Bob Liodice, presidente de ANA
According to a report by the Association of National Advertisers (ANA), at least four out of every 10 marketers a total of 43 percent of the 98 interviewed lengthened at least some payment terms for marketing services and media suppliers during the year ending last April. In 17 percent of cases, however, marketers had actually shortened terms of payment.Though ANA represents marketers, the group warned of the risks in lengthening payment terms. The respondents noted higher prices, tense relations with suppliers and less choice of suppliers, among the reasons why some marketers have shortened the terms of payment during the year ending April 30, 2013.Extending payment terms puts small agencies, production and editorial companies, and media outlets at risk, ANA said. The report cited a policy statement of the Association of Independent Creative Editors that such extensions “could cripple many post-production companies” and “put them out of business”.In a prepared statement, ANA CEO Bob Liodice that “while the ANA does not recommend any specific term or practice, we do advocate better collaboration that advances the quality of the marketer/supplier relationship and the products and services delivered”. Possible payment problems for agencies were particularly noted last year when Procter & Gamble said it would seek to extend the terms of payment from 30 to 75 days in new contracts with agencies.
