectations of creativity tend to be far broader and deeper then ours. They’re aware that the whole of their businesses require creativity if they’re going to succeed whereas people like you seem to think that creativity is just something that appears in ads. That’s a schoolboy error in today’s agency world and future business environment.
it’s attitudes like yours that lose accounts because they’re toxic & they paralyze agencies with politics and negativity – often based in the reality that you just don’t have the chops for the job any more.
But the deeper reality of your comments is that you seem to be a deeply unhappy human being & that’s sad. if that’s the case, then you ought to think about quitting before you get sacked. get some fresh air & do something you can enjoy.
All the best
Abe
Abe, before you do anything else in you life, enquire about a helpful feature on your computer called Spellcheck. I’m sure your PC has it installed.
If you’re on a Mac, then select all the type (Command + ‘A’), then either right click and scroll for Spelling and Grammar (not Spelling & Grammar, which is a schoolboy error). If you’re on a Mac laptop, then place two fingers on the trackpad, and the option should appear.
To aid you in your quest, I have written something below that’ll act as a guide for you to practice on. It has a few mistakes deliberately included. Happy checking 😉
Negative attitudes do not always destroy agencies, usually it is ncompetan management who have very little experience, or they are under pressure because most of their business is being touted around town, including one partucularly large client, who is about to hand a large portion of businiss to a nasty rival.
9.52pm, Sir, if you’re going to judge spelling, get your own right. I like what Abe Dew said. Working as a creative I’ve come across, and observed plenty of ‘Creatives’ who don’t understand what creativity in business is about, it goes beyond ads.
Dear 9.52, commenting on industry blog posts at 9.52 on a friday evening is just sad. Thanks for the lesson, but I don’t think it’s the one you intended.
a
9.52, don’t type drunk. You’re a cock That’s C.O.C.K. Or to quote you, an ” ncompetan” dick.
2:34’s gossip in turn might explain why Colenso had to wave goodbye to the prospect of the ASB account and into the waiting arms of D5..?