DOCSLIB.ORG

TV Advertising in the US

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
TV Advertising in the US This article was written for Spiritz, India’s most widely read alcohol industry magazine. I contribute a monthly column called Booze Abroad and the article is reprinted with their permission. BOOZE ABROAD Breaking the Ban on TV Advertising in the US Liquor industry has always worked under restriction on ATL advertising- either self-imposed or imposed upon. This prohibition leads to interesting and innovative ways to communicate about the brands to the consumers. Here is an interesting case study of using the media vehicles to promote a brand while prohibition loomed large in US. friend and I were The restrictions today are also broadcast medium outlet audience watching a sports voluntary but limited to after composition must be at least 71.6 event on TV and 10:00 PM for TV and content per cent over legal drinking age, he looked at me dependent for radio. Above all, the which is 21 years of age throughout with surprise as the US. A a liquor ad came In my view, any restrictions – on. “Hey, wait a minute,” he said, voluntary or imposed – on liquor “I thought it was against the law remain hypercritical, in as much as for liquor to advertise on TV in the wine and beer (mainly) do not face States.” comparable constraints in the US. My answer -- it never was against But that, my friends, is the story. the law. The ban on radio and television advertising for spirits THE HISTORY BEHIND (liquor) was voluntary and self- THE BAN imposed by the industry. In the When Prohibition in the US ended, mid-1990s, as head of marketing the distillers at the time got together for the US at Seagram Spirits and and set standards and practices to Wine, among my responsibilities avoid the reoccurrence of that event. and accomplishments was to break Between the do’s and don’ts, they the ban. voluntarily decided to ban radio 1414 the world of liquor March 2012 This article was written for Spiritz, India’s most widely read alcohol industry magazine. I contribute a monthly column called Booze Abroad and the article is reprinted with their permission. advertising. When television came ENTER MARKETING along, the self-imposed ban applied Usually marketing and public affairs to that medium as well. folks aren’t always on the same page. Meanwhile the wine and beer In this case, ending the voluntary Arthur Shapiro people did not feel the need nor did ban was a strong second item on they want to follow suit. the respective agendas -- more than spending was a fraction of just one of So over the next 50 to 60 years enough for an alliance. the major beer companies. people began to believe that 1) the The situation was complicated. From a brand-building standpoint, ban was a law and 2) spirits were The Seagram above the line (ATL) I really didn’t care about national characterized as “hard” while wine budget could not sustain a full-scale TV. I had neither illusion about, nor and beer were not. foray into broadcast advertising. In interest in, sponsoring the Super By the mid-90s this legacy hurt fact, total liquor industry advertising Bowl or some other mega event. Beer spirits in a number of ways. From marketing is based on mass appeal a marketing standpoint, access to and efforts. Spirits marketing is about important brand building media was reaching the correct (albeit smaller) denied. More painful, the hard vs. soft audience effectively. That meant our perception led to a lack of equivalency ultimate efforts needed to center on among alcohol types, particularly in local or cable TV and spot radio. the area of federal excise taxes, with The only way to accomplish these liquor taxed the most. objectives was to swing for the fences Seagram fought the tax and go for an end to the voluntary equivalency problem in a number ban. of ways. The most important was to promote the idea that a drink THE CHALLENGES is a drink and 1.5 oz. of spirits is The first order of business was to equivalent to 12 oz. of beer and 5oz. approach other spirits manufacturers of wine. Despite the accuracy and informally and through DISCUS acceptance of this claim, it wasn’t (Distilled Spirits Council of the US). easy to get the message across. Even None of them initially were ready or print media was reluctant to run ads willing to step up to the plate. Thanks containing this concept. to the clout the public affairs executive Another effort aimed at TV had with the Seagram family and involved the introduction of Seagram THE MOST IMPORtaNT management, it was decided that we mixers (soft drinks). While it got the would do it alone. name across, the benefits were limited WAS TO PROMOTE THE Interestingly, not every one among to those brands carrying the name management was in love with the and it addressed the equivalency issue IDEA that A DRINK idea of adding Radio and TV to the only in part. Besides, it was a back spending mix. Lots of reasons – fear door approach to changing consumer IS A DRINK AND 1.5 of change, concern about increased and government perceptions. “How spending and, my personal favourite, can you claim to be equivalent OZ. OF SPIRIts IS “How do we know it will benefit our when they (wine and beer) are on brands?” Duh. Now we had a two front TV and you’re not? You’re more EQUIVALENT TO 12 OZ. war, breaking the ban and making than alcohol, you’re hard liquor.” dozens of presentations to show The public affairs people wanted OF BEER AND 5OZ. OF that broadcast advertising works. more direct efforts