According to Business Insider, former WPP executive Richard Foster is suing the advertising giant for over $100 million after claiming he was fired for exposing an alleged kickback operation. Foster spent 17 years at GroupM, WPP’s media arm that controls more than $60 billion in advertising spending for clients including Google, Unilever, and Ford. The lawsuit alleges that GroupM leveraged client budgets to secure cash rebates and discounted media inventory from platforms but didn’t always disclose or pass these savings back to clients. Foster estimates the agency improperly retained between $1.5 billion and $2 billion over five years through these practices. After submitting a 35-page report detailing his concerns to new GroupM CEO Brian Lesser in October 2024, Foster claims he was systematically sidelined and then terminated without cause in July. WPP says it will defend itself “vigorously” against the allegations.
Deja Vu All Over Again
Here’s the thing – this isn’t exactly new territory for the ad industry. Back in 2015, former WPP exec Jon Mandel dropped a bombshell at a marketing conference, alleging that agency kickbacks were widespread. The following year, the Association of National Advertisers published that explosive K2 Intelligence report calling these practices “pervasive.” Agencies denied everything, of course, but the damage was done. Some advertisers started auditing their media buys, and federal prosecutors even launched an investigation. Now Foster’s lawsuit brings this whole mess roaring back to life. Basically, it seems like the industry never really solved this transparency problem – they just got better at hiding it.
The Timing Couldn’t Be Worse
This lawsuit hits WPP at what might be the worst possible moment. The company’s expecting its second straight annual revenue decline, their stock price has been cut in half this year, and they’re losing major accounts to rivals like Publicis and Omnicom. Now they’re facing a nine-figure lawsuit that dredges up all the old rebate drama. And Foster isn’t some random junior employee – he was global CEO of Motion Content Group, the division behind hits like “Love Island.” When someone at that level starts talking about “non-disclosed profit centers” and “unethical practices,” people tend to listen. The real question is whether this will trigger another wave of client audits and contract renegotiations.
How The Alleged Scheme Worked
Foster’s lawsuit describes what sounds like principal media buying on steroids. GroupM would use its massive collective client spending power to buy huge blocks of advertising inventory upfront, securing deep discounts through what they called “volume-based discounts” and “purchase risk deals.” But instead of passing those savings directly to clients, the agency allegedly kept a significant portion as hidden profit. Foster estimated GroupM derived nearly $1 billion in global net sales from “non-product-related income” like these rebates. The really problematic part? Many large advertisers apparently hated these deals because they were designed to benefit the agency’s bottom line rather than the client’s. So we’re talking about a practice that clients didn’t want and that wasn’t fully transparent.
Whistleblower Retaliation Claims
The retaliation narrative Foster lays out is pretty damning. He says he repeatedly raised concerns with top executives including former CEO Mark Read and general counsel Nicola McCormick. Then when new CEO Brian Lesser asked for a “candid assessment,” Foster delivered that 35-page report detailing the rebate issues. But instead of investigating, Foster claims Lesser asked for a “sanitized” version that removed criticism of GroupM’s trading operations. Within hours, Foster says he was “blindsided” by a restructuring that effectively demoted him. He was cut out of meetings, excluded from deals, and eventually terminated. Now, if even half of this is true, it raises serious questions about WPP’s compliance policies and whistleblower protections. And let’s be honest – when a 17-year veteran gets shown the door right after raising ethical concerns, it doesn’t look great.
