PERSPECTIVE: Holding companies reflect the personal traits of their heads.(Brief Article)(Column)

So, having just repaired damaged relationships after the Top 300 School Reports, this week we junk some familiar elements, devote seven pages to comparing the giant agency groups in devious detail, and lose virtually every friend in high places we ever had. Fun - it's a dangerous concept.

First, a few words on the rationale behind the report (Sizing up the Supergroups, p15). While much is written about these groups in isolation, we believe no magazine has set out to compare them in this way or in such detail. With the exception of Publicis and Dentsu who sell advertising space as well as buying it, the global holding companies all have similar business mixes and impressive client lists, so their growth should be similar. But, of course, it's not. The operating strategies of the groups may be broadly similar, but operating realities and controls vary wildly, as do the quality and breadth of coverage of key disciplines.

This is not a scientific report, so we have included a vox pop (which is necessarily anonymous, but screened for self-interest) reflecting the perception of these companies among agency peers and Wall Street and City players. These analysts control the important stock psychology side of the business and their views lead investors to consider loss-making Grey and Havas, when compared with the big four, as the industry's hospital cases.

What emerges from this survey is the sense of a showdown among ...