Cost consultants have become a fixed feature of the industry. Clients
love them and production companies loathe them. As Pliatzky joins the
fray, Michele Martin listens to all sides and assesses what’s on offer
The thing production consultants shy away from most is being called by
their most common name - cost consultants. Terry Slade-Baker, Mars’s
head of television production for Europe, says: ‘I am not a cost
consultant. I don’t want to screw producers on budgets, I want to help
our agencies get what they want out of a shoot.’ Graham Connor, despite
calling his company Commercials Cost Control, says: ‘We can cut a good
percentage off any budget, but that’s not what we’re here for.’
But any client will tell you that using consultants is primarily a cost
issue, with savings on production budgets at 5 to 15 per cent. Moreover,
the Advertising Film and Videotape Producers’ Association says that 50
to 75 per cent of all clients now use consultants compared with 10 per
cent less than a decade ago.
The name problem reveals a deeper sensitivity. Clients may be only too
pleased to call their advisers all-round production gurus, but to
agencies and production companies, cost consultants are just what the
name implies - willing to sacrifice creative excellence to save a few
pennies. Not calling them production consultants is one of the few
objections they feel they have.
Simon Wells, head of television at WCRS, speaks for many when he says:
‘There are some appallingly bad ones out there who will quibble over the
taxis and bacon butties and ignore the bigger issues.’ Or, as one
anonymous production company head puts it: ‘Cost consultants are the
teachers of the production world. Those who can, do, and those who can’t
become consultants.’
It is against this background that the second Pliatzky committee is
currently redrafting the industry’s 1987 bible on advertising
production. After warranting barely a mention in the first version,
there is now general agreement that changes are needed to encompass a
thriving service.
Cecilia Garnett, chief executive of the AFVPA, says: ‘We haven’t
finished our discussions yet, but everyone seems to be in broad
agreement and our best-practice guidelines will certainly deal with cost
consultants.’
On paper, cost consultants claim a role in advertising film production
to which few could object. Generally hired by busy clients, at their
best they should represent the agency’s needs to the client, while
simultaneously auditing and explaining the process back to advertising
managers and their bosses.
Their task is to check proposed production budgets and suggest
improvements. They should help select the final production company.
Overseeing shoots and post-production also comes within their remit.
Some larger clients even choose to hire individuals on an exclusive
basis. Mars appointed Slade-Baker as a staffer 18 months ago and Procter
and Gamble retains Geoffrey Forster as a full-time freelancer. Because
both monitor every company shoot instead of just ad hoc projects, they
can advise on ways of centralising entire production schedules for
greater cost effectiveness.
However, consultants are more often criticised for being inexperienced,
inefficient, and willing to drop creative standards to make savings.
Everyone has their own horror story, from the consultant who couldn’t
read a budget sheet, to the one who spent four days trying to beat down
a quote, only to tell a producer: ‘I’m worried you’re leaving yourself
dreadfully exposed with this costing.’
Then there are the constant criticisms that consultants only look at a
balance sheet and never wait to see the effects of their cuts on the
finished production.
With so many stories such as these, even some of the more enlightened
clients recognise the problem. Nigel Scorey, Mars’s commercial manager,
is one of the few: ‘The standard of cost consultants out there is
patchy. I sympathise with experienced production company producers who
have their work questioned, threatening quality in order to save small
sums of money,’ he says.
So why do clients persist in using such controversial figures? Firstly,
TV ad production has always brought clients out in a cold sweat. At the
root of the paranoia is a deep-seated client belief that agencies mark
up production costs. Nat-West’s director of marketing, Raoul Pinnell,
may stress that using a consultant was not intended to be ‘adversarial’
to agencies, but even he admits: ‘We all recognise that there is the
possibility of an inherent conflict of interests due to the way agencies
seek remuneration as a percentage of media or production spend. Cost
consultants help to balance the potential conflict.’
