e (84 page)

We have little time to come up with a viable alternative. But even if we have to make a late withdrawal rather than risk exposure, to my mind that would be a preferable option.

I have thought long and hard before writing to you with this. I have no desire at all to land David in trouble. As I said, he has only the best interests of Miller Shanks at heart, but I believe that his admirable zeal has clouded his judgement.

I await your view, and will follow whatever course you recommend.

Harriet

	David Crutton – 1/14/00, 12:39pm
to:	Harriet Greenbaum
cc:
re:	Coke

Thank you for sticking with it, however reluctantly. Loyalty, you will find, pays dividends. Why don’t we have lunch? We can talk about Barry Clement. It is him isn’t it? Ironically Simon was only my
second choice for the creative director’s job. Guess who my first preference was.

	Lorraine Pallister – 1/14/00, 12:42pm
to:	Zoë Clarke
cc:
re:	lunch

Susi’s on Paracetemol and Prozac, and Liam’s on a power trip. See you in ten in reception and I’ll tell you about it.

	Harriet Greenbaum – 1/14/00, 12:44pm
to:	David Crutton
cc:
re:	Coke

I’d love to have lunch but I have to wait for some important news. Incidentally, your intelligence is good.

	David Crutton – 1/14/00, 12:49pm
to:	Zoë Clarke
cc:
re:	lunch

I appear to be at a loose end. I suppose I could take you for lunch as a welcome to my outer office. Get your coat on.

	Zoë Clarke – 1/14/00, 12:51pm
to:	David Crutton
cc:
re:	lunch

I can’t, I’ve got plans. Sorry! How about Monday?

	David Crutton – 1/14/00, 12:54pm
to:	Zoë Clarke
cc:
re:	lunch

What?

	[email protected] 1/14/00, 12:58pm
to:	[email protected]
cc:
re:	your homecoming

I’m trying to make everything perfectly lovely for your return (can’t wait, darling!) and I thought I’d pop out to Liberty for some new silk flowers. I know we only got the lilies a couple of months ago, but they’re awfully dusty. I thought I’d look for a sort of autumn bouquet, but would you rather soft pinks and yellows? Also, I’m restocking the fridge. Would you prefer Charles Heidseck or Mumm Cordon Rouge – the kitchen has both?

Love you/miss you . . . Sx

	[email protected] 1/14/00, 1:15pm (8:15am local)
to:	[email protected]
cc:
re:	concerns

You are quite right to share your concerns. David can be an obstinate so and so. I will deal with this from here. And thank you for the information. Your loyalty to the greater good of Miller Shanks will not be forgotten.

Jim

	[email protected] 1/14/00, 1:34pm (8:34am local)
to:	[email protected]
cc:
re:	Coke

David, a matter has been brought to my attention that troubles me enormously. I understand that “IT’S IN THE CAN” is second-hand goods. I also understand that despite knowing this, you intend to present it regardless.

This is not acceptable. It is shabby, dishonest and un-American. As CEO you surely know that when they set up shop in 1929 with just $50 and the Crabtree Cookies account, the founding principle of Donald K. Miller and Cyrus Shanks was “To sell through integrity.” It has served us well these past seventy years, and your action is a scurrilous betrayal of our forebears.

It hurts me more than you could know to think that you are prepared to implicate Miller Shanks in the crime of handling stolen property.

You will now do the right thing. If you are in any doubt as to what this might be, I will lay it out for you.

Kill “IT’S IN THE CAN” – no ifs, no buts.

Make immediate contact with Pertti van Helden. Beg, grovel, do whatever you have to do to get him and his campaign in London by Monday. As I said all along, his is excellent work. It recalls the heyday of great Coke advertising. I can only think that your negativity toward it was a result of envy.

And I recommend also that you use all your powers of persuasion to make Pinki Fallon retract her resignation. Given your own lamentable lack of integrity, you need hers very badly.