Seriously, this is not an uncommon reaction to tough economics, and I’ve heard these comments echoed increasingly elsewhere. For instance, read this commentary from Steve Lanzano of media agency MPG: http://www.jackmyers.com/commentary/media-business-report/36222794.html

The crux of the problem here IMO is how we deal with marketing activities whose effects on sales are (currently) not precisely measurable. The CFO mind tends to view unmeasurable investments with extreme skepticism, while the CMO tends to take as an article of faith the idea that branding and other indirect demand generation activities are key elements of business success, even if their effect on sales is delayed and indirect (and even disputable in many cases).

Naturally, as Bill implies, many industries seem to do just fine on pure direct marketing (mostly B2B, up the supply chain), but consumer goods?

This is a short question with a potentially massive impact. There would be no need for a marketing budget because it would be line item…a line item in that particular line of businesses’ Cost Of Sales.

I’m not suggesting that all Marketing departments close down immediately, rather that *in some cases* the marketing function might work better as a cost of sales line item.

It would require CMOs that think like CFOs and vice versa (Dogs and cats living together in blissful harmony, I know.) but it might be just crazy enough to work in some industries.