Tuesday, September 05, 2006


Last night Advertising Depot (A|D) beat four other leading Brisbane agencies - Publicis Mojo, McCann-Erickson, Junior and De Pasquale - to win the 2006 Riverfestival Advertising Challenge.
The brief was enough to make even the smoothest salesperson cringe: convince the people of Brisbane to drink recycled water.
Each agency faced a panel of industry professionals and was given five minutes to present their billboard creative which was then critiqued by the judges.
And following the trend of reality tv, the vote went to the people, with the 200 strong audience voting for their favourite concept with a show of hands.
A|D took an innovative and irreverent approach, using a controversial headline, "Let’s not recycle water", with a url call to action: ShortTermThinking.com.au
But if you visit this website, you’ll find that unfortunately the people responsible for it didn’t plan ahead, so you’re redirected to LongTermThinking.com.au- a visionary website hub for long-term, lateral thinking to ‘make Queensland an even smarter state’. The site also provides a compelling argument for recycled water.
Says A|D Managing Partner Murray Berghan: “This was a great initiative of Riverfestival and we are really happy with our campaign being chosen. It was an excellent brief and our team loved working on it.”
Thankfully, even if Brisbane doesn’t welcome the advent of recycled water, critics will have a hard time rhyming it with the word poo, (see Poo-woomba).


Anonymous Anonymous said...

would have been better if the site actually worked... which type of thinking is that?

7:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The problem with the recycled sewage plant proposed for Toowoomba is that it just would not work.

It is not possible to produce 11,000 ML of recycled water from 8,000 ML of sewage. Toowoomba City Council also had nowhere for the RO waste stream to go. Acland Coal did not want it. Singapore pumps its RO waste stream into the sea.

The plant could never have been built for $68 million - closer to $150-200 million would be more accurate when you take into account the hundreds of acres of evaporation ponds required which were not included in the budget.

Regardless of your view on recycled water use, the no vote in Toowoomba was correct because the proposal was a dud.

12:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1. it's poo
2. it's not irreverent
3. it doesn't answer the brief
4. not many people can surf the net while driving a car.
shit brizzie advertising has a way to go if this shit wins something....

8:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous,

I don't think you quite understand mate. Go to www.ShortTermThinking.com.au read the copy, and have a think, then wait to be redirected to www.LongTermThinking.com.au

8:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm one of the creatives that worked on it. The website's a mockup, though we would like to develop it (but may need more than a week to do so). As for the other person's searing insight and eloquent critique - you appear slightly grumpy - perhaps you need a lie down and a nice cuddle? You're right about people not being able to surf the net whilst driving though, nor are they able to much else other than drive; which is why we should make all call-to-actions on billboards illegal. They're a silly idea, really...

What agency did you say you were from?

9:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


you're irrelevant & you're a tool.

nice thought ad depot.

9:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


9:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh I'm sorry, you're right guys.
It is irreverent, it is easy to log on while your driving and the competition wasn't for an outdoor concept...and it is really good creative...your place or mine for the hug?

10:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Witty retort.

Just for fun, you can imagine me with a sherlock holmes-type pipe in my mouth and we're sitting in a parlour room. I pace around the room with a thoughtful expression on my face, then I turn to you and say: "I have deduced two things from what you have said. 1. Your inability to contruct a cogent sentence, explain why you think what you think and spluttering vitriol leads me to suspect that you are an art director, not a writer. Secondly I have deduced that seeing as you know that we're often referred to as Ad Depot, that irrespective of your thin veneer of allusion to that you're not from 'Brizzie', in fact you are from Brisbane, and are one of the losers of the ad challenge!'

At this point everyone gasps and you laugh nervously.

Mere conjecture? Unsubstantiable bollocks? Maybe...

10:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

it was the other person who called THEM a tool, not you a tool, you tool - irrespective, Mr. Antagonism with the critique probably is from a losing agency...

10:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the work goes up then it can be shot down. If you want adulation for crap then flush it somewhere else. It's also getting really sad reading your responses.

11:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8.51, 10.22

Another thing - taking the initiative to question the brief, or go above and beyond it, doesn't really constitute intelligent grounds for criticism. An agency that blindly follows briefs without collaborating with the client or questioning the medium/strategy etc. is only ever going to regurgitate mediocre and ineffective creative. Also, a url is a much more effective CTA for outdoor than other CTAs. Or were you hoping to change people's preconceptions about recycled water with a single 'branding' billboard? Somehow I'm having trouble imagining your average punter actually changing their minds about a matter such as this without a well-rounded argument - even then it's going to be a challenge (to understate the point), but having the scope to present a full and intelligent argument is going to be a lot more effective than anything you can put on a billboard. This is why we questioned the brief, and came up with an educational campaign.

