Saatchi billings down but agency holds lead

<p>BEIJING: Saatchi & Saatchi has retained its status as China's </p><p>top-billing agency in 2000 in the long-awaited China Advertising </p><p>Association (CAA) report, which has been criticised for having the same </p><p>flaws as the Hong Kong 4As' ranking. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>CAA - a semi-government industry body that reports directly to the State </p><p>Administration of Industry and Commerce - had Saatchis billing RMB1.38 </p><p>billion (about US$165 million) after tax last year. But Saatchis' </p><p>billings were sharply down from the RMB1.83 billion it reported for </p><p>1999. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>McCann-Erickson Guangming, J. Walter Thompson, Ogilvy & Mather and Grey </p><p>round off the top five. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>A similar ranking compiled by the Hong Kong 4As puts O&M on top, with </p><p>Saatchis running second. Saatchis' Asia chief executive Patrick Pitcher </p><p>said the CAA figures were more reliable because they were calculated on </p><p>taxes paid. Pitcher said: "I'm not sure if the CAA numbers are the most </p><p>accurate but they represent the best effort. The 4As relies on agencies </p><p>sending in their audited billings but these are open to interpretation </p><p>because some companies get paid in Hong Kong and there might be </p><p>inter-company charges which confuse the whole picture." </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>Rival agencies have pointed to the discrepancy between Saatchis' </p><p>billings and the taxes paid. Despite its pole position, Saatchis was </p><p>only ranked fourth in tax paid, while second-placed McCann paid the most </p><p>taxes. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>O&M Greater China group managing director Joseph Wang claimed that all </p><p>of Zenith Media's billings, including accounts handled by Bates, were </p><p>listed under Saatchis. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>He said this was similar to MindShare's billings being booked only under </p><p>JWT, irrespective of whether some accounts were serviced by O&M, a </p><p>fellow WPP agency. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>This would account for the sharp drop in Saatchis' billings, after </p><p>Zenith took a huge hit when it lost the Procter & Gamble China media </p><p>buying account last year. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>However, Pitcher argued that since CAA had not changed the methodology </p><p>in compiling the rankings, the figures were consistent and therefore </p><p>reliable. </p><p><BR><BR> </p><p>But other agencies countered, saying this also applied to the Hong Kong </p><p>4As figures. "Unless there's more transparency somewhere, we're </p><p>deadlocked," said Wang. </p><p><BR><BR> </p>

BEIJING: Saatchi & Saatchi has retained its status as China's

top-billing agency in 2000 in the long-awaited China Advertising

Association (CAA) report, which has been criticised for having the same

flaws as the Hong Kong 4As' ranking.



CAA - a semi-government industry body that reports directly to the State

Administration of Industry and Commerce - had Saatchis billing RMB1.38

billion (about US$165 million) after tax last year. But Saatchis'

billings were sharply down from the RMB1.83 billion it reported for

1999.



McCann-Erickson Guangming, J. Walter Thompson, Ogilvy & Mather and Grey

round off the top five.



A similar ranking compiled by the Hong Kong 4As puts O&M on top, with

Saatchis running second. Saatchis' Asia chief executive Patrick Pitcher

said the CAA figures were more reliable because they were calculated on

taxes paid. Pitcher said: "I'm not sure if the CAA numbers are the most

accurate but they represent the best effort. The 4As relies on agencies

sending in their audited billings but these are open to interpretation

because some companies get paid in Hong Kong and there might be

inter-company charges which confuse the whole picture."



Rival agencies have pointed to the discrepancy between Saatchis'

billings and the taxes paid. Despite its pole position, Saatchis was

only ranked fourth in tax paid, while second-placed McCann paid the most

taxes.



O&M Greater China group managing director Joseph Wang claimed that all

of Zenith Media's billings, including accounts handled by Bates, were

listed under Saatchis.



He said this was similar to MindShare's billings being booked only under

JWT, irrespective of whether some accounts were serviced by O&M, a

fellow WPP agency.



This would account for the sharp drop in Saatchis' billings, after

Zenith took a huge hit when it lost the Procter & Gamble China media

buying account last year.



However, Pitcher argued that since CAA had not changed the methodology

in compiling the rankings, the figures were consistent and therefore

reliable.



But other agencies countered, saying this also applied to the Hong Kong

4As figures. "Unless there's more transparency somewhere, we're

deadlocked," said Wang.