>>Maybe she*ll room with Martha...or is she out already? At *Camp Cupcake.* That*s what they called Martha*s prison in the U.S. "What*s wrong here is the way in which agencies are getting paid. And the fact that our services are so undervalued." I agree with that statement. Madison Avenue definitely took notice of the trial; and you can be sure that there will be new billing procedures in place; especially when it comes to the government. We certainly don*t bill our advertising staff out by the hour as a s.o.p. Anyone care to share how their shoppes handle the billing of clients? Obviously there should be thousands of different answers.

c) Chasworth executives realize they*re going to fall short on their billing projections (though they believe they have actually worked on the account more than they have billed due to *billing mistakes*) then order Dabitch to lie on her timecards (as she has been told to do since she started in this business) so that they hit their goals? d) Chasworth takes the clients out to dinner and persuades them to spend the shortfall with them anyway? e) Chasworth gets his vendors some hookers so that his vendors will bill for their services however Chasworth needs them to; insuring Chasworth has no shortfall.

>>They could have just blown it all on liquid lunches too. I*ll drink to that!

It*s looks like a totally anal, government beancounter started it all. We*ve been discussing it around the office. Ethically, Ogilvy should have gone to the ONDCP and said, *Hey look we saved you 3 million bucks!* Our point of debate was this... If a client has already agreed to a certain amount of cash to the agency for an account, and the agency realizes that their billing (voluminous, complicated U.S. government billing at that) is going to fall short of that amount; are they still intitled to the projected profit? We*ll give you that the way Ogilvy went about making up the shortfall was idiotic to say the least.