Filed under: 2026, Advertising, Cannes, Colenso, Colleagues, Communication Strategy, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, EvilGenius, London, Mischief, New Zealand, Si Vicars
The CCO of Colenso is Si Vicars.
I’ve waxed lyrical about him over the years.
His talent.
His overfamiliarity.
His evil genius bastardness.
His Chicken Parmesan abilities.
But one thing I’ve not talked about is his physique.
There’s many reasons for this.
It’s objectifying.
It’s an HR violation.
It’s not much to write home about.
Put simply, for all the talent that bursts out his body like an overload of steroids, his actual body resembles a twig.
I say this, despite the fact he’s some sort of martial artist master … even though he’s such a nice human, he’s more likely to drink tea with you than to karate chop the shit-out-of-you.
But maybe it’s the fact his hands are a dangerous weapon – and I don’t mean in terms of writing some Cannes Grand Prix idea – that on a recent trip to London, his hosts were confused with the person standing in-front of them. To the point one of them said TO HIS FACE:
“You don’t look like I thought you did. I thought you were ripped”.
To which another person in the room apparently looked up and said, “So did I”
And despite their rudeness legitimately allowing Si to snap their neck he, of course, did nothing and instead casually mentioned it to me on his return to NZ … while wondering out loud, where this rumour has come from.
Hmmmmmn, I wonder …
Happy Monday.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Brand, Brand Suicide, Comment, Communication Strategy, Confidence, Conformity, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, Leadership, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Martin Weigel, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect, Retail
So I’m back and let’s start the week as I intend to go on. Kinda.
With the obsession of marketing practice, our towns and cities are increasingly being wrapped in advertising that all looks the same – just in different colours.
Doesn’t matter if it’s an ad for a bank, a car, a holiday destination or a cold and flu medicine … everything feels interchangeable, which results in people – ironically – being able to ‘tune them out’ rather than being attracted to how they stand out.
It’s why the thing that is increasingly capturing the attention and creating some sort of differentiation are the ‘walk-in’ signs designed by the people who either own the shops we walk past, or run them.
One of them I saw recently was this:
Is it brilliant? Not really.
It it it clever? A little, but not much.
Does the store have anything to do with Christopher Walken? Not at all.
But I tell you what, it caught my attention, made me smile and made me pay attention to it – and the store it was for – far more than I do with many of the dot-to-dot, paint-by-numbers ads that have been tested to within an inch of their life to ensure the message achieves maximum comprehension, does not – in any way – offend or alienate audiences and hits every category cue, brand ‘asset’ and ‘purchase driver’ to ensure the people behind it can tell their bosses it ‘achieved all the metrics’, even if no one in the real world paid the slightest bit of attention to it whatsoever.
Now don’t get me wrong, I know there’s a world of difference between developing the communication for a major, national/internation brand and doing a ‘walk-in’ sign for a local suburb – but somewhere along the line, we seem to have forgotten the point of ads is to stand out, not blend in which is why it might be a good time to end this post by dusting off this quote by the great Mr Weigel,
‘You can be as relevant as hell and still be boring as fuck’.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Agency Culture, Attitude & Aptitude, Comment, Complicity, Creativity, Cunning, Management, Scam, Systems, Technology
A few weeks ago, I received this email.
I know it’s small – and blurry – so out of the kindness of my heart, let me replicate what it says:
Hi Rob, I hope this message finds you well.
My name is Thomas and I am a recruitment consultant working on behalf of a large marketing firm.
I found your Linkedin profile and was impressed by your background and professional experience.
We are currently recruiting for several positions and would like to know if you a opportunities with us. We are looking for innovative and forward-thinking people who are passionate about building the future.
I think you would be an excellent fit for this organization, It you’re ready to take the next step in your career, we’d love to hear from you.
Please apply directly through our Careers portal.
Warm Regards.
Thomas Ryan
Recruitment Consultant
I’ve got to be honest, it really pissed me off.
Not just because it was speculative.
Not just because it was unsolicited.
Not just because it was ambiguous.
But because it was also presumptuous – exemplified by the ‘book a call’ link at the bottom.
I am fed up of how lazy some recruiters are – especially as some poor company is paying them for their ‘expertise’ in finding talent – so this time, instead of ignoring them, I decided to reply to them.
So I sent this:
Hello Thomas, thank you for reaching out.
I hope you will forgive me, but I receive many of these emails so to ensure we’re both on the same page, could you let me know what it is about my experience you feel is especially relevant for the opportunity you represent?
In addition, it would be good if you could tell me a bit about the actual opportunity – from industry, to geography, to level of position.
Thank you so much.
I know, polite eh?
And why – given I was so pissed off?
Well, because I wanted Thomas to respond so I could prove he hadn’t actually read my profile and was just ‘talent farming’ … by that I mean sending out copious amounts of emails to all and sundry to see who bit so they could tell their client about their extensive search and charge their fee.
And did I get a reply?
Not exactly. A few hours later I got an email saying my response had not been sent as the email it was sent to didn’t work.
