The worldwide contest is centred around the website ideabounty.com, which acts as an online community for creatives. Interested parties will be able to register on the site to receive a brief from 28 August. The closing date for entries is 23 October.
The winning idea, which will be announced in November, will receive what Unilever is calling a "bounty" of $10,000 as well as being turned into a global ad campaign, set to break initially in the UK, created with the help of Smartworks.
The idea will have to centre around the "animal" character which was originally devised by Lowe.
Unilever plans to pitch out all further briefs for the Peperami brand in this way, rather than appointing a retained agency.
Matt Burgess, the managing director of Chrysalis UK, the division of Unilever that manages Peperami, Bovril, Marmite and Pot Noodle, said: "We are no longer working with Lowe, we have terminated our relationship with them on very good terms. Lowe should be very proud of the work they’ve done, it's been a long and fruitful relationship.
"This is not a stunt. As an ongoing way of making our content we are crowd-sourcing. A plumber from Barnsley could enter but so could people with strong serious creative intent.
"We do not plan to appoint a retained agency for Peperami, but at this stage we have no plans to roll out this strategy across our other brands. We have to see how this works first."
Peperami splits with Lowe and looks to consumers to create its ads
25 August 2009, 10:55am
LONDON - Unilever is launching a competition that asks the public to create a new TV ad for Peperami, after splitting with its ad agency Lowe London, which it has worked with for more than 15 years.
All Comments
Clarence Bass - 25 August 2009
$10,000 for a creative idea that will deliver huge ROI for Unilever. Methinks Noam is looking to rip off gullible creatives desperate for some sort of big break. DON'T FALL FOR IT!
g - 25 August 2009
I agree. This stinks of a money-saving exercise, rather than a genuine belief in crowd sourcing...
Noam Buchalter - 25 August 2009
I suggest you take a look at the brief on www.ideabounty.com this Friday. We're asking for a TV script and a print scamp, so I'd say $10,000 is a pretty good prize. Does a creative employed by a big London agency really get paid more than that for this sort of output?
Thom Dinsdale - 25 August 2009
I think this is very tricky business also.
I've blogged about it in more detail here: http://thomcult.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-is-it-with-junk-food-and-ugc.html
- 25 August 2009
So Noam takes the line that like the ark was built by amateurs and the Titanic was built by professionals, the solution will be out there for $10K. It cost way more than the price of a nearly new Skoda to built the foundations of almost 20 years of brand growth for what is an extremely lucrative piece of nigh on inedible crud for Unilever. Regardless of the sometimes extravagant Lowe-related costs, what a terrific return on investment and what an incredibly shabby way to treat what was one of the elite creative and planning agencies in the world. Is it any wonder that Lowe's morale will be hitting an even deeper pit of despair?
Still, when Noam is replaced by a CRM program, I shall be laughing my butt off. Rest assured though, I certainly won't be offering him my Big Issue pitch on my days off.
harry fowler - 25 August 2009
So without the intial input from Lowe, giving you the idea of the Peperami animal thingy, this idea would be where exactly?
I thought so.
g - 25 August 2009
in fairness - props to Noam for getting involved in the debate. i'll be interested to see what the brief looks like, although at the moment i remain \(very) unconvinced i
Dean Turney - 25 August 2009
Noam, I think you're being dishonest. You're not just looking for a "TV script and a print scamp". You want a great idea that's going to sell shedloads of Peperami around the world. Unilever will make $millions out of it. Shouldn't your prize be proportionate?
Dave Holmes - 25 August 2009
Is now a good time to mention the obvious flaw in the endline ?
Second thoughts i'll save it for my Pitch
Bella Ikpasaja - 25 August 2009
I wonder..is this
a) cheap PR..\(subliminally working on fans of the brand, who may buy even more of it now..)?
b) Peperami trying to look cool..\(assuming it can)..?
c) a nod to the new marketing democracy.. \(at the expence of agencies, which may well set a precedence)?
Christine Asbury - 25 August 2009
I could understand it if they were after a brand new idea but it seems all that's being asked for is a new execution isn't it? And that makes it seem rather disingenuous.
The idea, character and campaign were created by Still Price Lintas in '93, inherited by Lowe in the '99 merger, who have preserved it faithfully ever since.
I wonder if the creators, Steve McKenzie and Jason Gormley will enter the fray?
Nic Ray - 26 August 2009
I am interested to see that the focus of this debate is not on whether crowdsourcing of creative ideas is a viable model \(I believe it is), but rather that the prize is not big enough. As a former big agency employee, I feel compelled to point out that almost all agency creatives work on freelance briefs outside of their normal employ - and get paid substantially less than $10k for doing so.
Here's a opportunity to work on one of the UK's most iconic \(and irreverent) brands, pull out those brilliant back draw ideas that were never sold and have some fun shaking up the industry in the process. Furthermore, there will be no stipulation in the brief as to how much time or effort a creative needs to put in - they can judge that based on the potential reward. So it's really up to the individual to make up there own mind up and get stuck in if they want to. Idea Bounty has over 4000 registered creatives who have participated in past briefs, and by in large its a very happy and loyal community. If they weren't, why would they continue to participate?
If you would like to read a objective discussion on the pros and cons of crowdsourcing, we wrote a detailed post about it here: http://www.ideabounty.com/blog/post/2070/is-crowdsourcing-evil
Thanks
Gemma Gales - 26 August 2009
This debate is not about a big enough "prize". It's not even about the time it takes to come up with an idea. it's about recognising the value of that idea. Which $10k doesn't even come close to covering. This is some kind of bizarre lottery. And I'm not even going to mention the lucky "also-ran" creatives who get to pitch for free. That's a whole other story.
