<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 150 equals 125? The Alternative PR Week 150</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.showmenumbers.com/pr-industry/150-equals-125-the-alternative-pr-week-150/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.showmenumbers.com/pr-industry/150-equals-125-the-alternative-pr-week-150</link>
	<description>This is the Blog of Adam Parker on numbers and relevance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2017 16:09:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.42</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: AdamParker</title>
		<link>http://www.showmenumbers.com/pr-industry/150-equals-125-the-alternative-pr-week-150/comment-page-1#comment-124</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AdamParker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 11:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.showmenumbers.com/?p=89#comment-124</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for dropping by Andrew and glad you like the blog :) 

I agree it would be very interesting to analyse profit - as the saying goes &quot;turnover vanity, profit sanity etc&quot;. However profit figures are a little more problematic to get at due to various reporting issues. For instance one can establish from WPP&#039;s 2007 annual report that the PR segment of their business made Â£104m on total turnover of Â£641m. But this is a worldwide figure and there is no requirement to sub analyse this segment of their business in geographic terms. (Geographic reporting is only required across the business as a whole). Also to the extent that the individual subsidiary accounts are available e.g. H&amp;K Limited, the accounts may have intra group management charges etc that would not necessarily be readily visible (there is an exemption available for this). 

Finally for privately owned agencies there is the potential for &quot;lifestyle&quot; elements causing depressed margins through owner managers taking out remuneration (in various forms) that exceeds the &quot;market&quot; rate. 

But I will ponder on it. Always up for a challenge :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for dropping by Andrew and glad you like the blog <img src="http://www.showmenumbers.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" class="wp-smiley" /> </p>
<p>I agree it would be very interesting to analyse profit &#8211; as the saying goes &#8220;turnover vanity, profit sanity etc&#8221;. However profit figures are a little more problematic to get at due to various reporting issues. For instance one can establish from WPP&#8217;s 2007 annual report that the PR segment of their business made Â£104m on total turnover of Â£641m. But this is a worldwide figure and there is no requirement to sub analyse this segment of their business in geographic terms. (Geographic reporting is only required across the business as a whole). Also to the extent that the individual subsidiary accounts are available e.g. H&#038;K Limited, the accounts may have intra group management charges etc that would not necessarily be readily visible (there is an exemption available for this). </p>
<p>Finally for privately owned agencies there is the potential for &#8220;lifestyle&#8221; elements causing depressed margins through owner managers taking out remuneration (in various forms) that exceeds the &#8220;market&#8221; rate. </p>
<p>But I will ponder on it. Always up for a challenge <img src="http://www.showmenumbers.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" class="wp-smiley" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Bruce Smith</title>
		<link>http://www.showmenumbers.com/pr-industry/150-equals-125-the-alternative-pr-week-150/comment-page-1#comment-123</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew Bruce Smith]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2008 09:22:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.showmenumbers.com/?p=89#comment-123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Adam - would be good if we could get a league table based on profit figures rather than top line revenue (a subject I&#039;ve bored for Britain on in the past). If Plimsoll&#039;s figures are believed than 33pc of agencies generate 100pc of the top 1000 agencies profits. And if margins range from 2pc to 25pc, then this suggests that a small minority of agencies generate most of the industry&#039;s profits (which would support a  Pareto/Koch 80/20 analysis). Anyway, great blog - look forward to more good posts!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adam &#8211; would be good if we could get a league table based on profit figures rather than top line revenue (a subject I&#8217;ve bored for Britain on in the past). If Plimsoll&#8217;s figures are believed than 33pc of agencies generate 100pc of the top 1000 agencies profits. And if margins range from 2pc to 25pc, then this suggests that a small minority of agencies generate most of the industry&#8217;s profits (which would support a  Pareto/Koch 80/20 analysis). Anyway, great blog &#8211; look forward to more good posts!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
