Interview with Steve Davies — Chief Executive of the Advertising Producers Association
Steve Davies is Chief Executive of the A.P.A — the Advertising Producers Association based in London. In this insightful discussion, we talk challenges and opportunities for production companies in a tech-savvy era, and what really makes a high-quality video.
(listen to the podcast on the link below)
Hello, and welcome to the Movidiam podcast. I’m George, and today I am delighted to welcome Steve Davies, the chief executive of the A.P.A. — the Advertising Producers Association based in London.
Steve, welcome to the Movidiam podcast.
Thank you very much, George. Delighted to join you.
Steve, we’re living in very interesting times for production companies, producers in general, and the state of the advertising industry. There’s a lot going on, where do we start?
Well there are always challenges, aren’t there? Constant challenges, clients wanting more for less every year, but against that we have more and more advertisers having access to high quality video content. They would never have advertised on television in the past, but now there is high quality curated video content for websites, etc.
So there are challenges and opportunities.
Sure, I think it’s very interesting what you wrote in your article ‘What do production companies do?’ You referred to the Chinese translation of the word crisis and what that actually means, and what it means is that there is opportunity in crisis.
Always. No matter how bad things are, somebody, somewhere thinks of a way it will benefit their business. I think that’s a great approach really in terms of positivity. Because you see things are difficult, but you also know that someone’s going to work out how to make money out of it. I think that gives you hope and expectation. It’s not doom and gloom, it’s things move forward for those who adapt and seize the day.
Well it’s very interesting. When I think about some of the producers and advertising production companies that we have on the Movidiam, we see a very diverse group of people from a number of different territories around the world, forming up and working with collectives and freelancers that in previous advertising generations might have been out of reach or simply not visible. So the talent pool and access has increased because of technology products.
I think it has, and I think London has an incredibly strong international outlook. The strength of London still is preeminent in advertising; you know, who’s won the Cannes in the last 12 years or so. It’s built upon internationalism and bringing international talent, and working with whoever around the world. Like working for a US agency, the production company might have a Swedish director, and might be shooting in South Africa. All of that is second nature to companies in London. They really have utilised the benefits of talents and location and everything around the world.
I think fundamentally, going back to your point about distribution and when distribution changes. If we think of advertising commercials back in the days playing on channel 1,2,3 and 4. Now there’s a different form of distribution. There’s content required for YouTube, there’s content required for Snapchat and Instagram, and actually, people, brands, and agencies have to produce a considered production value underpinned by fantastic story and narrative for this long-tail of channel of distribution opportunities.
When the distribution changes, is this perhaps one of the tensions for production companies?
It can be, some approaches have been odd. Some clients started out thinking that if something’s being made for the internet, it has to be cheap. Of course, our view really is that you pay for the quality of the content: in creating it, where it’s shot, the expertise of the people involved, and where it goes. It is not a determinant of cost, and it can’t be. But having said that of course, clients need more content, and they need some of that content more cheaply. We have to provide them with the choice that they want.
So we’re very much saying: “you can have that choice, but let’s work together to find something that works in those media”; which might mean restricting some of the the choices about where to shoot, the amount of crew, and some of the process whether it’s cast or wardrobe, or approvals etc. If you do that, you can have it a bit cheaper, but what you can’t just do is write an expensive TV script and say “oh but it’s for the Internet, can you give me half price”. Some clients have really got that, they understand that. We also have a lot of clients who thought “ Oh the Internet is cheap, there’s no immediate cost, let’s just make something cheap”. But many have now seen that if you don’t make anything that works, that grabs the relevant attention of the Internet, no matter how cheap it is it’s still going to be a waste of money.
You need impact, so a lot of clients are now investing seriously in content for the web etc, because they know that unless they do that and unless they make an impact they want to make, they’re wasting whatever money they do spend.
Of course. I think it’s very interesting. The Internet has come along, it’s still young but it’s getting into a mature phase, seeing a lot of different products coming into the ecosystem of the internet in general. I mean, I think previously people felt “ oh it’s on the web, it’s commoditised, it’s cheap”, to use your word there.
But I think there are systems and developments and programs similar to Movidiam where there is a growing amount of trust and integrity and curation, which might be more of a reflection of what we’ve seen in the traditional communities of advertisers. Can production platforms deliver quality and integrity?
I think you’re right, using the example of Movidiam. People want interesting content that grabs their attention, and we genuinely need next to move away from banner ads towards more video content. There are big question marks about measurability on the Internet. The sort news that hovers the ads and banner ads that we click through are from robots and things, so there’s scepticism about that.
There is more trust of high-quality video content, because people know from television and media that’s something that connects with people. And you actually hear people talking about it. As a test I suppose, if you ask people about their favourite commercials, they immediately think of film that that they have seen on Internet or television. They don’t think about a banner ad.
