17659: On Adland Q3 & Big Three.

The Drum published an analysis of Adland’s Three Stooges—Publicis Groupe, WPP, and Omnicom—examining Q3 earnings, the focus on media, rethinking pitches, respective organizational maneuvers, etc.

Not mentioned at all: the human beings inhabiting cubicles and/or remote workstations for the corporations—as well as the thousands cast off from the White holding companies and single White operating company.

Of course, DEIBA+ is not mentioned and not even considered.

The image illustrating the content (depicted above and likely rendered via AI) tells the story. The new “Big Three” are Old White Guys and an Old White Gal.

What Q3 revealed about advertising’s new ‘Big Three’ – and where holdcos go from here

By Barry Dudley

Publicis is powering ahead, WPP is steadying the ship and Omnicom is finding its feet after a mega-merger. The Big Three loom large – but the industry around them is in serious flux. Green Square’s Barry Dudley examines what Q3 reveals about adland’s changing balance of power.

When I started out in professional services there were ‘The Big 10’ accountancy firms, which at the time felt quite a daunting gang. But I found my way into that gang with Arthur Andersen. The Enron scandal came along, and the firm was taken over by various of its peers around the world – in the UK we went to Deloitte. And roll forwards to now, there’s just ‘The Big Four’.

Through that time my expertise was always marketing services, media and production. In this world, we are now down to ‘The Big Three’ – Omnicom, Publicis and WPP. So how are they faring given their Q3 results and, more importantly, what does having a Big Three mean for the sector more generally?

The Q3 results

Starting with organic revenue, Publicis was up 6.9% in the quarter, WPP was up slightly at 0.5%, whilst Omnicom was up 7.2% based on its ‘core operations’. Not quite apples and apples, as Omnicom’s numbers are on a different basis.

Looking at organic net revenue (as opposed to total revenue), Publicis was up 5.0% and WPP was down 3.9%. Omnicom doesn’t report at this level.

So, the initial assessment is that Publicis continues to move along impressively, WPP is clawing its way forwards and Omnicom is still finessing what its core operations are since its mammoth coming together with IPG but seems to be trading well.

But what did the leaders of each business have to say? Publicis CEO Arthur Sadoun said: “This was our 25th quarter of outperformance, and thanks to our unique ability to connect data, technology and talent through the Power of One, we are confident in confirming our full-year guidance for 2026 and in outperforming the market for the eighth consecutive year in 2027”. Very firmly on the front foot and riding a wave.

WPP CEO Cindy Rose said: “We are on track to deliver phase one of Elevate28: stabilizing our business performance and laying the foundations for a simpler, more unified WPP. Our integrated client proposition and modern data solutions are gaining traction with both new and existing clients.” The key word here is ‘stabilizing’. So Rose is, rightly, pleased to be settling the ship.

And Omnicom CEO John Wren said: “As we approach the one-year anniversary of the Interpublic acquisition, we continue to deliver the expected benefits of the combination. We’ve strengthened our competitive position and are on track to deliver $900 million in cost-reduction synergies in 2026 resulting in stronger organic revenue growth, operating margins, and earnings per share.” There is still a little way to go with the integration, but progress has clearly been made with the numbers.

There were two things that stood out for me in the business lines: Media remains the engine room for all of them – Publicis’ Connected Media grew by high single digits, WPP Media was up 0.3% and Omnicom’s Integrated Media was up by over 10%. Conversely, the performance of creative/advertising was not so pretty: Advertising fell mid-single digits for Omnicom, WPP Creative was down 5.1% and it was low single digits growth for Intelligent Creativity at Publicis. I’ll come back to the creative theme later. Again, these comparisons aren’t quite apples and apples given that Omnicom reports differently, but the directions are clear.

Regionally there were some consistencies across the three: US performed the best, the UK was down and unsurprisingly, so was the Middle East.