Scorey adds: ‘Clients see huge prices on things like carpenters and
painters that a layman wouldn’t usually pay that much for and they feel
they are spending over the odds.’ This suspicion is not helped by the
increasing use of freelance producers, which leaves many clients feeling
additionally justified for retaining an experienced consultant.
Agencies and production companies find it hard to voice their concerns,
however legitimate they may be. That’s why the Pliatzky initiative is so
welcomed by all sides. The report looks set to make two key
recommendations: firstly, consultants should demonstrate on-line
experience as an agency or production company producer, or a solid
client background, before being allowed to practise; and secondly, it is
altering its illustrative timetables, giving guidelines for cost-
effective production schedules to include consultants’ involvement,
suggesting the addition of up to an extra week to accommodate plans.
Such recommendations would please those who believe the two areas
highlight the worst aspects of cost consultancy. WCRS’s Wells speaks for
many experienced producers when he says he is shocked by the standards
of consultants: ‘I’d say only 35 per cent have on-line production
experience,’ he comments.
Mark Andrews, the managing director of Rogue Films and a former
president of the Pliatzky committee, says that delays by consultants
caused by this lack of experience can - ironically - add thousands of
pounds to bills, by preventing advanced bulk deals on securing crews,
equipment and even plane tickets.
Andrews says: ‘There’s almost no lead time on jobs nowadays, yet you
find cost consultants all over them while the client is standing in the
background saying ‘where’s my ad?’ Nobody’s got time to make the changes
to make the savings.’
The hope is that Pliatzky will enable the more positive aspects of a
consultant’s job to come the fore. Even now, not all those on the
receiving end of consultants think they are a bad thing. Nicky Webster,
Grey’s director of TV production, may be in a minority when she says: ‘I
find them fantastically helpful. Most have production company or agency
experience and know what you’re going through.’
All parties agree that Pliatzky is a vital first step towards advancing
these sentiments; whether it can advance them any further is another
matter.
For some, mainly the consultants themselves and the clients that use
them, production evaluation is a permanent by-product of the advertising
business and as such can only grow stronger from formalisation.
But to others, consultants are a sign of the fractured relationships
between an agency and its client, and as such, self-regulation can only
limit the damage.
As Mark Collier, head of television production at Bartle Bogle Hegarty,
says: ‘I don’t think cost consultants cause the problem, they are a
symptom of it. Agencies and production companies should handle costs
effectively and when they don’t, clients are forced to use cost
consultants.’
Whether Pliatzky is a first step towards greater trust or merely a set
of rules of engagement, cost consultants look like they are here to
stay.
Graham Connor
Occupation Production consultant, Commercials Cost Control, which he
founded in 1992
Pedigree Current clients include Kraft, Nissan, Nestle, NatWest. Began
life as an assistant director, then produced for David Street. Moved to
Still Price Lintas as a TV producer in 1989 and had a brief spell at
Film Budget Analysis before starting his own company
What’s his speciality? ‘None’
Agency view
‘Very active, but his understanding of the process is largely
financially-driven’ ‘Mixed press in town. If you keep things from him,
he’ll probably interfere more’
Production company view
‘He didn’t impress me. He didn’t know his way around a production
budget’
Client view
‘Very detailed and thorough. Always able to suggest a more cost-
effective way of doing things’
David Prys-Owen
Occupation Managing director and consultant, Focus on Film
Pedigree Current clients include BT, Camelot and Unilever. Began work as
an account man at J. Walter Thompson, but switched to Avro Films to
become Adrian Rowbotham’s producer for six years. Went to work at Film
Budget Analysis in 1991 before it was taken over by Focus on Film
What’s his speciality? Not specified
Agency view
‘He’s had on-line experience, he’s very good and knows more than lots of
producers and agency producers. He follows the process through’
Production company view
‘Probably the best in the business. Very straight and professional.