to change the Ah, the power of fear of change. situation. WINE (See the side bar story) the world of liquor 15 March 2012 This article was written for Spiritz, India’s most widely read alcohol industry magazine. I contribute a monthly column called Booze Abroad and the article is reprinted with their permission. BOOZE ABROAD BEWARE THE MEDIA BUYERS While I never worked as a media buyer, throughout my career I’ve had many occasions to work with and manage the people responsible for placing advertisements in publications and on the air. In effect, these are the folks who work for an ad agency or media buying company and negotiate the rates. Too often, these buyers are myopic and push for formulas that do not always take into account the quality of the audience reached nor sound business practice. While it may have changed and perhaps doesn’t apply all over the world, I have found media buyers often tend to be enslaved by the cost per thousands (CPM) and lose sight of the forest for the trees. At Seagram, we had our own in-house media buying department. But, when it came to the break-the-ban wars, they were either missing in action or got in the way. As our efforts to get on the air progressed we had many defeats (“I can’t run your ads now but maybe at a later time”) and a few cherished victories. Breaking the ban was not enough; we needed a sustained presence on television. Among our allies was a cable program called The Golf Channel. Given the go ahead, the strategy This was perfect for us -- the audience was older, no issues with under was simple. It was called the “crawl age drinkers, affluent, sophisticated and premium quality drinkers. strategy” as in, we will slowly It was an ideal setting for Chivas Regal and The Glenlivet. We even and quietly crawl into broadcast. sponsored a program on golf tips. No fanfare, no hoopla, no press One day the owner of the media company called and hesitantly conference, just do it – buy the space asked to see me. This could only mean a problem, since the usual and slowly expand from market to approach was to go through the media department. market before anyone notices and, by After exchanging pleasantries, I could see that the gentleman was the time they do, it will have been a agitated and it didn’t take long for him to blurt it out. Our esteemed fait accompli. media department had cut The Golf Channel from the new budget. Ha! When we started to crawl, we Considering they were the 2nd or 3rd station to take our ads, I was must have been wearing noisemakers partly perplexed and partly very angry. because the country heard us the very next day after the initial effort. On the spot, I called one of the buyers and asked about it. “I understand that we’ve cut The Golf Channel from the plans,” I politely WILL YOU TAKE OUR ADS? asked. “How come?” Objectives, plans, authorization and “Well,” came the reply, “they are too expensive.” strategy in place, we needed a partner “What are you talking about?” I asked. – a broadcast media company or “Their CPM is twice as high as XYZ channel.” station that would run our ads. Our “Tell me,” I asked, “does XYZ take our advertising?” ads, by the way, were entertaining “No, they don’t,” was the answer. and humorous, very tasteful and “So if I got this straight…we are dropping one of the few channels effectively got our message across in who will take our ads because their cost per thousand is higher than a a low key manner. channel which will not take our ads. Is that correct?” Finding a media partner was He said, rather sheepishly, “I didn’t look at it that way…just extremely difficult.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seagram Building, First Floor Interior
    I.andmarks Preservation Commission october 3, 1989; Designation List 221 IP-1665 SEAGRAM BUIIDING, FIRST FLOOR INTERIOR consisting of the lobby and passenger elevator cabs and the fixtures and interior components of these spaces including but not limited to, interior piers, wall surfaces, ceiling surfaces, floor surfaces, doors, railings, elevator doors, elevator indicators, and signs; 375 Park Avenue, Manhattan. Designed by Ludwig Mies van der Rohe with Philip Johnson; Kahn & Jacobs, associate architects. Built 1956-58. Landmark Site: Borough of Manhattan Tax Map Block 1307, Lot 1. On May 17, 1988, the landmarks Preservation Commission held a public hearing on the proposed designation as a Landmark of the Seagram Building, first floor interior, consisting of the lobby and passenger elevator cabs and the fixtures and interior components of these spaces including but not limited to, interior piers, wall surfaces, ceiling surfaces, floor surfaces, doors, railings, elevator doors, elevator indicators, and signs; and the proposed designation of the related I.and.mark Site (Item No. 2). The hearing had been duly advertised in accordance with the provisions of law. Twenty witnesses, including a representative of the building's owner, spoke in favor of designation. No witnesses spoke in opposition to designation. The Commission has received many letters in favor of designation. DFSCRIPI'ION AND ANALYSIS Summary The Seagram Building, erected in 1956-58, is the only building in New York City designed by architectural master Iudwig Mies van der Rohe. Constructed on Park Avenue at a time when it was changing from an exclusive residential thoroughfare to a prestigious business address, the Seagram Building embodies the quest of a successful corporation to establish further its public image through architectural patronage.