Sure. There is a certain amount of integrity and openness and authenticity around a quality production video. I think this is what has been a slight illusional or perhaps a challenge, and I think you refer to this again in you ‘What do production companies do?’ article, which is the technology from the means of production side of things has changed, so there’s a very high quality image that can be constructed by a relatively inexperienced person. But do they have the knowledge and the narrative and the script-building experience to actually create a story with an image that.. Just beautiful images cut together isn’t a commercial, is it?
No. I think that’s the key thing, and I think I said that in ‘What do production companies do?’ , and of course the other articles in there. It’s one of those questions that you think “Oh that’s easy, I know the answer to that’. But writing it down forces you to think more clearly about it.
I think one of the things I was keen to get away from is, sometimes the clients say to me: “we don’t need the top quality production company, because we don’t need this film to look glossy”. That’s such a fundamental understanding of what they bring, that shows it is worth articulating what it is they actually do. Of course, that is to deliver the most effective film for the client by realizing the idea on paper on film as clearly and effectively as possible. That can look glossy if it needs to, and that can look as if it was filmed on a camcorder in the dark if it needs to.
Based on the story and based on the narrative, exactly. I think what Movidiam is certainly rubbing up against this very interesting experience, where there are very well equipped filmmakers, who have watched an awful lot of commercials and practiced and practiced, and rehearsed their commercial experience, and are now getting on increasing number of jobs through the platform to execute commercials in these long-tail channels for the web, for an online distribution format. And actually, seeing an ROI there, which is very valuable both for the client and for themselves as ultimately a sole trader in a large ecosystem which is beginning to say “we need more of quality, but with this essential ingredient of story”.
Can there be a bigger community in the advertising community, or does it have to remain inside client-agency relationships? Can smaller brands and businesses create fantastic adverts with the long tail of new producers and entrepreneurial generation we see coming into the marketplace?
I think they definitely can. They need to do better at stipulating what they’re buying, but they can something very effective as a small advertiser for a budget they can afford, if they approach it the right way. And that might mean getting a small team together, creatives, production companies etc. It’s definitely possible to do that.
I suppose the challenge is when that work is then seen by a bigger brand, and they think “well gosh that was a nice bit of creative story”, and it might have come out of one or two or a collective of individuals, then of course the bigger brands then want to create that volume for themselves, because obviously they can afford it, whereas it might be a lead piece for a small enterprise or a small business. So actually it gets competitive, and that probably pulls people up on their creative journey.
Yes I think it does. They start as small companies competing probably more for digital and online work, because they can’t compete against the directors for the award-winning scripts. But they pull themselves up by getting noticed, by making some great work. And I think it can be a very lo-fi piece, but if it’s got a great idea behind it and it’s well put together, then the advertising world will take notice.
In terms of the structure of production companies and the structure of agencies, a lot of people say, “follow the money, where are clients spending now?”. Are clients changing their agencies more frequently looking for more delivery or more output, or are they looking for other ways of producing things? If that model existed to serve the one TV commercial a year, are you recognising a change in the structure?
Well, of course the traditional structure was client to agency to production company. And we are moving towards, I wouldn’t say a different structure, but many different ways of doing things. I think a big advertiser, like Ford or Samsung are always going to need an agency, and they are always going to need production companies. Because just to organise the amount of advertising they have, planning, research, consistency across markets, production then to have to bring the quality of filmmaking.
But a lot of big advertisers are also doing small things outside of that. Small advertisers are doing things in different ways, assembling things in different ways, some productions are doing work directly with clients. So there are lots of different solutions now. So I think for an advertiser there’s lots of different opportunity. But it’s also a challenge, to make the most of them they have to take much more active role in managing and commissioning advertising themselves, rather than just giving it to a good agency and say “you do everything”. Because they want to pull together these different strands of expertise; whether it’s web design, production, interactive production. So there is not a one-stop shop anymore.
Sure. I think it’s interesting what you talk about there. What you talk about is there not being this one-stop shop; these niche and very expert communities developing around the web for graphic design, for video production, for video game production. It’s all digital content, digital output.
You need a producer, director, VFX artist, and actually, we see all these types of individuals coming to Movidiam because of our project management facilities; there are timelines, video revisions, and the ability to chat within your team. As more is required, more communications are required, more channels of communication, such as those we see in the marketplace need to potentially, unless there is an aggregating tool that brings it all together, the production logistics complexity is vast, and that’s where we see a real opportunity to help advertising businesses, whether that’s a collective, an individual or established production company, utilise streamlining tools to trigger efficiencies.
And that comes down to the next level of our conversation, which is the talent. Where is creative talent, ideas people, producers — how are their roles evolving inside the mix?