Never takes his eye off the ball’
Client view
‘His relationship with agencies is very productive and helpful. He
understands both our issues as clients and theirs’
Ken Vaughan
Occupation Director and founder of MPP Marketing Services
Pedigree Works only with retained clients, including S. C. Johnson Wax,
Argos and Somerfield. Began his career at General Foods, latterly as its
advertising and promotions manager. Left to set up consultancy in 1984
after very short spell at Option One
What’s his speciality? Offers media consultancy as well as production
consultancy
Agency view
‘He’s an old pro who knows the ropes and understands your business’
Production company view
‘Thorough and capable’
Client view
‘He has his finger on the pulse. Very thorough. We point him in the
right direction and he does everything else himself’
Mike Ford
Occupation Retired TV advertising production consultant, ‘but I keep
getting work in’
Pedigree Clients have included Bulmers, Red Stripe, National Savings and
BA. Interest in production goes back to his first job as a director at
the BBC which he left to join the sales division at Heinz in 1953
What’s his speciality? Not specified
Agency view
‘No on-line experience, but pretty good. He was fair and got involved
with the whole process’
Production company view
‘Good and knows what he’s doing. If he’s cross-examining you he asks
fair questions about the right areas. He also goes behind the scenes to
check up on what’s going on with other companies’
Client view
‘Slightly older school, not as experienced as some in new filmic
techniques or post-production’
Terry Slade-Baker
Occupation Mars’s head of television production for Europe since 1994,
incorporating Mars Confectionery, Masterfoods and Pedigree Petfoods
Pedigree Head of TV at D’Arcy Masius Benton and Bowles between 1984 and
1994. Producer since 1967 at companies including the Annexe, Joe Films
and Trillion Video
What’s his speciality? Co-ordinating worldwide advertising projects
Agency view
‘He’s very helpful and understands quality. We can pick up the phone to
him any time’
Production company view
‘He probably knows his way around a budget, but I still don’t like
Mars’s attitude to buying production’
Client view
‘He’s well respected by all Mars’s agencies, production companies and
marketing people. He’s improved our TV production to the benefit of all
parties’
Geoffrey Forster
Occupation Independent production consultant, works almost exclusively
for Procter and Gamble
Pedigree Began career as a producer in 1957. Started own company,
Geoffrey Forster Associates, in 1966 before moving to the James Garrett
Films for 18 years, latterly as a company director. Went freelance in
1992
What’s his speciality? P&G
Agency view
‘A bit nit-picky but fine if things are presented to him correctly. You
need to take him along with you’
Production company view
‘Anyone associated with the Bold 3 ads deserves a one-way ticket to
hell’
Client view
‘A respected man in the industry with a real influence on the way P&G
oversees the production process’ (P&G itself refused to comment)
John Byrne
Occupation Consultant producer
Pedigree Clients include BA and the Meat and Livestock Commission. After
working as a trainee account man at S. H. Benson in 1954 and running the
TV department at C. Vernon and Son for eight years,among other jobs, he
joined James Garrett Films as a producer in 1967. Stayed for 24 years
before becoming a consultant in 1992
What’s his speciality? Not specified
Agency view
‘A stolid sort of chap-turned-consultant’
Production company view
‘He’s a very nice man who’s done years of pulling budgets together and
has a fairly sane approach.’
‘He knows his onions’
Client view
‘He’s been really useful in helping me understand a production quote and
how they get to what they get to’
Nigel Neads
Occupation Head of TV and film division, Production Link International
Pedigree Clients include Unilever, RHM Foods and Abbey National. Started
his career in medical research but moved into television in 1973 and
began producing shortly after. Became a programme production accountant
(film equivalent of ad cost consultant) in the late 80s and joined PLI a
year ago
What’s his speciality? Combines producing programmes with current job
Agency view
‘He’s got a very fair attitude, but I would suggest that he’s still
learning about the commercials industry’
Production company view
‘Obviously knows what he’s talking about’
Client view
‘Very experienced. Explains the process clearly’
