Advertising - Short(ened) Ad Time and Short(ed) Ad Companies

Did Netflix Lose a Potential Rev Stream Before Activating it? 

Earlier this week Fox Networks Group’s ad sales chief floated the idea of cutting commercial ad time down from 13 minutes to 2 minutes an hour in a speech he gave in Los Angeles. This is interesting on a number of levels.

First, this would pose a real challenge to advertisers who, undoubtedly, would have to fight for limited but costly supply. Yes, television advertising has flat-lined, but it is still one of the most effective means to get brand messaging out.

Second, such a maneuver could have the effect of squeezing Netflix ($NFLX). Numerous underwriters highlight that Netflix can always open the ad spigot to help it grow into its ever-growing capital structure. And they’re not talking about product placement. If ads are eliminated elsewhere, will consumers focused on the ultimate user experience tolerate ads before watching treasured content like Ozark or 13 Reasons Why? Or will that result in friction and, in turn, leakage? If this decision gains traction, this as-of-yet-untapped revenue stream for Netflix could be collateral damage.

Ultimately, minimal advertising may help draw users back to content. But it will create all sorts of issues for brands trying to sell product AND, by extension, the advertising companies trying to place those brands.

To point, earlier this week the Financial Times reported that “[h]edge funds have amassed bearish bets of more than $3bn against the world’s largest advertising companies in an attempt to profit as the industry undergoes wrenching disruption and slowing growth.” Publicis, WPP, Omnicom Group ($OMC), and Interpublic Group of Companies ($IPG) are all short targets of funds like Lone Pine and Maverick Capital. With corporates like Proctor & Gamble ($PG) cutting ad spend and Facebook ($FB) and Google ($GOOGL) monopolizing same and building custom tools that cut out the middlemen, this is an area worth continued watching.

Ad Agencies Get Hammered (Short Don Draper)

Changes Afoot as Large Corporates Like P&G Shift Spend

Draper never would’ve made it in the age of #MeToo anyway.

This week, Proctor & Gamble ($PG) announced that it cut its digital ad spending by approximately $200mm, a shot across the bow of certain undisclosed big ad players (cough, Google) and a major blow to the middlemen ad agencies that seem to be caught in a maelstrom of disruption. Back to that in a sec. More on P&G,

P&G, however, has not cut overall media spending. Funds have been reinvested to increase media reach, including in areas such as TV, audio and ecommerce media, a company spokeswoman told Reuters.

Not yet, anyway. P&G intends to cut an additional $400mm in agency and production costs over the next 3 years. In so doing, they’re also going back to the old school after realizing that the 1.7 seconds of eyeball view time doesn’t necessarily translate into sales. Podcast producers take note.

So what about those middlemen? Judging by WPP’s 10% stock price plummet this week ($WPP), investors are bearish. WPP is a British multinational advertising and public relations company besieged by the ease with which advertisers can publish directly on Facebook ($FB) and Google ($GOOGL) and, in an instant, receive performance metrics. Ad agencies, therefore, are no longer needed as much to connect brands with end users. Per the Wall Street Journal:

For their part, big ad agency companies that have traditionally bought advertising space on behalf of marketing clients are under pressure to reinvent themselves to remain relevant as the industry changes. Advertisers are demanding that their agency partners be more transparent about media-buying, so it is clear that agencies are getting the best possible deal for the clients and aren’t receiving rebates from sellers.

Disrupting kickbacks too? Rough.