    [Show full text]
  • Companies with Matching Gift Programs
    Companies with Matching Gift Programs Many companies encourage charitable giving by matching gifts made by their employees. As a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, CHCA is eligible for matching gifts. Below is a list of companies that have matching gift programs. Even if a company is not listed, they may still have a matching gift program. In addition, not all companies match PK-12 schools. To find out if your company matches gifts made to CHCA, please contact your HR representative. If you need additional assistance, please e-mail Paige Tomlin at [email protected]. A AK Steel 3Com Corporation Albemarle Corp. 3M Company Alco Standard AlliedSignal Inc. Alexander and Baldwin Inc. Allstate Alexander Hamilton Life Abacus Capital Investments Alexander Haas Martin and Partners Abbott Laboratories Al Neyer Altera Corp. Contributions Allegro Microsystems Inc. Accenture Alliance Bernstein Access Fund Alliance Capital Management L.P. ACE INA Foundation Alliance Coal LLC Adams Harkness and Hill Inc. Alliant Techsystems Altria Group Allegiance Corp. and Baxter International Adaptec Foundation Allendale Insurance Foundation AMBAC Indemnity American Natl Bank & Trust ADC Telecommunications American Intl Group, Inc. AMD Corporate Giving American Standard Found Adobe Systems Inc. Amgen Inc. ADP Foundation AMN Healthcare Services American Express Co. AmSouth BanCorp. A & E Television Networks American Stock Exchange AEGON TRANSAMERICA Ameriprise Financial AEP Ameritech Corp. AES Corporation AMETEK / Sealtron A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co. AMSTED Industries Inc. American Fidelity Corp. Amylin Pharmaceuticals Aetna Foundation, Inc. Anadarko Petroleum Corp. American General Corp. Analytics Operations Engineering AG Communications Systems Analog Devices Inc. American Honda Motor Co. Avon Products Foundation, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • TIU S5E4 Transcript
    The Liquid Workforce Krissy Clark: Hey it’s Krissy. This is the Uncertain Hour. If you’ve been listening to our whole season (which, if you’re not, you should), you’ll know the last few episodes have been about Jerry Vazquez, a former janitor who was not employed by the company whose name was on his uniform, or by the companies whose offices he cleaned. At one point most corporations, schools, churches - had their own in-house janitors who were their employees. Not so much anymore. And on today’s episode we’re looking at how did that come to be? Not just for janitors, but for so many people. Which is why Uncertain Hour producer Peter Balonon-Rosen and I sat down with a guy named Bryan Peña. Peter Balonon-Rosen: And Bryan told us how, decades ago, he worked beneath the bright fluorescent lights at a 7-Eleven in San Diego. BP: You wanna learn about people? You know that’s a great job to learn about people. Peter: Why do you say that? BP: Because you see people of all shapes, sizes and colors in different states. Peter: It was the early ‘90s and Bryan was paying his way through college, working the graveyard shift at 7-Eleven. He was majoring in economics, minoring in acting, so Bryan was fascinated with human behavior. And at 7-Eleven, he got to see that up close. BP: We'd have the guy who had no teeth who would buy 17 cans of easy cheese every Tuesday. Peter: OK BP: We had the guy who lived in back who would get donuts.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterloo County Soldier Information Cards - World War II
    Waterloo County Soldier Information Cards - World War II Residence [R] or Last Name First Name Rank Regiment/Battalion Hometown [H] A H.Q. Company, Highland Light Infantry of Ableson Albert Private Canada Galt [H] Ableson Gordon L. Stoker First Class Royal Canadian Navy Galt [H] Adam Kenneth F. Pilot Officer Royal Canadian Air Force Elmira [H], Preston [R] Adamos John Private Essex Scottish Regiment Kitchener Adams G. n/a Veterans Guard of Canada Galt [R] Adams Hector J. Gunner Royal Canadian Artillery Preston Adams Hugh B. Trooper Royal Canadian Armoured Corps Norwood [H] Adams William C. n/a Highland Light Infantry of Canada Preston [H] Adams Lawrence R. Private Quebec Royal Rifles Kitchener Addis Harold Private Western Ontario Regiment Preston [H] Agnew Archie Sergeant Hastings and Price Edward Regiment