Paying to pitch – like prostitutes paying to give a blowjob
Singapore’s advertising community will probably be aware by now of a pitch called by Singapore Management University that required agencies to pay to participate.
Yes, actually pay for the privilege of offering the university its ideas for free in the hope that they might get a whiff of the business.
It was only $100, a token amount which SMU has justified as an administrative cost in the name of good governance, and probably thinks will weed out those who aren’t serious out its business, but will probably result in any serious agency boss running for the hills.
Like this one, who captured the feelings of many of their peers with the following diatribe on Facebook (now deleted, name withheld):
SMU has been approached for comment on whether they’ll be sticking with the $100 ‘admin’ charge in future.
Here are a few more comments that give an indication of how agencies feel about paying a fee to pitch, which by the way isn’t a new thing, but seems to touch a nerve every time.
“They’re letting you know they will be a shitty client early in the process. I’d give them the money in gratitude.”
“I would be more than happy to pay for the pitch document if they were prepared to pay for my time to prepare the pitch response. Yeah, like that would ever happen!”
“Totally ridiculous! Really, zero appreciation of time and intellectual capital. So happy that I liberated myself from this type of tyranny.”
But of course the sad reality is summed up with the following:
“As much as we provide witty and sarcastic remarks here, do note that SMU would have likely gotten a room full of comms agencies still vying for this piece of work.”
If this was on Facebook, I’d like the shit out of it!!!
ReplyHardly a surprise since most of the agencies in Singapore are basically glorified McDonalds’ anyway letting the clients dictate their every move and price.
99.9% of them will pay to pitch. The industry has never been more desperate.
ReplyCan Singapore stop making headlines in the marketing for all the wrong reasons?
ReplyThis kind of business is notoriously hard to win…..because the Uni will 100% have no brief…just a muddled statement of lofty objectives and principles penned by the dean.
So the brief will be entirely generated by the agency planner….a big risk to start with.
Once you submit your campaign, it will not be evaluated by marketing people…the ones who make the decisions are academics….and historically, they consider themselves to be intellectuals who are morally and artistically superior to the ‘shysters’ operating in advertising. You can expect your work to be sent around a table to professors, office administrators and admissions staff who will be deciding your fate.
They also have no money to afford senior creatives who have the maturity and experience to generate inspiring concepts on education….so most likely they will end up with a bunch of kids who left university 2-3 years ago.
Then after 2 years they’ll complain that the creative is not good enough and hold another pitch.
ReplyNot cool. It sounds like a procurement department interfering in a process they know little about…who would have thought?!
ReplyI don’t think we should all throw our toys out on this one. if you have ever worked on a property or industrial pitch, these types of fees are not uncommon. procurement driving a process, but, if it weeds out the bulk then it is not a bad thing. i just hope you get more than a 1 page brief for 100 bucks. this is not a unique to singapore thing, so dont bad mouth singapore for shits and giggles.
ReplyYeah and 4A’s are as useless as ever. why would anyone bother pitching SMU? It’s a rigged pitch as they already know who they want to appoint, It’s just a fishing expedition. WAKE UP PEOPLE! You’re getting buggered and you’re paying for it!
ReplyDont give them any ideas for free, people.
ReplyJust say yes to everything, the juniors we charge out as seniors can figure it out. 4A’S are full of client servicing, no one manages them. That’s why we end up with situations like this.
ReplyAh yes. This kind of arrogance feels familiar.
Pitched, won and worked on a project for SMU. In summary:
If you like bad briefs, that shift constantly and evolve.
And you like multiple stake holders, who will never agree on the final objective.
And you like to be micro managed, art directed and experience design by committee, then fill your boots. Pay the $100 and sit back and take the pain.
Asking agencies to pay to pitch is vile & disrespectful.
If you are a client or ever a client, don’t do it. Ever.
If you are an agency, don’t pay to pitch. Ever.
ReplyWhy can’t agencies charge clients a pitching fees for the far higher admin costs they incur to prepare the pitch proposal, most of which are still printed and even laminated?
I’m pretty sure SMU will just provide a soft/pdf copy of the pitch RFP since they are so admin cost conscious?
ReplyIs the school run by idiots?
ReplyDear Agencies,
Firstly, allow me to introduce myself I am the Founder/CEO of 360 Strategist since the late 90’s.
Secondly, I was an agency suit myself for many years too.
Ok! now I have this to say to SMU, JUST PLAIN CHEAPSTAKES!!!
Whoever that came up with the idea of the $100/- is one who does not even come from a decent background or mass comms an experience person will NOT even think of it. As SMU as a good reputation as a Brand…why? such a stupid request…this person need to be terminated immediately not doing justice to the Brand SMU.
Thank you!
ReplyOMG. Does it include GST or exclude.
ReplyYea, was there being invited to pitch. They really got a room full of all the big holding companies of the ad world sitting in.
