New contract awarded by BW?

I have just heard a rumour that BW have just appointed McCann Erickson for
a million pound a year advertising contract.

Can anyone substantiate or deny this?

If its true wouldn't the money be better spent on the waterways ?



Julian

Julian wrote:
> I have just heard a rumour that BW have just appointed McCann Erickson for
> a million pound a year advertising contract.
>
> Can anyone substantiate or deny this?
>
> If its true wouldn't the money be better spent on the waterways ?
>

What exactly do they need to advertise for?

Bit like an advert for the Royal family. What's the point?

Complete and utter waste of money.

--
Gibbo

This email address isn't real.

On May 23, 1:47 pm, Will Chapman <nbQuiddi...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> I hope it doesn't turn out to be a typical advertising contract;
> by the time that advertising space is paid for it is not unusual
> for the total bill to be 3 x the basic contract.
>
> I wonder if this replaces work that was previously being done in
> house or is simply a renewal of an existing contract?

I believe it's a national marketing contract, rather than specifically
an advertising contract.

Richard

On May 23, 2:14 pm, Will Chapman <nbQuiddi...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> A marketing contract? So what would you expect to be produced by
> that? Publicity posters/leaflets, design/layout of Annual Report,
> corporate image enhancement?
>
> Perhaps we should wait for the official announcement....have you
> received a press release about it?

No press release, I only know because the proverbial little birdy told
me. It may be mentioned in BW Monthly (staff newspaper), but I doubt
there's any guarantee it'll be officially announced.

My guesses are that it'll include consumer PR and some b2b
relationship-building stuff, but that's only guesswork.

Richard

On Wed, 23 May 2007 12:50:06 +0100, "Neil Arlidge" <neil@tuesdaynightclub.co.uk>
wrote:

>Gibbo wrote:
>> Julian wrote:
>>> I have just heard a rumour that BW have just appointed McCann
>>> Erickson for a million pound a year advertising contract.
>>>
>>> Can anyone substantiate or deny this?
>>>
>>> If its true wouldn't the money be better spent on the waterways ?
>>>
>>
>> What exactly do they need to advertise for?
>>
>> Bit like an advert for the Royal family. What's the point?
>>
>> Complete and utter waste of money.
>
>But we don't know the whole story.
>It must be something pretty important they are advertising, coming so close
>to the EFRA enquiry outcome.
>So what exactly are BW advertising?
>Selling off their property portfolio?
>Stakes in their property portfolio?
>Non operational Heritage property?
>For staff with some waterways knowledge?
>Redundant plant?
>Contracts to run the waterways?
>Contracts to maintain the waterways?
>Moorings?
>A better image?
>Marinas?
>Canals?
>
>For a million quid a year it must be something pretty large they are
>advertising!...or maybe a million quid does not go far with this advertising
>company?
>
>I'm sure Adrian will soon be around to put all us idots straight! :-)

For an economist with a flare for public relations and spending other people's
money on irrelevancies?
--

Martin