Galt [R] Aigner Frank Lance Corporal Highland Light Infantry of Canada Waterloo Airdrie Douglas Private n/a Elora Aitchinson Edward Flight Lieutenant Royal Canadian Air Force Elora Aitken George M. Private Irish Regiment of Canada Galt [H] Aitken W.T. "Bill" Second Lieutenant "C" Company, Highland Light Infantry of Canada Galt South Dumfries Township Aitkin George Captain Sault Ste. Marie and Sudbury Regiment [H] Aksim R.E. Captain Intelligence Corps Waterloo [R] Aksim Victor Captain Royal Canadian Corps of Signals Waterloo Albert Leo N. Private Highland Light Infantry of Canada Preston [H], Kitchener [R] Albrecht George Private Essex Scottish Regiment Milverton Alderman Frederick Corporal Highland Light Infantry of Canada Galt [R] Aldworth G. Louis Pilot Officer Royal Canadian Air Force n/a Alexander Clem Lance Corporal "D" Company, Highland Light Infantry of Canada Galt [R] Alexander Jack Paratrooper Paratroop Units Hespeler Alexander James Private Royal Canadian Infantry Corps Hespeler Alexander Thomas W.
    [Show full text]
  • Nysba Fall/Winter 2018 | Vol
    NYSBA FALL/WINTER 2018 | VOL. 29 | NO. 3 Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Journal A publication of the Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section of the New York State Bar Association www.nysba.org/EASL Table of Contents Page Greetings from Lawyersville, by Barry Skidelsky, EASL Chair .......................................................................................4 Editor’s Note .......................................................................................................................................................................6 Letter from Governor Andrew M. Cuomo......................................................................................................................7 Letter from Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand .......................................................................................................................8 Pro Bono Update .................................................................................................................................................................9 Law Student Initiative Writing Contest .........................................................................................................................12 The Phil Cowan Memorial/BMI Scholarship Writing Competition .........................................................................13 NYSBA Guidelines for Obtaining MCLE Credit for Writing .....................................................................................15 Brave New World: Unsilencing the Authenticators .....................................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • Companies That Match Gifts a Advanced Micro Devices Advantis
    Companies that Match Gifts Amgen Berkeley Systems, Inc. A Anchor Brewing Co. Best Foods Advanced Micro Devices Antioch Companies/Webway BF Goodrich Co. Advantis AOL Time Warner Birkenstock Footprint Sandals AES Corp. AON Fdn. Bixby Land Co. Aetna Fdn., Inc. Apple Black and Decker AGIA, Inc. Applied Materials Blandin Fdn. Agilent Technologies Aramark Corp. Blauvelt Demarest Fdn., Inc. Agribank, FCB Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. Bloomingdale's Air Products & Chemicals Inc. Archie, Bertha Walker Fdn. Blount Fdn. Alex Brown & Sons, Inc. ARCO Fdn. Blue Shield of California Alexander & Baldwin Fdn. Argonaut Insurance Group BMC Industries Inc. Allendale Mutual Insurance Arkwright Fdn., Inc. BNSF Alliance Capital Management Arthur J. Gallagher Fdn. Boeing Co. Alliant Techsystems Inc. Aspect Communications Boeing Gift Matching Program Allied Signal Inc. Aspect Global Giving Program/ Boole & Babbage, Inc. Allstate Giving Campaign Aspect Telecommunications Booz Allen Hamilton Allstate Insurance Co. AT&T Fdn. Borden Fdn. Altria ATC Boston Consulting Group ALZA Corp. ATK Sporting Equipment BP Amoco Corp. American Cynamid Autodesk, Inc. BP Fdn. American Express Automatic Data Processing Braun Intertec Co. American Honda Motor Co. Aventis Pharmaceuticals Breslauer and Rutman, LLC American International Group Avery Dennison Brobeck Charitable Fdn. (AIG) Avon Broderbund Fdn. American Management Axa Fdn. BT Commercial/Deutsche Bank Systems, Inc. Ayco BTD Manufacturing, Inc. Ameriprise Financial B BTW Consultants, Inc. Ameritech Corp. Barclays Burlington Northern Santa Fe Ameron Inc. Bemis Co. Fdn. Railway Co. Business Wire Butler Manufacturing Co. CAN Fdn. CNA Insurance Co. Fdn. Bakar, Gerson Fdn. Candle Fdn. CNA Surety Co. Bakers Square Restaurants Capital Group Companies Coca-Cola Fdn. Bank of America Carnegie Fdn.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Order and Oppinion of the Commission