And what of the stock markets? I looked at the share price movement from the day before announcement and compared it with the day after announcement, so a three-day spread. All saw price increases: WPP up over 5%, Omnicom over 2% and Publicis up over 1%. My reading is that the markets expect Publicis to do well so there was no major jump in its favor, Omnicom was rewarded for delivering cost savings and WPP has benefited from some strong leadership from Rose in starting to turn the WPP tanker towards a new path.

The big themes beyond the results

1. The CEO, not the CMO, is the buyer

Sadoun says AI transformation “has to start from the top” and Publicis is “increasingly seeing CEOs involved in what we do”. Rumor has it that PepsiCo’s move to Publicis was led by its CEO. Cup half full view of this for the CMOs out there – they are still highly important and relevant, arguably more than ever, but the CEOs are right there next to them.

2. The pitch is dying, or is it?

This is probably an extension of the previous point. In the Publicis webcast Sadoun said clients are increasingly appointing agencies without a pitch and that Publicis won “the two biggest accounts of the year without a pitch” and “three material AI-led transformation assignments this year outside of traditional pitch processes”. Speaking to The Drum, he presents it as the new normal: “Those same clients increasingly consider it is way more efficient to spend their time... digging deeper and actually kicking the tires of the partner they are interested in, rather than organizing this kind of big beauty contest for months.”

Two weeks later, in the WPP results webcast, Rose stepped into this when responding to an analyst’s question, referencing “this pitch-less, CEO handshake thing that I keep getting asked about”. Rose continued with: “What can I say here? Look, nobody loves pitching, right? You’re not going to find anybody that says: ‘I love pitching.’ The cost and burden of the process seems to be, you know, increasing. But I think what’s really important to me is that my clients fully understand the implications of the decisions they’re making. These are really high-stakes decisions with material business consequences, and they deserve careful consideration. I don’t think we do ourselves any favor as an industry of professionals by encouraging clients to bypass proper due diligence, and I think I’ll leave it at that.”

The pitching debate continues to rumble on!

3. Aesop’s fable

Aesop told of a lion and a bear who fought over a fawn until both lay exhausted, only for a passing fox to carry it off. The Big Three aren’t exactly brawling, but between integrating, restructuring and arguing over whether pitches still matter, they are certainly distracted with each other right now. And there are plenty of foxes about.

Take Stagwell for example. Its CEO, Mark Penn, isn’t trying to build a fourth holding company, he’s arguably trying to stop being an agency group altogether. But I do believe Stagwell (along with many others) is becoming a very credible alternative. Stagwell’s organic net revenue was up 7.4% in Q3, adjusted EBITDA up 25%, new business is strong. And tellingly Penn said in the earnings webcast: “Well, I think for us, we are continuing to win really high levels of creative accounts, but there is still a lot of shrinkage, and movement, and CMOs being fired. I do think there is a lot of turmoil in general. It is a great door for us.”

There’s that word ‘creative’. Just as the Big Three seem to be suffering in this area, the foxes are out and about picking up significant creative work. I will be following up with more thoughts on this; the Big Three will always have a Media and a Data capability that only they can provide to certain clients, but creative is a whole different ball game.

4. Creator economy and sport

Publicis acquired 160over90 which it called ‘the premier global sports and culture agency’ and Point d’Orgue, a Paris based influencer and creator agency. WPP announced Devon’s Point, a 34,000 square foot production studio with dedicated spaces for creators: live streaming studios, quick shoot-and-edit facilities and areas for brands and creators to collaborate. And Omnicom’s Wren commented in their earnings webcast: “And in sports marketing, where we manage $9.9bn in sponsorships and talent and oversee one-third of global sports media investments, we secured a major integrated assignment for the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, spanning sponsorships, creative, and communications.”

New battlegrounds that the lions and bears will be fighting over… 

17658: On Publicis Groupe Versus WPP Versus The World Wide Web.

Mediapsssst surveyed online responses to the Publicis Groupe vs WPP spat, spotlighting clever critiques from an annoyed, angered, and anti-corporate audience.

Given the technological ambitions of the White holding company and single White operating company, it would be apropos if most color commentators turned out to be AI chatbots.