They just have to be much more flexible, I suppose, but I think they are anyway. I mean, the production companies are very small, flexible entities. It’s got very little structural overhead, it’s all based upon bringing the talent into the right job. So in a way, it’s very fit for the future, because it doesn’t have big structures or huge amount of staff or buildings that it constantly has to feed. It can just think about “where is the next project that I can do, that I can bring the talent in for”.
I think it’s interesting talking about the way you’re trying to bring people together through Movidiam, because I think increasingly, people and even advertisers may want a digital company in Brazil, production company in London, visual effect company in London, or a creative in Holland. In becomes second nature really to work that way, and for it to all be fully networked is obviously important.
I think if you describe a production company as a low overhead entity, and future-proof, or as you said: ‘fit for the future’; Movidiam as you described gives you the ability to say “right, well traditionally the best visual effects might have migrated to urban centers where there is work, the conversation bubbling away, and everyone is closed together. But actually, we see a lot of creative talent in São Paolo, in Barcelona, and in Australia.
Actually, we built all our marketing materials and videos on Movidiam through very diverse teams, more efficiently than we have when we were previously involved in production. So it’s a virtualized layer that helps production companies go to market with the best team for their brief.
Yes and that’s interesting. I think visual effects companies have probably led the way to that in London, because they work in a highly competitive market, as everyone in production does, they get jobs they simply can’t afford to do on London salaries. So they have sub-teams in India, China, eastern Europe, a full network. They manage it from London, so the agency has the comfort of knowing the person they are dealing with, and that person will take responsibility for everything and manage the communications between diverse offices. So the quality is maintained, and they’re factoring talent from around the world that is cheaper than London to be able to deliver the job with the budget the client has.
Sure, very interesting. So what do you see? What’s on your six-months horizon? We had a good time when we came down to your presentation at BAFTA and brought in some interesting companies to talk about the future. What’s the temperature on the industry from your perspective?
Well I think as far as we’re concerned, we are in charge of making most of the opportunities. We’ve got a busy programme starting next year: an event talking about the future of advertising one afternoon — that’s an annual event and we’re doing it again; we are doing some work overseas, in Korea initially; we have our training course in production, which trains a 110 producers a year in the beginning of the year; we’re very active in Ad Week Europe, which we think is a very important event because it brings together the whole industry: clients, the media agencies, agencies, and production; and very interesting presentations in London at the end of March which we are part of doing.
Sure. I know we’ve taken a lot of your time this morning so thank you for that, but dipping back quickly to your history: you come from a legal background originally, how is the landscape of rights and issues and content evolving as we moved into this sort of tech-based era? That’s a massive change as well isn’t it?
So there is a lot coming up, and many chances for production companies to engage and to stay in the future. One of our roles is to help them to do that in an environment where they don’t have time to stay in the future as much as they like, because they are running small businesses and have to focus on getting the next job in and doing their current job as well as it could possibly be done. That is their approach to life, and that is their future business prospects. Once they’ve done all that, it’s very hard to find the time to study the medium term and where the business might go. So we are trying to give them by-side stuff that they can come and interact with and think about in the 2% of the time that they’ve got to do that.
It is, yes. It’s an interesting question, because traditionally of course commercial producers handed over the copyright and everything, except from animation, on being paid for the job. But in an era in which they are creating content, then if they originate it they would expect to retain rights. That gives rise to increasing possibility for them, because what production companies have seen in the past is how successful they are in commercials.
The company essentially has no value when you sell it, because it’s about the people within it. But they look at television production companies, the big independents, and they’ve all been sold for very substantial amounts of money because they all had their ongoing IP. So I think companies in commercials are really interested in that prospect and developing their own IP, because that means the company owner has something when they start to move on.
Sure, it’s very interesting. Just one last question before wrap up Steve. Ad Week Europe, again is the collection of the industry in London. Are we seeing more businesses and platforms like Movidiam evolving that are going to stick people together in a more appropriate fashion based on their expertise and skill and wanting to streamline? Because I think what we’ve seen a lot of is the hardware technology change — so therefore the image is change. But less so of the modus operandi of organisation and perhaps a SaaS tool really being able to assist on the bottom line and draw efficiencies.
Yes, I mean people are interested in these things which they have always been interested in, which is connecting with people they trust, identifying people who’ve got expertise they can use, and a platform like Movidiam is going to help them to do that I’m sure.
Steve Davies, Chief Executive of the Advertising Producers Association, thank you so much for your time on the Movidiam podcast. We look forward to catching up soon, and hopefully we’ll see you at Ad Week Europe.Yes, I mean people are interested in these things which they have always been interested in, which is connecting with people they trust, identifying people who’ve got expertise they can use, and a platform like Movidiam is going to help them to do that I’m sure.
Absolutely. Pleasure George, thank you so much.
Find Steve here:
Website (A.P.A):
Twitter (A.P.A): https://twitter.com/apalondon
