by Herman Manson (@marklives) Cell C is in negotiations to restructure its agency agreements. Karin Fourie Executive Head: Communications at Cell C, told MarkLives that “We are in discussions with all of our advertising agencies about possibly restructuring our 
agreements but these discussions are confidential between the parties and so at this stage we cannot provide further information. We can, however, confirm that we are satisfied with their performance.”
Fourie confirmed that the account is not out to pitch.
Cell C uses Trigger/Isobar and Ogilvy Johannesburg. Earlier this year it froze an account move and cancelled a pitch on which it had already announced two high profile winners which caused an outcry from the ad industry and prompted agency heads to question the rules governing agency pitches.
Industry news you’ll make time for. Sign up for our free newsletter!
This was inevitable! It is nothing more than abuse of power and simply opens the door for Alan Knott Craig to have the flexibility to use any agency he wishes without a heavy financial retainer (yoke) protecting Ogilvy’s revenue. My guess is that he has another ‘Afrikings’ up his sleeve somewhere. The sad thing is that the former CEO did exactly the same thing to Ogilvy in late 2010, bringing DDB into the agency mix without a word to Ogilvy, resulting in a substantial chunk of the ‘contractually agreed’ retainer for 2011, being reallocated to DDB. How did Ogilvy respond, it didn’t! It simply bent over and took one for the ‘team’. And this is exactly what brings the credibility of the industry into question.
How are agencies ever going to be given the respect that is due to them, when they keep allowing their clients to treat them with such disregard. The fact that the CEO is writing scripts or the Marketing Director deciding on final wardrobe and music because “her daughter loves that outfit/song”. You laugh, but it is a sad truth governing the industry today. What client wants, client gets, because client pays the salaries! ‘Money makes the advertising world go round’ and until such time as the remuneration models become less about coveting agency costs and more about contribution to the bottom line, clients will continue to feel ripped off, and agencies will continue to overcharge.
Ogilvy is but another pawn in AKC’s strategy, personally I think King James and Fox P2 got away ‘lightly’.
This comment was removed by the moderator as possibly libelous.
It is very authoritarian to censor a comment that is not libellous, Herman, Cicero. Need a little refresher in media law? – contact Dario Milo at Webber Wentzel (tell him I sent you :-)) Recent disturbing and similarly authoritarian movements at Cell C suggest “Name&Shame” is not off the mark. Knott-Craig has also been widely quoted in the media saying Cell C is offering in-bundle pre-paid data with no strings attached at 5c/MB. This is, of course, a complete lie. The cheapest rate – which was hiked upward on 1 August – is 15c/MB (up from 13c/MB). We have asked Cell C to clarify this and set the record straight, but top management (including our friend, Knott-Craig) has doggedly refused to even acknowledge email – let alone tell its clients the truth. So we have distributed our stories to our US, Canadian, Australian and UK client saying how we tried to get comment, but were refused.
That’s the journalistic side. At the same time, from a customer experience viewpoint, service levels at Cell C have taken a vertical Acapulco cliff dive. Internet was completely unavailable yesterday costing me R220 at a local Internet cafe. While trying to get service since I changed from Vodacom on 28 July has cost me R134.57 in 48 calls of up to ONE HOUR from Vodacom cellphones to try to drag service out of Cell C. Each call has received a zero on the automated client feedback survey (which I think is bogus anyway). I have advised my family in PE, and friends in Robertson, Grahamstown and Joeys (now 6 all told) NOT to switch to Cell C (they’re equally disillusioned with Vodacom) because Cell C blatantly doesn’t give a cobbler’s cuss about its clients. In addition to phonecalls, 13 emails to customerservice@cell.co.za and 5 via the Cell C website have gone unanswered. Thirty-three Tweets (18 retweets incl. NPR) and five FB complaints have also been diligently ignored.
Is it any wonder then that abused clients will readily believe what “Name&Shame” says, whether true or not. And he/she is not the only one whose disappointment has turned to outright vitriol. Hellopeter.com shows Cell C has only been able to convert a shameful 8% of its10,000 complaints into satisfied clients. May we suggest a little more investigation before MarkLives.com regurgitates press releases.?
Hi Llewellyn
The comment I removed made no mention of Cell C but only hinted at charges against ‘Alan Knott Craig and family’ that was never proven in court. As a matter of course MarkLives discourages anonymous comments and I consider it sufficient reason to moderate a comment. When commenting we require a legitimate email address at the very least – something this particular post also lacked. Trolls have not done the Internet, journalism or free speech much good, and I don’t care to tolerate them on this site. That said, as in the case of Name & Shame, anonymous posts are not removed automatically and will be judged individually.
I fully agree that Cell C is not a very communicative organisation. That was not the point of the story in question which addressed rumours that Cell C is once again shaking up its agency agreements. We republished their statement, which we received in response to a set of questions and confirmed that changes are afoot, in full. I would hardly call that ‘regurgitating press releases’.