Has anyone monitored Marcel mutterings in the past few days?

Publicis Vs WPP: And The Winner Is…

By Richard Whitman

As you probably know, WPP and Publicis exchanged some tit for tat over the past couple of weeks concerning the client pitch process and what constitutes due diligence.  

It started when Publicis acknowledged that it had won a couple of big pitches outside of the traditional review process.  

Asked about it on an investor call, WPP Cindy Rose referred to the “pitch-less, CEO handshake thing,” that clients should not mistake for proper due diligence.  

Which led Publicis to publish a “Dear Cindy” missive on its Instagram account which suggested her take on how Publicis won the accounts was an “insult” to clients’ intelligence.  

But if you’re thinking that one side or the other emerged as a winner in the contretemps, take a look at the hundreds of comments on Publicis Groupe’s Pinterest feed. 

Many of the comments seem to take the position that both sides are more than a little tone-deaf by engaging in what amounts to a pissing contest at a time thousands of industry jobs have been cut at their own agencies, and across the industry, over the past couple of years.  

One writer had this to say: “Two agencies talking shit while killing the industry and burning out a generation of talent while fueling the generational wage disparity. Hello pot? It’s kettle. But hey, sure I’ll sit down for the CEO celebrity death match.”

Another had this to say: “It’s actually pretty pathetic posting something like this. It reads like a playground squabble and feels both tone deaf and embarrassing for your employees.”

Another mockingly wrote: “Hey @ufc, can we please get Publicis vs. WPP in the Octagon? 5 rounds. No pitches. No CEO handshakes. Just pure agency warfare. Winner takes the global media account.”

Some writers really let off some steam, like this one: “Out of curiosity, how do you think the @publicisgroupe employees feel reading a lecture about investing in talent when they haven’t gotten raises in…it’s been a minute? But I’m sure whosever ego was hurt and led the charge here is a big deal and that trumps the tone deafness of a social media pissing match that definitely does not align with what their workforce laments elsewhere online and IRL. Way to defy the impossible and make our industry even more out of touch than it already is.”

Others took a more light-hearted but still mocking approach: “Mom, Dad! The neighbors can hear you”. 

I’ll end the quotes with this one: “Guys, may I introduce you to The Telephone. Go ahead, have a call, sort this out. We don’t care. There has been tens of thousands layoffs. Have some decency. Thank you.”

Well, maybe one more: “@pepsi @cocacola you guys just handed over billions dollars to two holding companies who can’t keep their spats out of the public space. Good luck having them managing your next PR crisis.” 

Okay, I’m going to stop scrolling now after this last one: “Isn’t it so fun to watch them eat each other?”

I think I’ll leave it at that. 

17657: Mickey D’s Says Uber Deserves A Brake Today.

 

Advertising Age published Bloomberg News content reporting Mickey D’s named Uber “the preferred delivery partner” for orders made via Mickey D’s app.

The arrangement makes sense, as lots of Uber drivers are clowns.

McDonald’s names Uber a preferred partner, edging out DoorDash

By Natalie Lung, Bloomberg News

McDonald’s Corp. will prioritize Uber Technologies Inc. over DoorDash Inc. to fulfill orders placed on the fast-food chain’s app in 14 countries, ratcheting up a rivalry between the delivery services.

Uber will be “the preferred delivery partner” for orders placed through the McDonald’s app in markets including the U.S., U.K., Australia, Belgium, Canada, France and Germany, the companies stated Monday. McDonald’s has previously dispatched orders using either Uber or DoorDash. The new agreement gives Uber precedence in the specified locales.

The move bolsters Uber Direct, the ride-hailing company’s white-label delivery service that lets merchants deliver via Uber through their own channels. It also gives Uber access to a massive pool of customers: McDonald’s has more than 45 million loyalty members in the U.S. through its app.

Uber is looking for ways to add more customers as competition with DoorDash heats up. In late October, DoorDash announced plans to acquire grocery delivery service Instacart. Last week, Uber and Amazon.com Inc. countered with a new delivery partnership for Prime subscribers—sparking the biggest decline in DoorDash shares in a year.

