The Hoosier Lottery has rejected all bids for
the creative part of its advertising account. Most of the bidders were local, and the agencies involved are miffed that they
were passed over.
In this weekendâ??s IBJ, reporter Anthony Schoettle quotes lottery spokesman Andrew Reed as saying the recent addition of several marketing-savvy employees played into the decision.
In her Dear John letter to the companies, Executive Director Kathryn Densborn said none of the bidders could offer â??all the capabilities the Hoosier Lottery was seeking in connection with its overall marketing program and strategy.â??
Local ad execs are stunned. The execs say the rejection by one of the stateâ??s largest accounts could send a negative signal about the local ad industry.
Is the lottery underestimating the capabilities of the local ad community or wisely saving taxpayer dollars? Whatâ??s your take?
In this weekendâ??s IBJ, reporter Anthony Schoettle quotes lottery spokesman Andrew Reed as saying the recent addition of several marketing-savvy employees played into the decision.
In her Dear John letter to the companies, Executive Director Kathryn Densborn said none of the bidders could offer â??all the capabilities the Hoosier Lottery was seeking in connection with its overall marketing program and strategy.â??
Local ad execs are stunned. The execs say the rejection by one of the stateâ??s largest accounts could send a negative signal about the local ad industry.
Is the lottery underestimating the capabilities of the local ad community or wisely saving taxpayer dollars? Whatâ??s your take?
Back to Top
IBJ Conversations
11 Comments
Add Comment
I don't see what the big deal is if the lottery can hire their own talent to develop the campaigns they need. Those hires did not contribute to brain drain but rather put them on an Indiana payroll.
Just as most talent typically specialize their skills- so do most agencies (Which often allows them to target their prospects better and focus internal resources efficiently.) I think it may make sense in many ways for the Lottery to bring the work in house so that they have much more creative control while reducing costs and ensuring their strategy is implemented across the board. The talent is here in Indy for any small or large scale marketing campaign, what the Lottery did not see in its bidders was an agency that was a central location for all the skills required to see their strategy to fruition.
Part of developing and implementing any strategy, marketing and otherwise, is to make tough decisions based on the strategy of the organization and the resources at it’s fingertips. Bringing the work in house and hiring Talent to develop, cultivate and implement new strategies and reducing costs allows the Lottery to put more money towards all of the programs it supports while employing Hoosier Talent. Now let’s hope this is the case.
Then consider the creative content (or lack thereof) of the totally forgettable TV and radio spots the Hoosier Lottery has approved over the past few years. Does anyone remember any of these spots? With their questionable creative premise, poor talent casting and sketchy production values, I doubt it.
If the Hoosier Lottery felt bringing the creative in-house was a viable option, why didn't they review the agencies' services versus have them make full account pitches? This would have saved a lot of agency man hours and allowed them to present their services most applicable to the Lottery's needs.
I question the validity of Bill's claim that many local agencies are pricing themselves out of the market. Doesn't the client have the final say on what fee, commission or project cost arrangement is made with their agency? If an agency's costs are too high, they don't get hired. Simple.
My knee jerk reaction to this whole situation is one of bemusement. The Hoosier Lottery staff is acting like a big-shot account. The Indiana ad agency community is suitably miffed.
Now here's what would be interesting: have the spurned agencies band together and work for the state casinos on a campaign that promoted gambling on the slots and casino tables as your chances of winning are much greater than the gazillion to one odds the Hoosier Lottery offers.
In the end, the decision of what agency(ies) to use is an economic one -- even if it starts out as a political one -- based on achieving marketing objectives. If what Mike and Phil say is true, and I think it is -- that many full-service agencies didn't even bid, and that the Lottery's decision was based on finding the most effective way to use resources to achieve strategic objectives -- then agencies who were not selected (i.e., all of them) should graciously acknowledge that it was a strategic marketing decision based on the breadth of capabilities needed. Then they should either develop those capabilities themselves or demonstrate to the Lottery (and other prospective clients) how they can provide a better return on investment than an in-house solution can.