Seems I was right before though - you appear to have an intimate knowledge of the brief? Perhaps you might want to consider being slightly less transparent with your agenda, lest everyone think that you're a loser AND a tool...

11:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Went and got your copywriter, did you? 'Adulation'... impressive.

Dude - what's sad is that you are bitter for losing, try to bag other people's work, won't say where you're from and can't come up with a coherent argument to support your posits and instead need to resort to puerile bollocks.

Are you going to pretend that you're not from a losing agency? Please do... I know it wouldn't be McCann's as they're cool and produce good enough work that they don't get all bitter and twisted if they don't win...

12:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the person who is taking time out of their day to bag the creative - what is sad is you keep checking up on the responses so you can big note yourself add your bit of dribble. Really nobody wants to hear your constant negativity. Go use it on a Sunday when you are sitting in front of Idol - I can only presume that is where a person like youself will be as you will have no friends to hang out with. Now get back to your work and log off this site. I enjoyed the creative and think you should be doing better things with your time than constantly bagging it. OR if you want to respond again make a suggestion as to how YOU would have solved the brief. What is your amazing solution seeing you think the one pictured above is trash? Again, well done to the agency with the guts to go down this line. I personally think it has worked very well.

12:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK OK...you guys are really good and it's a really good ad and Ad Depot is really good too.

12:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't really think people are going to be driven to do anything from this idea. An ad for an adperson. But that's just me. Well done on winning though. An esteemed honour.

12:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Beautiful one day, bitter and twisted the next!

3:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Ad Depot guys - Grow a thicker skin. This blog doesn't need your whining and defensive responses any more than it needs the universal negativity of some others' posts.

3:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Guys. This is sad. Let's break this down. I'm driving down the street and I see this poster. I read it. "Let's not recycle water." I think: "OK, someone doesn't want to drink recycled water - me either - cool." If you're really lucky, and I mean REALLY lucky, they'll look to see who's saying it, "oh, short term thinkers think that way, I don't want to be a short term thinker, but I sure as fuck don't want to drink sewerage either." It's just too soft AND too similar to "I never read the economist"


Sydney writer.

4:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

After reading the responses above I got curious and decided to see if I could track down any of the other examples. I discovered them at...


I recommend that everyone take a few seconds to check them out.

For me, Mojo's response should've been the clear winner. It's a great looking piece of communication. Great visual. Afterall, these were meant to be billboards right? Simple idea well executed. Some of the others seem to be trying way to hard. De Pasquale win the award for smallest sponsor's logo.

5:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm curious too. Curious that our Sydney writer felt it necessary to tell us that he was a Sydney writer... the last post is curious also... hmm, i smell a rat... also curious is the proliferation of bad grammar from supposedly different posters.

Regrads to you 'too' - last two posters...

5:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Checked it out, 5:15. Not sure I agree with your judgement, but at least three of the entries were better than the winner's in my opinion.

Was interested to see who was judging this, and I quote from the site ...

Professor Ian Lowe, Australian Conservation Foundation President
Paul Menary , goa Billboards General Manager
Plus representatives from the scientific and research fields

Good to see there was no one from an advertising agency or marketing department there to bother the panel with issues like clarity of communication and single-mindedness of message.

5:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Come quick everybody, the gnats are fighting.

5:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear 5:32. I am 4:02 - "Sydney writer" (sorry for the "who's, I do that when I type fast). I felt the need to say I was from Sydney due to a previous post accusing anyone with a contrary opinion of being a sore loser. And in regards to your hypothesis that I am also poster 5:15... incorrect. Good thing you're an ad guy and not a detective - or is it? Hmm.

12:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

my work here is done. long live the gnats!!

7:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Checked out the others and Mojo was the clear winner. Hands down.

8:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

would you like some goulash with that?

1:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Go the Vegas! We do pretty ordinary work up here, but we have way hotter chicks, way hotter weather and no where near as many advertising flea bags, like Sydney. And we can almost still afford housing. Go the Vegas.

1:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey 1:35 PM!

Is that you Todd? Good luck with the new house mate. Keep an eye out for those termites. Say hi to Gary for me.

4:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Azza, wasn't me. Hate the hot weather. Termites in the front fence, spreading rapidly. I've purchased a creaky lemon.

2:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

."Thankfully, even if Brisbane doesn’t welcome the advent of recycled water, critics will have a hard time rhyming it with the word poo, (see Poo-woomba)."

True, but we could always call it Piss-bane.

10:05 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home