Jon Ratcliffe - 26 August 2009
If you ask any marketer worth his salt, he will tell you that you need to innovate in order to succeed in an economic downturn. You need to constantly be looking to get a greater ROI from your marketing spend. If this process delivers a similar product at a considerable saving, then I think it's a great idea.
This is what you expect to see from small emerging brands who treat their marketing spend as their own. All credit to a big brand looking to do things differently.
Benjamin Beavan - 26 August 2009
Jon, I completely agree with your opinion. We are going to see a radical change in the way clients operate, starting with experimentation. This will ultimately benfit the consumer, due to changes in the traditional model. It seems to me that the issue for the larger agencies is fragmentation at a time when user generated content is on the increase. The problem is brands are now aware they can throw out a hook to creatives, then choose which fish they reel in. The fish will always bite, they are hungrier now than ever before.
harry fowler - 26 August 2009
Jon, how is this innovative?
'The idea will have to centre around the "animal" character which was originally devised by Lowe'
If it was from scratch yes I'd agree. But is isn't and no matter what way you dress it, it's a snub to the agency, the relationship and to the original creative idea.
I have no issue with clients being innovative and using everything at their disposal to achieve their aims, but this is definitely not that.
Dan Neville - 27 August 2009
Actually I have to disagree, I think its extreamly innovative. The idea that only the creators of an idea are able to take it forward is a little strange to me - From what I understand Lowe have been the custodians of the Animal and have developed and worked him into the character, and by inference the brand, that he is. What Unilever have done is take a well established brand \(one that can hardly be twisted in the wrong way) and handed him over to the public - they are the people who have after all accepted the Animal for who he is - and asked them to continue his legacy.
I dont think something like this could have ever been possible unless there was an agency that was there to develop the brand to such a high level - In fact if I was Lowe I would be extremely proud of the fact that they have created such a strong brand that is able to be placed in the hands of the public...
I think this is just the next stage in the evolution of marketing: it is inherently more sensitive to market-forces, it levels the playing fields as far as creatives are concerned \(giving them the opportunity to communicate their ideas to global brands) and it opens brands to a limitless number of new, innovative marketing ideas. AND it doesn't remove the need for traditional agencies, as the ideas generated will still need to be implemented - and for that matter the brands developed.
I think we will see The Animal being taken to some new and interesting places in the end and I think more established brands will start to move towards this model in the future... just my two cents...
Christine Asbury - 27 August 2009
I can't see that it's about innovation; surely it's about cost saving?
Andrew Allen - 27 August 2009
I'm not sure it is innovative, after all UGC ads are nothing new, but neither is it as despicable as some people are making out. We're in tough times, and any client that isn't looking at trimming its cost down is either bullish or foolish. It may not be a move that will delight the advertising world, but too me, providing there is an over arching plan for the future behind this \(which is surely a short term move) then I don't think there's much denying in a pure business sense it's a shrewd move. I've blogged about it here: http://bit.ly/YYDW0
Jon Ratcliffe - 27 August 2009
Hi Harry
I agree that it's not nice for the agency but as a marketing / business decision, I think it's a good decision.
To your point, if innovation is defined as bringing something new to a business, whether it is a product or process etc, then I think that this is most certainly innovative.
This is a new approach to the traditional agency client model for developing advertising and I think a great project to keep an eye on. If it is a success and great ads are produced, it stands to reason that Peperami ads will continue to be developed in this manner and my guess is that more brands will give this model a try.
Chris Arnold - 27 August 2009
I think we have to accept that clients are seeing better creativity on YouTube than some agencies are delivering. Just sit in any night and see if you can see any good ads. And the price tag big agencies come with only encourages clients to look elsewhere. Worse for some agencies, this could see the decline of the creative department and without that no agency has a reason to exist.
However, very few clients will every be able to get great work just by running competitions. Because the public are great at random ideas but can't answer briefs. Then there's the question, who's devising the strategy? Whose is going to develop the idea and execute it?
Grilla Login - 28 August 2009
Dear Brands
Thank you for giving Joe Public and me the opportunity to deliver your content. I'm sure the world won't miss the Ad industry and all the so-called creatives whose job it used to be. We're all capable of being creative after all, even untrained Grilla's with no experience. Why stop there? I look forward to the day when the airline industry also asks its customers to step into the cockpit and fly the plane and hospitals inviting us into the theatres to perform the operations. My furry fingers can feel squishy insides already.
Mad Man - 29 August 2009
Frankly, out of all of the industries around today, it sickens me to see marketers and advertisers taking such a pathetically blinkered approach to what is obviously a pretty ground-breaking move for a conglomerate like Unilever. For people who are supposed to lead the way in thinking "out of the box", you all sound like a bunch of tired, pessimistic bores to me.
So much for creative integrity: this brave step by a client is illustrating perfectly what motivates the "brilliant creative minds" at work in agencies around the world today. And that's cash, if you're a little slow on the up-take. How boring.
This whole thing makes perfect economic sense : if you think $10,000 is beneath you, then get back to your desk and shut up. If not, a few hours out of your otherwise lazy evenings to earn a potential ROI of $10,000 sounds like a pretty good deal to me. I'm already plotting my script!
Big up The Animal!! And good for U for trying to mix things up a bit!
Only registered users may comment. Sign in now or register for free.
Your Comment