As part of the multiyear partnership, Uber and McDonald’s will offer joint perks across their services. McDonald’s rewards members in some markets, for example, will be able to redeem points for discounts on Uber rides for a limited time. Future benefits may include earning McDonald’s rewards from orders placed through the Uber platform.

McDonald’s will continue to be available as a restaurant option on both Uber’s and DoorDash’s apps.

The burger chain is looking for faster growth, especially following three quarters of same-store sales weakness in the U.S. McDonald’s is recalibrating its value strategy while working to convince franchisees to sign on to a new strategic plan that includes restaurant redesigns and streamlined kitchens so staff can prepare food more efficiently.

17656: On Haters Gonna Hate.

 

MediaPost reported on the “Hate Has No Home Here” campaign from Blue Square Alliance Against Hate in partnership with the Out of Home Advertising Association of America (OAAA).

If “Hate Has No Home Here” and “Love Has No Labels,” what does indifference not have?

Relating to DEIBA+ in Adland, “Indifference Has No Opposition.”

OAAA Teams With Kraft’s Blue Square Alliance For ‘Hate Has No Home Here’ Campaign

By Steve McClellan

The Out of Home Advertising Association of America (OAAA) today announced a partnership with Blue Square Alliance Against Hate, founded by business magnate and New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft, to launch a nationwide public service advertising (PSA) campaign encouraging Americans to stand together against hate.  

The initiative calls on OAAA members across the country to donate out of home (OOH) advertising inventory for the campaign, dubbed “Hate Has No Home Here.” 

The effort comes as Blue Square, founded by Kraft in 2019 to combat the alarming rise in antisemitism, has evolved into a broader movement dedicated to confronting hatred and intolerance directed at any community.  

The blue square is considered a universal symbol of solidarity in the fight against hate. The campaign’s creative will appear across donated billboards, digital screens, transit advertising and other OOH formats, leveraging the industry’s national footprint to make the message visible in communities across the country. 

The initiative is spearheaded by Drew Katz, CEO of Interstate Outdoor Advertising and a member of OAAA’s Board of Directors. He’s also been a supporter of Blue Square Alliance Against Hate.  

Anna Bager, President and CEO of OAAA, said that the medium’s presence in communities across America provides “a unique opportunity” to make the “hate has no home here” message visible on a national scale. 

Added Kraft, “By joining forces with the out of home advertising industry, we can bring this message into the everyday lives of millions of Americans. Every billboard is an opportunity to remind someone that they are not alone and that standing against hate is a responsibility we share.” 

OAAA members interested in participating can access campaign creative assets and learn more at oaaa.org/public-service.

17655: On Ads Of The Exclusive World.

 

Ads of the World added a Diwali Campaigns to its collections—which include performative presentations for multiple White women categories, LGBTQIA+, Chinese/Lunar New Year, Mental Health Awareness, COVID-19, sustainability, and more.

Yet still nothing for DEIBA+ or multicultural marketing.

It’s reflecting a very exclusive world.

17654: On Wendy’s Worsening Woes.

Associated Press reported Wendy’s nixed a buyout offer and activated a “poison pill” plan to defend against a hostile takeover.

According to the content, Wendy’s has shuttered outdated restaurants across the US to focus on more profitable properties. In 2024, the chain closed 240 restaurants, and 2026 plans include erasing up to 358 locations.

Wendy’s CEO—who joined the fast feeder in May—declared, “We’re confident that we have the right strategy, execution, and resources to restore Wendy’s to its full potential and drive meaningful shareholder value.”

Wendy’s CMO—who joined the fast feeder in August—stated, “My focus will be on reigniting that passionate connection with our brand to show up more powerfully in every experience, everywhere our fans meet us.”

Can’t help but wonder when Wendy’s honchos will view its longtime White advertising agency VML as outdated.

