Your agency retainer is buying management, not marketing

Take your monthly agency invoice and ask one question: how many of the people billed on it personally shipped work you can point at?

What you actually pay for should be visible in the work, not in the meeting notes.

For most retainers, the honest answer is under half. The rest is the account layer — account managers, project managers, traffic managers, and the meetings between them. All of them professional, none of them producing.

Why the layer exists

It’s not a con. The account layer exists because the agency model bundles many juniors and a few seniors, and someone has to translate between your business and a rotating delivery team that doesn’t know it. Coordination is the tax on distance. The more distance between the person who understands your business and the person doing the work, the more of your budget the tax consumes.

What the tax costs beyond money

  • Speed. Every brief passes through the layer twice — in translation and back in review. A two-day task books two weeks.
  • Signal. Feedback arrives second-hand. The person editing the ad never heard the customer call.
  • Accountability. When work disappoints, the layer absorbs the blame and promises a better process. Nobody owns the outcome by name.
Typical retainer account & project layer work you can point at Direct operators 1h/wk shipped work, named people, hourly rates 70% of ANA brands moved former agency work in-house or direct — the account layer is the part nobody misses. Illustrative split, not a specific client result.
Where the money goes: retainer vs. direct model.

No account managers. No briefs handed to juniors. No mystery retainers.

The direct model

The alternative is structurally simple: senior operators, working inside your business, with names and hourly rates you can read. No margin stacked on a delivery team you never meet. When the work is done, the hours stop. When it’s not right, the person who made it — not a process — fixes it.

That’s not an anti-agency rant; some briefs genuinely need a big production apparatus. But for the ongoing engine — media, lifecycle, content, reporting — paying for the work instead of the management of the work is simply better maths. See what that looks like on the pricing page.

Questions we get on this

Is this anti-agency?

No — some briefs genuinely need a big production apparatus. The argument is narrower: for the ongoing engine (media, lifecycle, content, reporting), paying for work instead of the management of work is better maths.

How do we know who’s actually doing the work?

You see names, profiles, and hourly rates before anyone starts — and every invoice shows who worked, on what, at which rate. That transparency is the model.

What replaces the account manager?

One weekly session with the operator who ships your work, plus a coordinator on your side who owns priorities. Coordination is a one-hour meeting, not a salaried layer.

Request the rate cardEvery role, a clear hourly rate — with a first indication for your setup within one working day. Ask about this topicWorking on exactly this? Send us the question — same straight answer we’d give a client. Book a 20-min callAn open conversation, no pitch deck. We’d rather talk than guess.
Remco Livain

Remco Livain

Co-founder · Fractional CMO & AI operator

Remco has spent 20+ years leading marketing in online and B2B businesses across Europe — from marketplaces and fintechs to consumer brands. Today he works as a full-time fractional executive and AI-first operator for businesses in transition, writing here about what actually changes inside marketing teams. More about the team →

Start the conversation

Tell us what your marketing function should look like in a year.