Monopoly busting; the invisible WPP entity; and Head of Seating Plans
A different way of thinking about Google and Facebook’s dominance will be music to the ears of other parts of the advertising ecosystem, writes Dominic Mills. Plus: the lunacy of WPP’s ‘Supermarket Sweep’ approach to acquisitions, and a job title that’s not as daft as it sounds.
As far as I can see, the growing global debate about controlling the duopoly has two sides to it.
One is imposing some form of regulatory control over the content they publish — which finds its common expression in binding them in to the rules and behavioural norms of mainstream publishers.
The other is in mitigating their ever-growing influence (or control, if you take a dystopian view) over the lives of citizens both in the expansion of their own services and in the way they hoover up smaller rivals — aka monopoly busting.
The classic example here is in the way the US passed legislation in the early 1900s to break up the Rockefeller Standard Oil empire.
Ever since then, US (and practically every other developed country too) anti-trust law has been based on one principle: price to the consumer. This principle, for example, was at the heart of the CMA’s decision last month to block the Asda/Sainsbury’s merger.
But there’s a problem, as highlighted by the former AppNexus founder Brian O’Kelley, who last week appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Google and Facebook services are free, so there is no obvious price harm to the consumer.
Here’s what O’Kelley said: “This is the loophole that allowed Google and Facebook to complete hundreds of acquisitions over the past decade without any significant FTC review. Let’s apply some common sense to the regulatory process just by acknowledging that consumers pay for ad-supported content with their data and their attention.”
You can read his submission here, including a fascinating passage on how Google reacted (clue: in a total hissy fit) when WPP bought a stake in AppNexus.
Submissions by other witnesses, including professors of marketing and economics, are also available here.
Much of what O’Kelley says, including about consumer privacy, will be music to the ears of other parts of the advertising ecosystem. And it’s reassuring to hear that US politicians are taking an interest.
But don’t hold your breath. The wheels of Congress turn mighty slow, and if anti-trust legislation has to be rewritten so that it is based on consumer harms beyond price, we could be talking a decade.
Tenth Avenue Freeze-out
With a passing nod to Bruce Springsteen, WPP last week announced that it was closing its obscure Tenthavenue (problem #1: difficult to pronounce) mini-holding-company subsidiary.
Reading WPP’s annual report, there are two clues that this was inevitable. One, no mention of Tenthavenue anywhere; and two, on page 49 of the annual report, a promise of 100 planned mergers and 80 local office closures over 2019.
Don’t worry if you had never heard of Tenthavenue. Kinetic apart (going to GroupM, where it obviously belongs), its constituent parts comprise a rag-bag of subsidiaries like Joule, Candyspace, Shopper2Buyer, TMarc, Forward and others too numerous to mention.
I think the rule here was clear: if there was no natural home for an acquisition, it was shoved into the Tenthavenue.
And therein lies one of the problems Mark Read has inherited: incoherence built on a ‘Supermarket Sweep’ approach to acquisition. Buy it because, no matter how small or niche, you can (and it’s good for the ego).
The lunacy of this was explained to me about three years ago by someone who worked for one of WPP’s big media agencies. Like its GroupM siblings, it wanted to make a bet on content. Absorbing content agency Forward (now mysteriously morphed into something called Bookmark) seemed like a sensible way to jump-start the proposition.
“Oh, no,” they were told. “That would spark a turf war. It belongs to Tenthavenue — even though there’s no logic to it.”
Needless to say, frustrated and dismayed by such parochialism, my contact left soon after.
It’s not clear yet what the future holds for the constituent parts of Tenthavenue. But just closing down the mini-holding company doesn’t really solve the problem. The rag-bag is still there — just without a home.
A job title that’s not as daft as it sounds
Head of Seating Plans…it’s a job title to make you smile, although perhaps not one you might want for yourself.
To spare the blushes of everyone involved I won’t say who it is, where it is, or who tipped me off. All I will say is that the holder is at an organisation sewn into the very fabric of the industry, although not in an obvious way, and which tends to be acquisitive.
As job titles go it’s not quite as laugh-out-loud as the person who described themselves to me as head of the revenue waterfall (begging the question:…and if it becomes a trickle?), but even so it’s quite a conversation stopper.
Nevertheless, as any office commando knows, seating is guerrilla warfare by another name. I’ve seen huge rows break out over office seating, especially when it involves a move or the arrival of new people. Chairs, space, location, neighbours, windows, noise, proximity to the toilets… all of these can be the cause of internecine fighting and rows that can turn best mates into sworn enemies. There were times when I would have given my right arm to dump all the crap on to a head of seating plans.
So I’m coming round to the view that such a job is certainly much more serious than I thought. And to do it well requires an interesting combination of skills: toughness, diplomacy, empathy, not to mention a keen sense of spatial awareness and a box of tissues. Getting it right can make a big difference.
In many ways, this is exactly one of the requirements for MDs these days, all the more so if they are having to negotiate a merger or re-organisation. I’m thinking, for example, of Wunderman Thompson, where the former JWT staff are all moving from Knightsbridge to Mornington Crescent. I bet there are some big fights there.
Perhaps WPP could do with its own group-wide Head of Seating Plans given the similar re-organisation/merger of VMLY&R in the very same building (one person, two jobs…very efficient) and any forthcoming agency consolidation.
Note: By way of apology for the lack of timeliness on this column, it was written in the middle of last week before I headed off on holiday a few time zones away. Next week, expect Mills on Tuesday (or Wednesday).