Wendy’s rejects buyout bid from activist investor and adopts ‘poison pill’ plan

By Dee-Ann Durbin

Wendy’s rejected a $1.4 billion buyout offer from an activist investor, saying Thursday that the bid was too low, and it adopted a “poison pill” plan that would make it more difficult to engineer a hostile takeover of the company.

Noted investor Nelson Peltz made an offer last week to buy the chain, which has been struggling with high beef prices and aging stores. Peltz said the fast-food landscape had become increasingly challenging, with consumers under pressure, intensifying competition and persistent inflation, and his offer was the best path forward for shareholders.

But in a conference call with investors Thursday, Wendy’s CEO Bob Wright, who joined the company in May from Potbelly, said Wendy’s has a turnaround plan in place that is already producing good results.

“We’re confident that we have the right strategy, execution and resources to restore Wendy’s to its full potential and drive meaningful shareholder value,” Wright said.

Shares rose more than 2% Thursday as the company reported a better than expected performance during the third quarter.

Wendy’s said in a statement that a committee of independent directors unanimously rejected the offer because it “substantially undervalues” the company.

Wendy’s also announced that it has adopted a shareholders’ rights plan, a so-called “poison pill,” intended to avert a hostile takeover of the company. The plan, which grants all shareholders except the hostile bidder the right to purchase discounted shares, automatically triggers if a person or group owns 15% or more of Wendy’s shares.

Peltz’s Trian Fund Management and other partners in the investor group that made the offer to Wendy’s hold 16.3% of the company’s shares. The plan would stay in place for one year, Wendy’s said. Trian didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Wendy’s has been closing outdated U.S. restaurants so it can focus on its more profitable locations. The company closed 240 restaurants in 2024 and said earlier this year that it planned to shutter up to 358 locations in 2026.

Then, in September, one of the largest U.S. franchisees for Wendy’s filed for bankruptcy protection after the chain tried to terminate its franchise agreement. Michigan-based Meritage Hospitality Group operates 314 Wendy’s restaurants in 15 states.

Wendy’s, which is based in Dublin, Ohio, had 5,969 restaurants in the U.S. and 1,428 outlets in 38 countries at the end of 2025.

Founded in 1969 by Dave Thomas and named after his daughter, Wendy’s is known for its square burgers and Frosty desserts. The fast-growing chain introduced the drive-thru window in 1970 and went public in 1976. In the 1980s, as it jockeyed for sales with McDonald’s and Burger King, Wendy’s launched salad bars and ran its iconic “Where’s the beef?” ad campaign.

But as the fast-food market grew even more competitive and rival burger-focused chains like In-N-Out and Five Guys expanded, Wendy’s fell behind. Wendy’s share of U.S. burger chain sales fell from 11.5% in 2019 to 10.4% last year, according to Technomic, a market research company.

17653: On The Publicis Groupe Versus WPP Exclusivity Exhibition.

Advertising Age spotlighted the spat between Publicis Groupe and WPP, whereby the France-based White holding company called out Cindy Rose, CEO of the UK-based single White operating company, for her commentary on major brands assigning global business to White holding companies sans traditional pitches.

The Publicis Groupe rebuttal felt like admansplaining—although former Publicis Groupe Chairman and CEO Maurice Lévy would undoubtedly deny it.

The volleying vomit displays hypocrisy and hubris.

After all, holding companies were arguably designed to secure business in unconventional—accent on con—style. The model allows for cronyism, Corporate Cultural Collusion, and constructing companies for exclusive client catering.

Publicis Groupe and WPP—as well as all holding companies—have engaged in account acquisition schemes leveraging privileged power plays. And there’s no sign of anyone returning to traditional pitching.

The back-and-forth bickering is bona fide bullshit.

Let the White holding company without Prime Redlining practices cast the first stone.

Publicis fires back at WPP CEO Cindy Rose over comments on agencies winning business without traditional pitches

By Brian Bonilla

Publicis Groupe is firing back at WPP CEO Cindy Rose over comments she made about agencies winning business without traditional pitches with an unusually pointed Instagram post that accuses its rival of insulting clients. It also takes a swipe at WPP’s decision not to defend Coca-Cola’s North American media account.