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS: Timothy J. Muris, Chairman Sheila F. Anthony Mozelle W. Thompson Orson Swindle Thomas B. Leary In the Matter of POLYGAAM HOLDING, INC., a corporation DECCA MUSIC GROUP LIMITED, a corporation, UMG RECORDINGS, INC., Docket No. 9298 . a corporation, and UNIVERSAL MUSIC & VIDEO DISTRIBUTION CORP., a corporation. FINAL ORDER The Commssion has heard this matter on Respondents ' appeal from the Initial Decision and on briefs and oral argument in support of and in opposition to the appeal. For the reasons stated in the accompanying Opinion of the Commssion, the Commission has determned to affirm the Initial Decision and enter the following order. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, as used in this order, the following definitions shall apply: 1. "PolyGram Holding" means PolyGram Holding, Inc., its directors officers, employees, agents, representatives, successors, and assigns; its subsidiaries, divisions, groups, and affiliates controlled by PolyGram Holding, Inc.; and the respective directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives successors, and assigns of each. 2. "Decca Music" means Decca Music Group Limited, its directors officers employees agents, representatives, successors, and assigns; its subsidiaries, divisions, groups, and affiliates controlled by Decca Music Group Limited; and the respective directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives successors, and assigns of each. 3. "UMG" means UMG Recordings, Inc., its directors, officers employees, agents, representatives, successors, and assigns'; its subsidiaries divisions, groups, and affiliates controlled by UMG Recordings, Inc.; and the respective directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, successors, and assigns of each. 4. "UMVD" means Universal Music & Video Distrbution Corp. , its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, successors, and 'assigns; its subsidiaries, divisions, groups, and affiliates controlled by Universal Music & Video Distrbution Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • Matter of New York Landmarks Conservancy, Inc. V 375 Park Ave
    Matter of New York Landmarks Conservancy, Inc. v 375 Park Ave. Fee, LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 30865(U) April 4, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 151097/2014 Judge: Carol R. Edmead Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various state and local government websites. These include the New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service, and the Bronx County Clerk's office. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [* 1] SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: PART 35 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------)( In the Matter of the Application of: Index No.: 151097/2014 NEW YORK LANDMARKS CONSERVANCY, INC., Plaintiff, INTERIM DECISION AND ORDER for an Order Enjoining Respondents from removing the Pablo Picasso Curtain, entitled Le Tricorne, from its current Motion Seq. #s 001 and 003 location at the building located at 375 Park Avenue, New York, New York, -against- 375 PARK AVENUE FEE, LLC, RFR HOLDING CORP., CLASSIC RESTAURANT CORP. and THE FOUR SEASONS RESTAURANT, Defendants. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------)( HON. CAROL R. EDMEAD, J.S.C. MEMORANDUM DECISION Plaintiff New York Landmarks Conservancy Inc. ("Landmarks") moves by Order to Show Cause to preliminarily enjoin respondents 375 Park Avenue Fee, LLC ("375 Park"), RFR Holding Corp. ("RFR"), and The Four Seasons Restaurant ("Four Seasons") (collectively, "defendants") from removing the "Picasso Curtain" from its current location without its express written consent and authorization (motion seq. 001). Defendants oppose the application and cross move by Order to Show Cause to dismiss the Amended Verified Complaint as against 375 Park and RFR (motion seq.