I should have known given so many of these type of emails are sent out with the sole goal of ensuring they don’t have to deal with any direct contact … however I was still pissed at the lazy and impersonal approach, so I went back to the original email to see if there was any way to contact them.
Having looked again, I realized there wasn’t any except that link to ‘book a call’.
At this point I’d decided to write a blog post about Thomas and how horrid and presumptive his approach was – so in a bid to try and find out more info on how to reach him for the content of the post, I clicked on the link and …
Well, at this point I should be showing you an image of what I found, but I forgot to take a photo, so instead … maybe this will give you a good idea of what I discovered:
Yep, I was caught in a phishing scam. Except they weren’t trying to steal my data, they were ‘teaching me’ that I needed to be more careful before I click on links sent on email because this ‘scam’ was from our own IT department.
Now I appreciate I work for an Omnicom company. And I appreciate security is rightfully very important to them and they understandably want all their people to take security seriously too. And I acknowledge I’d just demonstrated that I need to be extra vigilant because these things can – and do – happen all the time, even though it was the first time I’d fallen for something like this in my 5 years with the company. Which I will. And finally, I also acknowledge that on closer inspection, the email was riddled with little tell-tell spelling mistakes that I should have noticed … though the reality is not only did I miss them, I only saw them when I replicated the email above for legibility and corrected them for ease of reading this post.
However – and maybe it’s just me – the way they approached this ‘lesson’ feels a bit yucky.
Not because I was caught out – it was definitely an effective way to remind people to keep on their toes where company internet security is concerned – but because their approach could be read by some as a way to scare people into fearing – or staying clear – of any genuine recruitment enquiry they receive from any outside party.
Now you might think who cares, it was effective. And that’s fair.
Or you may think that couldn’t happen … but imagine you’re new to the business and have never experienced dealing with a recruiter before? Add to that the endless rounds of redundancies they’re hearing about – and most probably fearing – and let me tell you, I can absolutely see this sort of thing potentially putting someone off who is young in the industry from responding or replying for a long time.
As I said, I get why they do this sort of thing and I hold my hands up in acknowledging I was caught out by it – albeit for reasons they probably hadn’t anticipated which is namely some bloke with a blog suddenly wanted name and shame the sender for their lazy and sloppy professionalism. And it’s because of that I would like to take this opportunity to genuinely congratulate the Omnicom IT department for their devious and – all credit to them – creative way to teach an important and valuable lesson.
[As an aside, I wonder if they send similar sorts of things to different CEO’s of different Omnicom companies? Except instead of Thomas being a fictional recruiter with ambiguous job openings, he’s now a potential client with a billion dollar advertising budget he wants to talk to them about, via a ‘book a call’ link]
But for any younger person who has never been in the position of being approached by a headhunter and was caught out by this exercise – and looking at Reddit and Fishbowl, there were – let me ease your paranoia by saying should you ever end up wanting or needing to explore new opportunities and don’t know where to start, who to turn to or what to do, seek out Lea Walker or Lesley Cheng, who are both based in Australia but work internationally.
Not just because they’re brilliant humans who happen to be incredible, smart and deeply knowledgeable experts in talent, careers and roles … but because they will never send you an email that could be an Omnicom IT phishing test in disguise.
I will now never be responding to any email, let alone make the stupid mistake of clicking a link … even if its in the quest to write a scathing blog post.
Consider myself properly ‘chastised’.
Filed under: 2026, A Bit Of Inspiration, Aspiration, Attitude & Aptitude, Authenticity, Brand Suicide, Brilliant Marketing Ideas In History, Clients, Clothes, Comment, Community, Consultants, Context, Corporate Evil, Crap Marketing Ideas From History!, Creative Development, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, Devious Strategy, Disney, Effectiveness, Egovertising, Empathy, Honesty, Innovation, Luxury, Management, Marketing, Marketing Fail, Membership, Netflix, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Popularity, Process, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Research, Resonance, Respect, Social Divide, Social Media, Strategy, Stupid
Once upon a time, I was asked to help a client based in Thailand.
They were very successful – having made Thailand the most profitable market in the World for their particular brand.
Anyway, part of the project involved a workshop and part of that workshop was about identifying new variants for their product.
So far, so good.
Until I realized they weren’t looking at this to expand who could become a customer of theirs, but how to get existing customers to buy more of what they make.
Even that was OK, until it became apparent they believed their product was so loved, their customers would continually fill their shopping baskets with 3 or 4 different versions of the same product because they just liked the ability to consume it in more places at more times.
In short, they believed the more versions of their product they made, the more volume of products their customers would buy.
Every time.
Forget that people have a finite amount of money.
Forget that people have other bills, items, people to look after.
They believed, if you made it … people would just blindly buy.
It’s the same blinkered approach that some sales organizations have.
Where they believe if one salesman brings in a million dollars of revenue a year, hiring 11 more will mean they achieve 12 million dollars of revenue.
It’s both blinkered thinking and wishful thinking.
Or – as my father used to say – “the expansion of logic without logic”.
I say this because it feels companies are viewing the subscription model in a similar way.
Once upon a time, subscriptions were seen as the exciting new thing for business.
