[3] In a reference to the increasingly powerful new media giants Google and Facebook, Lévy noted the merger was a response to the sea-change in the communication and marketing landscape and the blurring the roles of all players, to the benefit of clients.
Sir Martin Sorrell, head of WPP, praised the "extremely bold and brave and surprising move", but expressed reservations about the different cultures to be merged.
[3] The proposed company would be listed on both the Euronext Paris and New York Stock Exchange, corresponding to the previous headquarters of Publicis and Omnicom respectively,[2][6] and the OMC ticker on the NYSE retained.
However, as the largest shareholder of Publicis, she was expected to have her 9.13 percent holding of the company diluted by half as a result of the merger.
AdWeek noted that PepsiCo is handled by Omnicom's TBWA\Chiat\Day and the Coca-Cola account resides at Publicis' Leo Burnett.
[5] Some commentators expressed concern, with Craig Le Grice of The Drum saying that it would be "creating a sector essentially owned by two holding companies",[8] but not all industry observers were equally worried.
[4] The expected completion of the merger in late 2013 failed to materialise, and created great uncertainty for the industry players.
[11] While Wren was keen to emphasise in explaining the collapse that "there was no one factor" at play responsible, Lévy indicated the deal-breaker was Omnicom's insistence on keeping all three top posts for its own executives.