    [Show full text]
  • Employer Matching Company List 2020
    A 3Com Corporation Alco Standard Fdn. 3M Company AlCOA Foundation Abacus Capital Investments Alexander and Baldwin Inc. Abbot Laboratories Alexander and Baldwin Foundation Accenture Foundation, Inc. Allegro Microsystems Inc. Access Fund Allegiance Corp. and Baxter International Alliance ACE INA Foundation Alliance Capital Management L.P. Alliance Coal LLC Allendale Insurance Foundation Allendale Mutual Insurance Co. Adams Harkness and Hill Inc. Alliant Techsystems Adaptec Foundation AlliedSignal Inc. ADC Foundation Allstate Foundation, The Allstate Giving Campaign ADC Telecommunications Altera Corp. Contributions Program Adobe Systems Inc. Altria Employee Involvement ADP Foundation Programs A & E Television Networks Altria Group AMBAC Indemnity Corporation AEGON TRANSAMERICA AMD Corporate Giving Program AEP American Express Co AES Corporation American Fidelity Corp. A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co. American General Corp. Aetna Foundation, Inc. American Honda Motor Co. Inc. AG Communications Systems American National Bank and Trust Co. of Chicago Agilent Technologies American Standard Foundation Aid Association for Lutherans American Stock Exchange AIG Matching Grants Program Air Liquide America Corporation Aileen S. Andrew Foundation Air Products and Chemicals Inc. Albemarle Corp. AIM Foundation Ameriprise Financial Ameritech Corp. Amgen Center American Inter Group Amgen Foundation Amgen Inc. American International Group, Inc. Aspect Telecommunications Associates Corp. of North America AMSTED Industries Inc. Astra Merck Inc. AMN Healthcare Services, Inc. AstraZeneca Pharmaceutical LP Atapco Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Corp. Giving Program ATK Foundation Analog Devices Atlantic Data Services Inc. Analytics Operations Engineering Analog Devices Inc. Atochem North America Foundation ATOFINA Chemicals, Inc. Anchor/Russell Capital Advisors Inc. Andersons Inc. ATO FINA Pharmaceutical Foundation AT &T Andrea Frankel Allen Charities Anheuser-Busch Foundation AT&T Communications Systems AT&T Foundation AOL Time Warner Foundation Autodesk Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • In Re: Vivendi Universal, S.A. Securities Litigation 02-CV-05571
    UNITED STATES DisrRicr COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x : Civil ActionNo. IN RE VIVENDI UNIVERSAL, S.A. 02 Civ. 5571 (IIB) SECURITIES LITIGATION x CONSOUDATED CLASS iataLOEMEUM This Document Relates To All Actions —x Jury Trial Edat BASIS OF ALLEGATIONS Lead Plaintiff:3, by their undersigned attorneys, on behalf of themselves and the class they seek to represent, for their Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the "Complaint", make the following allegations against defendants based upon the investigation conducted by and under the supervision of plaintiffs' counsel, which included reviewing and analyzing infeurnation relating to the relevant time period obtained from numerous public and proprietary winces (such as LEXIS- NE)IS, Dow Jones and Bloomberg) - including, i= she. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") filineft, other regulatory flings and repot% publicly available annual reports, press releases, published in news articles and other media reports (whether disseminated in print or by electrcadc media), and reports of securities analysts and investor advisory services, in order to obtain the information necessary to plead plaintiffs claims with particularity. Lead Plaintiffs'investigation also included interviewing or consulting with i3adividuals, including finmer employees of Vivendi Universal, SA ("Vivendi" or the "Company") and its subsided= who are knowledgeable about defendant Vivendi's business. Lead Plaintiffs believe that further substantial evidentiary support willexist for the allegations sot footth herein slier a reasonable opportunity for discovery. SUMMARY OP THE CCiMPLALaTla 1. Lead Plairaiffi bring this securities fraud class action against Vivendi and two of its most senior fernier °Mors; defenchmt JeanaMatie Messier (i'Messier), Vivendfs CEO and Cheirraall (until he was fumed to resign on July 3, 2007), arid defendant Guillaume Hawsezo ("Hrmnezo"), Vivendi's CFO (until he resigned on July 9, 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Vivendi 438X273 Ai.Pdpage 1 28/06/06 10:56:52
