Yesterday, I read a post on Steve Rubel’s Blog Micro Persuasion about Agency.com’s pitch video for Subway they released on You Tube. It has launched quite a debate on his blog and other like Ad Freak.

The interesting thing is most conversation seems to center around if this is viral or not & the quality of the video.

In terms of the video being viral, in my opinion, that quickly becomes an issue of semantics. However, it definitely created a conversation within the ad world

More importantly, on Agency.com explains why it is viral & why they did it on the recently launched blog - http://www.whenwerollwerollbig.com/

To be fair, in terms of the quality of the video – it is probably overdone. This is a funy parody of it.

However, personally the more interesting part of the conversation from my perspective is the business development approach by Agency.com. Steve Rubel’s post summarizes the criticism I have read. He calls out 3 reasons this “showed poor judgment”:

First of all, to put Subway’s brand at risk like this at the expense of winning an account is a bad business decision. Agency.com is holding Subway’s brand hostage for ransom. If I were the brand manager for Subway I would find this totally offensive. It’s one thing when you encourage Subway customers post a video. That’s called feedback. It’s another when someone trying to pitch your business does so without your permission (at least it seems). That’s called lame.

Second, the video is now getting mocked by others. Worse, bloggers are beating it to a pulp.

Finally, Agency.com didn’t just hurt their reputation with Subway (at least that’s my bet). They set their entire credibility in the social media space back eons and maybe did the same for other interactive agencies. Was it really worth it?

Let’s deal with these in order:

1. “Holding Subway’s Brand Hostage” - please as I understand it this was an opportunity to pitch the interactive part of the account. They showed they can create a conversation.
   

2. “the video is getting mocked” - come on Steve you are in PR – just spell my name right

3. “Agency.com hurt their reputation” - I actually think this is the most ludicrous reason. Part of the challenge of any service provider (including ad agency) is figuring out what accounts you would fit into. Obviously, from reading their explanation on the Agency.com blog – this is the type of work they want to do. Therefore, they should look to identify clients who are open to this approach. While I’m sure it did offend some CMOs (potentially including Subway.) It also must have impressed some (look at the polarized comments.)

Therefore, I’m sure some CMOs will never (at least for the next 6 months) invite them to pitch their accounts. Other CMOs who were impressed and want that type of approach certainly will. If they win a higher percentage of those accounts, I’ve got to believe it will work out in the end.

I’ve got to wonder if this negative reaction in the industry has anything to do with others wishing they would have thought of the idea. Or even more scary, that it is new and not from one of the “market leaders”. (It is true this doesn’t copy some idea that CP+B did 2 years ago.

Regardless, I for one am imprssed with the fact it is different and that is the point just ask Seth Godin & all his purple cowevangelists. Hats off to Agency.com …