by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
button in toolbar for more information.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Please subscribe by clicking on the link to receive
Campaign Brief (AUS/NZ) Online.
Campaign Brief Magazine : January February 2008
NOT? whether they are state, national or international. Cream rises to the top - always has, always will. Peer recognition sometimes iden- tifies creative thinking that may not go on to win awards. Sometimes because the ad is too parochial for the overseas shows. Or it might be a highly innovative, category busting campaign that is not to the taste of a conservative, local jury. Then the re is the year’ s work, seen in one hit by Campaign Brief. Here’s where the surprises are. For example, an agency that won zip at the award shows last year, has a run of great work later in the year, that may go on to win big in 2008. Or the complete opposite: an agency does well at the 2007 shows with work created in 2006, but have done bugger all since. There’s also a perception lag. An agency everyone thinks is hot (or cold) is based on creative product created year s b efor e. T here were several so-called ‘hot agencies’ that provided disappointing work, and other agencies (particularly some of the less fashionable multi-nationals) that totally blew u s away. That’s why it’s critical to see the work, not just tally mostly outdated award show totals or fall in the percep- tion/reality trap. Of course, big or small, being in the ‘Red Zone’ isn’t for everyone. A lot of agencies don’t give a toss about b eing ‘hot’, and some are proud of it. Many ‘Blue Zoners’ believe in that old adage, ‘where there’s muck, there’s money’, and that’s not only fine with us, it’s vital to the very existence of our Index. Imagine if all agencies were ‘hot’? It wou ld mak e for an i mpos sibl y crowded ‘Red Zone’, thus spoiling the aesthetic balance of our charts! But on a serious note, it’s great to see that most of the warm to hot agencies are also consistent winners of effectiveness awards. Hopefully, those ‘Blue Zone’ agencies that continue to brainwash their equally ‘Blue Zone’ clients that ‘Creativity’ and ‘Ef fecti vene ss’ are mutually exclusive, lose the argument in the long run. If our annual charts can help in some way t o move a few more major clients to ‘Red Zone’ shops each year - a nd the evidence suggests that is happening more and more - our ongoing quest to promote creative standards on both sides of the Tasman wi ll tak e another small step forward. 7 JAN UARY /FEB RUARY 2 008 CAM PA IGN B R I E F 35 LA PERTHCREATIVITY/BILLINGS INDEX 2008 $150m Marketforce $100m Workhouse JMG Ad Corp Alternative Linc Braincells KeithEllis BBellooth Trilogy BVinten rowning BC+Y Creative Cooch $10m Ad Impact Creative Rare Gatecrasher Meerkats $25m The Brand Agency 303 ADELAIDECREATIVITY/BILLINGS INDEX 2008 $ 100m $ 50m $25m Martens Design Joyce Russ THEM Lathlean NRG FNUKY BRISBANE CREATIVITY/BILLINGS INDEX 2008 BCM $ 100m $ 50m Mint Axis Coo’ee $25m Partners The $10m Partnership McCann Erickson Red Suit Gallery The The Hoopla Family Publicis Mojo Clemenger Harvie Edge GPY&R Junior De Pasquale Make Einstein Da Vinci Slippery Fish $10m WDM Kick Black Sheep Show Pony Bombora KWP! Clemenger BBDO Jam Cummins Nitro
AWARD Awards 2007
March April 2008