In the “Dear Cindy” post, addressed directly to Rose, Publicis challenges her suggestion during WPP’s third-quarter earnings call last week that agencies winning business without competitive pitches could be encouraging clients to bypass proper due diligence. The French holding company, which has secured several major accounts this year without formal reviews, argued in the post that clients are subjecting agencies to extensive evaluations even when they forgo traditional pitches.

“Although it might make for a good headline, claiming we win on a ‘CEO handshake’ is an insult to clients’ intelligence,” Publicis wrote. “We all know global companies don’t hand over their data, media, and tech keys over a friendly espresso. It takes months of hard testing by marketers, engineers, data architects, and procurement teams.”

Rose made the comments in question during WPP’s earnings call, after an analyst asked about the company’s decision not to participate in Coca-Cola’s North American media review and whether WPP was seeing competitors win assignments without pitching. Rose described the trend as the “pitchless CEO handshake thing” and acknowledged the growing costs associated with agency reviews, but warned against dispensing with formal pitches.

“Nobody loves pitching,” she said on the call. “The cost and burden of the process seems to be increasing. But I think what’s really important, to me is that my clients fully understand the implications of the decisions they’re making. These are really high-stakes decisions with material business consequences, and they deserve careful consideration. I don’t think we do ourselves any favor as an industry of professionals by encouraging clients to bypass proper due diligence.”

Earlier last month, Publicis Chairman and CEO Arthur Sadoun spoke about the growing trend of marketers handing over accounts without a formal pitch process. Publicis won PepsiCo and Microsoft business this year without a pitch.

In the post, Publicis Groupe also took a shot at WPP for declining to defend Coca-Cola’s North American media business—which Omnicom eventually secured—while focusing on pitching its global media business. In the WPP earnings call, Rose explained: “We made a tough call between spending yet another six weeks pitching for North America versus delivering against what we had already won.”

“You can’t be a passionate defender of pitch culture and plead exhaustion in the same breath,” Publicis wrote in response. “If an extra six-week run was enough to sideline your teams, it’s not an endurance problem; it’s a capability one.”

WPP was not immediately available to comment on the Publicis post.

Read Publicis’s full letter below:

Dear Cindy,

We’ve had a busy few days, as you may have seen, but of course we didn’t miss your earnings call last week.

We’ve always enjoyed a bit of industry back and forth, à la Maurice and Martin, so we couldn’t let your theory on how we win new business slide without a word.

Although it might make for a good headline, claiming we win on a “CEO handshake” is an insult to clients’ intelligence.

We all know global companies don’t hand over their data, media, and tech keys over a friendly espresso. It takes months of hard testing by marketers, engineers, data architects, and procurement teams. So let’s be really clear here: skipping an old-school pitch circus isn’t skipping due diligence. It’s clients knowing what they need and testing us to the limit.

Having worked at one of the companies that chose us this year, you know its leaders really well, and your comments sell them remarkably short. They would never have entrusted us with a task of this magnitude on a wink and a handshake.

It’s as believable as saying your troops were too tired to try and win back your biggest client’s biggest market. You can’t be a passionate defender of pitch culture and plead exhaustion in the same breath. If an extra six-week run was enough to sideline your teams, it’s not an endurance problem; it’s a capability one.

Take it from us, investing in tech and talent really helps on that front.

Because in the real world, enterprise partners aren’t chosen after a cosy tête-à-tête or legacy slide decks. They are chosen on connected identity and media solutions, intelligent creativity, and AI engines that drive business.

Don’t get us wrong. We didn’t expect a basket of muffins or a thank-you note for clearing the path to your global renewal. We understand the pressure of building a narrative for the financial markets and the urge to celebrate a win – a victory lap is fun even when you’re the only one who ran. But it shouldn’t require denigrating our clients, our people, and all of our efforts.

Our industry does extraordinary work. Let’s give it the credit it deserves.

Very best,

Your friends at Publicis