Em SMU can’t even get their shit right and repeatedly say things like you can participate and if we like you, we may not select you but keep you on our preferred vendor list.
Replythe problem here is not about paying for the opportunity to pitch… which is justified for many reasons.
…. printing costs ( ask any architect, buying bid documents is nothing new in the construction industry, in fact $100 is low),
….willing buyer, willing seller – if you feel strongly about t, walk away, let the desperate low quality amateurs pay the entry fee and let SMU suffer from the poor quality submission. A professional firm does not want to do free work, neither does a professional procurement board want to waste time evaluating low quality submission
… the procurement board spent significant time and resources preparing the bid documents, no reason why a similar company with similar procurement needs should get the bid documents for free
The bigger question is whether this raise the barriers of entry for budding entrepreneurs who are startig out. SMU start at $100, what”s there to stop the next company to raise the fees to $10,000? how do we nurture our next generation of entrepreneurs? or is the playing field always favouring the GLC, MNC and incumbents????
ReplyIs this what our industry has come to… How fucking sad. Now we have to bend over, pull down our pants and pay for the priveledge. Does $100 pay for 1 hour or 10 hours of their time to administer such shit?
ReplyDear SMU, no ad agency will ever tell you this but a university is not a jeans, smartphone or soft drink brand…you cant make it famous with advertising.
Especially the kind of advertising you do….all your messages are trite bullshit…pick up skills of the future, make yourself more attractive to employers…..everyone says that crap.
Look at Harvard, Stanford, Yale etc…..do you think they got famous and sought after by advertising their ‘brand’? No….they produced some real leaders of industry and politics, who in turn made them famous.
Can you do that? You’re relatively young so it remains to be seen…lets see how far your alumni reach in a decade or so…..and when they’re being interviewed on CNN, maybe they will say I went to SMU. It’s a big IF….and I wouldn’t count on it.
In the mean time….forget advertising, really. Your ads have been rubbish for many years now. Hire a bunch of in-house graphic designers and some PR writers. Just focus on your website, facebook page and course intake announcements. Design a nice grid and just do it yourselves. You will save a shit ton of money…..whats better is you won’t have to deal with scummy ad people…..and we won’t have to deal with you.
Win win all around.
Replymate great headline, only British journalists can write these, aka, The Sun, The Daily Mail, congrats. Great yarn, again the headline reminds me of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It%27s_The_Sun_Wot_Won_It
Replywell, its pretty clear they only want the big holding companies to participate given how they structured the tender. And the senior guy himself said it during the media tender brief that “most of you here are holding companies” and that’s why its structured like that.
Crap school. No wonder their graduates are also not that impressive.
ReplyIt would be interesting to find out who wins this pitch and if, whoever the winner is, they will want the account considering the bad publicity this is generating — and at pitch level at that! Wait, not even at pitch level yet!
Also, I’d like to know how SMU will respond to this issue, if it ever does. Don’t they have PR people on the payroll to take on the sorry task of commenting on things like this?
ReplyOh come on everyone, don’t be so surprised. SMU has always profited from the desperate and naive.
Who are you to question a working business model! ‘Management’ is their middle name yo.
ReplyI think Robin should confront them with these comments and see how they respond, don’t you?
ReplyDear Agencies,
How do we as an industry change such ludicrous pitching behavior?
Do 5 or 6 of these pitches a month and win none of them, smaller agencies will be out of business quick smart. Even if their ideas were really great.
This kind of pitching kills innovation.
I feel change can only happen if we as a collective industry stand up to these types of pitches.
Sign me up. I’m willing to end such greed that can potentially cost me and you our jobs.
Replythe problem is simply the economics of demand/supply.
Unfortunately, there is just not enough local business to go around in SG. Most of the ‘profitable agencies’ earn more their revenue on regional accounts. But even they need to some earnings from the local market.
For the size of the local SG market, the SG ad industry is very over-supplied: multinationals, local independents, boutiques and consultants all fighting over the limited no. of local business.
I don’t any market with a population of 5M that has so many ad agencies and staff…
ReplySo,the problem he is not just SMU it is the Singapore ad industry as a whole. It is primarily run by a bunch of yes people with no spines who will bend over and say yes to any pitch. Creativity left Singapore advertising a long, long time ago. It is essentially just a retail and property development market, nothing more, nothing less. That’s why you see so many scam ads come out of Singapore, there’s simply no opportunities to do anything else. Could it change? Maybe. Possibly. But you need some new, brave, risk taking agencies, ones that don’t do whatever it takes to make the client happy. ‘Yes’ people are not risk takers nor are they innovators. Singapore needs more risk takers. This SMU pitch is a joke, everyone knows that, so why are there not a group of vocal industry people calling a press conference to say this will not be acceptable. There is nobody willing to stand up for this kind of behavior and as such it will continue. The Singapore ad industry needs to grow a pair of balls if it wants to do better work and gain some respect.
ReplyHave your say