A new way to charge for your products and services … regardless that ‘direct debit’ payments had been around for years.
There were 3 key reasons why repositioning cost as a subscription was so appealing:
1 It lowered the barrier to entry, so it could appeal to more/new customers.
2 They knew that while customers ‘could’ cancel at any time, data showed most wouldn’t.
3 It could, in theory, allow them to charge more per month than their old annual fee.
And they were right, it proved to be a revelation … until it wasn’t.
Right now, everything is seemingly a subscription model.
Food.
Clothes.
Streaming.
Gym and health.
Car purchasing.
But the one that really is making me laugh, are phone apps.
It’s almost impossible to download anything without it being a subscription service.
And that would be OK, except the prices they want to charge are getting out of control.
I recently downloaded a recipe app that wanted $14.99 A WEEK. A FUCKING WEEK.
$60 a month just so I could send it healthy recipes I see on social media and have them all in one, easy-to-access place.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Sure, it had some features that would make it more convenient than just putting it into a saved folder on instagram … but it sure-as-shit isn’t worth me paying more than it costs me for Netflix, Disney+ and Spotify PUT TOGETHER.
I appreciate everyone thinks their product is the best product.
I acknowledge it takes a lot of hard work and money to make a new product.
But the removal of any ‘human reality context’ – ie: how much money do people actually have available to spend, and the hierarchy of importance they place on the things they spend – is not just stupid, it destroys the potential of good ideas.
Of course, part of the reason for this is because of how tech investment works.
Basically investors want big returns, very fast … so this pushes developers to build economic models based on a ‘perfect scenario’ situations.
For perfect scenario, read: not real life.
So they show things like:
The economic value of the health industry.
The impact of social media on diet choices.
The rise of health-focused products and services.
And before you know it, they’ve extrapolated all this ‘data’ to come up with a price point of $60 per month and said it not only offers good value, but will generate huge returns on the investment in collapsed time.
Except …
+ All this is theory because they haven’t talked to anyone who would actually use it.
+ They probably haven’t identified who they need to use it beyond ‘health seekers’.
+ And they absolutely haven’t understood it costs a lot of money to be healthy and so an additional $60 subscription for the average person is a cost too far … especially when things they use ALL THE TIME – like Netflix [which they already think is too expensive] – is a quarter of that cost FOR THE MONTH.
I get no one likes to hear problems.
I appreciate anyone can find faults if they really want to.
But being ‘objective’ is not about killing ideas – when done right – it’s about enabling them to thrive, which is why I hope business stops looking at audiences in ‘the zoo’ and starts respecting them in ‘the jungle’ … because not only will it mean good ideas stand more chance of becoming good business, it also means people will have more access to things that could actually help them, without it destroying them in other ways.
As perfectly expressed by Clint, the founder of Corteiz …
Filed under: A Bit Of Inspiration, Advertising, Attitude & Aptitude, Brands, Context, Corporate Evil, Creativity, Culture, Cunning, Customer Service, Devious Strategy, Effectiveness, EvilGenius, Experience, Management, Northern, Perspective, Planners, Planning, Provocative, Relationships, Relevance, Reputation, Resonance, Standards, Strategy, Stubborness, Wieden+Kennedy
Maybe it’s because I’m British …
Maybe it’s because I’m naïve …
Or maybe it’s because I’m privileged …
But I’ve always been pretty shit when it comes to ‘negotiating’.
That changed quite dramatically when Metallica’s management taught me both ‘the value of value’ and how procurement is a game … but even now, there are situations where I feel weird to push back.
Ironically, the thing that snaps me out of it is not confidence, but disgust.
Recently a company sent me a bill that was 49% more than the previous year.
My situation hadn’t changed.
I was a long-term customer of theirs.
I had not used their services any differently than any time before.
And yet they sent me the invoice without explanation or consideration.
And I was pissed. Properly fucked off.
And while I could have just walked away, I wanted to play them at their own game.
I should point out my goal was not to get a price reduction; it was more so I didn’t feel a mug just blindly accepting their shit.
I wanted to feel I’d pushed back …
That I wasn’t a pushover …
And while I suspected they wouldn’t care – or maybe even notice – what I was doing, it was important for me that I did it.
Short story is I rang them up and ‘had a chat’ before ending up with all the price increase being removed.
Every last penny.
And while you may think that means ‘I’d won’, the thing is my definition of ‘winning’ had changed … which is why once I got the reduction, I informed the company I wouldn’t be working with them anymore and why.
Petty?
Sure.
Pathetic?
Possibly.
Pointless?
Maybe.
Unprecedented by me?
Errrrm, no.
But as my old Wieden boss – the great Jason White – once told some people, I’d asked him to meet,
“Be true. Be transparent. Believe they want to do the right thing with the right intentions. But if you suspect they think they’re hustling you … make sure you’re hustling them right back”.
Which is why, if you want to know the real art of ‘strategy’ – both in terms of effectiveness and creativity – don’t follow the methodologies or tools flogged by the never-ending list of Linkedin Pundits, study cats or petty bastards.