    couverture_vivendi_438x273_ai.pdPage 1 28/06/06 10:56:52 C M J CM MJ CJ CMJ N VIVENDI - 2005 FORM 20-F FORM 20-F 2005 20-FAN2005 Head Office 42 avenue de Friedland - 75380 Paris cedex 08 - France Tel. : + 33 1 71 71 10 00 - Fax : + 33 1 71 71 10 01 New York Office 800 Third Avenue - New York, NY 10022 - USA Tel.: 1 (212) 572 - 7000 www.vivendi.com As Ñled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 29, 2006 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 20-F n REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 OR ¥ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the Ñscal year ended December 31, 2005 OR n TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to n SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Date of event requiring this shell company report Commission File Number: 001-16301 VIVENDI S.A. (Exact name of Registrant as speciÑed in its charter) N/A Republic of France (Translation of Registrant's name into English) (Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) 42 avenue de Friedland 75380 Paris Cedex 08 France (Address of principal executive oÇces) Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Name of each exchange Title of each class on which registered Ordinary Shares, nominal value 45.50 per share New York Stock Exchange* American Depositary Shares (as evidenced by American Depositary Receipts), each representing one share, nominal value 45.50 per share New York Stock Exchange * Listed, not for trading or quotation purposes, but only in connection with the registration of American Depositary Shares, pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Ittshurgt Daeitt
    . e . ißtorcllantous latbical Jacbtral tiatlroabz ailro ib' RESOLUTION sae Propoatng Amendments to the Cometit • XXd, . R. R. R. AYER'S RAILROAD NOTICE JUNK • 11, Cemetery Alarble VTorlcs, ; by Uri Steals rind Moot of Representuttres of TIIREE GREAT LIG FITS! ITEPIT'TSBUILGII, daeitt. Resolved Amotsyleanio in (knead Amiably mot:— 1 Liberty CHERRY PECTORAL, ittshurgt Cbmwanceidth of No. 333 Street, below Wayne, WAYNE k CHICAGO RAIFT. PITTSITCRGII,DVS 4 CINCINNATICOLUMagyMOIL are proposed to the Condi. PA. Air ANKIND HAVE LONG BEEN .EN- Fur Mt et(rr 1 V. with R. ample !tellingStork wed LINE. ILAILICOAD. the amendmeots with PITTSBIIitOII, RUAD CO3IPAN That the pre. gulphed u ropood 11.' trairspert Passenger. and Freight Pram to in Sense Cast. tntionuf the Commonwealth, in accordance .131 to darkneoc. ineut.k preluded hi Thirty Wes Trami Sid— Through Coininbus NA suns rams Tits Ousts% the thenmf. MATTHEW LAWTON, seen.. health—riddingthe human body from diseace. and Coughs, Colds and Hoarseness. Pittsburgh to Loula,lndianap- of To Cin- SCOLIt piece of information .1,100,ofthe tentharticle the trtutnient of Philadelphiaand Chia-Nish:Lt. 11cour,s—tritho. ~.hart9+ thrs::— following interesting [MST LYZNOXr.sr. ERACTICAL MARBLE'IIASON, pretereinglife. The rick. muter fallaccouc tnaumaa, Ma...,ash 0.i.,1355. elk. Cincinnati, mid all places Kest and Sonth-west, n ith a cinnati in Tlreireflours. —The Delta, the 1 lair • continued practlo•of the Orleans of to laid Coo/Mutton te reru. faculty, are oubJect to Ds.. J.C. Airst—l dured hesitate to ..ay the l esis mmody diem, efreaularity and expedition. Arse22d. from Nest . There shall bo an ISRES RESPECTFULLY TO IN- and There le nothing certain or meet tlaand after MONDAY.
    [Show full text]