<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>4A&#039;s Review Central &#187; prudential</title>
	<atom:link href="http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/tag/prudential/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com</link>
	<description>For RFPs and Pitches</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:49:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Pitch Fees—Who Should Pay? What is Fair?</title>
		<link>http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/requests-for-information/pitch-fees%e2%80%94who-should-pay-what-is-fair/</link>
		<comments>http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/requests-for-information/pitch-fees%e2%80%94who-should-pay-what-is-fair/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:04:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Review Central</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Review Central]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prudential]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reckett benckiser]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thomas cook]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/?p=211</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The wacky world of agency new business may have reached new extremes. &#8211;In India, Reckett Benckiser is reported to be asking agencies to pay $6,500 to be eligible to pitch for Reckett’s media buying account (and, in a demonstration of how quickly even really bad ideas can travel, Thomas Cook in the UK is rumored to be [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The wacky world of agency new  business may have reached new extremes.</p>
<p>&#8211;In India, <a href="http://adage.com/globalnews/article?article_id=144779">Reckett Benckiser is  reported to be asking agencies to pay $6,500</a> to be eligible to pitch  for Reckett’s media buying account (and, in a demonstration of how quickly even  really bad ideas can travel, <a href="http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/news/1014883/Thomas-Cook-pitch-fee-row/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH">Thomas Cook in the UK is rumored to be  contemplating a similar idea</a>).</p>
<p>&#8211;In the USA, <a href="http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/news/account-activity/e3ife5a57734af1cf19f89282e43bce5f24">Prudential is reported  to be paying $300,000+</a> (each) to multiple agencies that were invited to submit  creative concepts (the $300,000 fee is payment for ownership assignment to the  client).</p>
<p>Are Reckett and Thomas Cook  exploiting their buying leverage, or are they soliciting bribes which will  ultimately work to their detriment? Will best-in-class agencies agree to pay for  the privilege of pitching?</p>
<p>Is Prudential enlightened? The Pru  review does include Prudential’s in-house agency as a 4<sup>th</sup> contender  and it is not clear that there is a going forward assignment for the agency  winner. Is the Prudential approach prudent?</p>
<p>What  gives?</p>
<p>What is your point of  view?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reviewcentral.aaaalabs.com/requests-for-information/pitch-fees%e2%80%94who-should-pay-what-is-fair/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

