[Closed] More clever advertising that I don't understand...

They're not identical though. They're priced differently. Which one?

The Flying Ox - Member

Answer the question, Teej. Which washing up liquid?

Teh question is nonsense

teh only answer is I don't know - i am not in a position to say as its not a choice I have ever made as its not a position I have ever been in.

Tell you one thing - irarely get boggoff unless I wanted two anyway

See?

It's an irresistable and occasionally well argued force, but it's coming up against an essentially immovable object; the Teej.

There are better things to ponder..

Certainly is a pointless argument, even for those who don't suffer the ignominity of being ignored...

If I can guess exactly what this thread has become without reading anything other than the OP, do I win a prize?

CaptainFlashheart - Member

Arrogant, condescending, supercilious, etc.

Words fail me.

Telling me what I do when I know it is wrong? Really. How arrogant condescending and supercilious is it for people I do not know to tell me what I do and don't do?

You do realise i am laughing at the obsessiveness of folk arguing with me all day for two when I was not here and not replying? I expect an other couple of pages please after this.?

i am laughing at the obsessiveness of folk arguing

Dear Kettle, you are black.

Yours sincerely,

Pot.

It's not nonsense. It's a question you can't answer because the answer either outs you as someone influenced by marketing or a buffoon with the financial decision making skills of a 4 year old.

And to clarify, I don't think you're a buffoon.

[i]ignominity [/i]
You don't get much of that to the pound here in Lancashire....

Bet TJ is a brilliant laugh to go for a pint with

For junkyard

I know you guys will never accept that there are people like me to who brands, marketing and advertising are [b]almost completely irrelevant[/b].

where marketing is [b]virtually [/b]irrelevant

perfectly possible to [b]reduce[/b] its pernicious influence [b]to a minimum[/b]

To be 100% immune is of course very difficult.

You're from Lancashire? Explains a lot 😛

I'm not even sure that word exists. If it doesn't, it should.

Ah, the Edinburgh defence arrives....

It's not nonsense. It's a question you can't answer because the answer either outs you as someone influenced by marketing or a buffoon with the financial decision making skills of a 4 year old.

my daughter puts forward a more compelling argument for washing up brand a rather than brand b against tj's. she goes by colour.

this is NOT a decision she makes based on marketing. they are the colours they are by accident, not by design.

The Flying Ox - Member

It's not nonsense. It's a question you can't answer because the answer either outs you as someone influenced by marketing or a buffoon with the financial decision making skills of a 4 year old.

No its not its a nonsense question. Its not something that could ever exisit in real life. there would always be other considerations such as place of manufacture, amount of packaging, and other differences in the product.

Wher people have asked questions possible to answer I have attempted to do so

So - I will answer more if another two pages is posted

CaptainFlashheart - Member

i am laughing at the obsessiveness of folk arguing

Dear Kettle, you are black.

Yours sincerely,

Pot.

2 pages posted without me posting a thing - while I rode 25 miles on my bike, dug some ditches, watched a couple of rugby games, cooked tea etc.

So - 2 more pages or will the mods put it out of its misery?

my daughter puts forward a more compelling argument for washing up brand a rather than brand b against tj's. she goes by colour.

I do not put forward any argument for brand a over brand b - have yo actually been reading? I don't care which it is so long as it does what I want it to do

so go on chaps - can you dish up two pages of arguement with me without my help?

2 pages posted without me posting a thing - while I rode 25 miles on my bike, dug some ditches, watched a couple of rugby games, cooked tea etc.

go you and your life outside STWland...
Its like you needed to emphasise it....just in case it was a bit unlikely...

I do not put forward any argument for brand a over brand b - have yo actually been reading? I don't care which it is so long as it does what I want it to do

but you make a choice, without any basis for making that choice (or secretly you do,but, for some perverse reason you claim you don't) whereas my daughter does make a choice based on what she unknowingly sees (which you dont).

what have YOU been reading?

Marketing is nonsense.
I watched the EDF advert 3 times but I still don't need a poo.

No its not its a nonsense question. Its not something that could ever exisit in real life. there would always be other considerations such as place of manufacture, amount of packaging, and other differences in the product.

With superhuman stubborn-ness and logic like that, there's only one possible scenario:
You are my wife, and I claim my £5. Now stop arguing. It upsets the baby.

🙂

What you guys seem unable to understand is the separation between what the object is and what its marketed as - sometimes this gulf is small,sometimes large

Junkyard - lots and lots of phrases where I qualify the absolute. even in your quote most people would not take "bugger all" as absolute zero would they? Why yo keep on doing this selective quoting and then inventing things yo claim I will say^ is rather obsessive

Obsessive...iirc correctly that would be a beautiful example of "inventing things" and doing a personal attack...you know the kind of stuff you accuse others of doing ad naseum whilst ignoring your own departures into these area.

I would refer you to this thread *where you made up something i had never said in order to refute it...you did have the good sense to leave the thread after doing this but I am sure by now there is a TJ reason that will explain this behaviour...I am certain you weren't wrong despite the inability to quote me.

Honestly how many people need to keep saying the same old stuff to you before you consider the possibility that we may actually have a point about this issue and your posting style in general?

* http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/the-helmet-debate-rumbles-on-in-the-mainstream-media/page/4#post-3855126

^

I have only got to Page 2 of 5 sI am sure it continued till that post [ [b]you are going to trawl your own posts to find something and I wish you luck but it was clear what you were saying.[/b].you were free of marketting and we were arrogant and patronising to suggest you were not. You appear to accept our view that you are influenced though I am sure there is a special Ninja TJ argument move you will now pull to deny this

Had you qualified it as such we could have avoided most of this.
I shall leave you to claim I am being personal, misrepresenting your quotes, telling me you never said what i have quoted etc that and all the other usual stuff you do when you TJ an argument.

I bet you are going to claim that your replies did none of this aren't you

I'm with TJ on this, What's so surprising about ignoring/not being swayed by marketing. Some of us have a mind of our own. we are not all sheep!

It's quite possible that you personally aren't affected by marketing but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work. The last time that this came up I posted a link to a large scale test that showed a bunch of things that proved that marketing works but the key points from the test (which used a banner ad on a web page) were:

The ad only increased people's spending on the product by 5% on average. It doesn't seem much and leave plenty of scope for people not being affected. However that 5% gave an ROI of 3 so clearly it worked.

90% of the people whose spending increased never bought the product online even though it was an online ad. They probably imagine that the ad had no effect on them and anyone doing a simple analysis of the effect of the banner such as sales linked to clicks on the banner would imagine that the marketing failed. Only when a full analysis of both offline and online sales was done was the really effect seen.

So for me personally it is quite possible that some people aren't affected but from a marketing point of view enough people are affected to make it worth the effort. As someone who spends money on online advertising it was interesting that I shouldn't put too much weight only on what I see happening online.

That looks very interesting leffeboy, but it only appears to be focussed on advertising, which we all know is just small part of the work that the marketing machine undertakes.
It's not necessarily a question of being affected by, but more a question of benefitting from marketing.

Yep, but a banner ad was the only way to be able to be sure whether or not someone in the target group had actually seen it and hence allow for a proper control group who your were sure ( or largely sure) hadn't seen it.

There were more interesting studies on the web doing things such as flashing subliminal images and showing that it later changed your likelihood of selecting a particular product when in a rush but none of those linked to data that we could actually look at without paying. The idea there being that you wouldn't be able to affect people who thought carefully about each purchase but for people who just bought something and got on with the next job their decisions were affected by stuff they weren't aware of. At least that was what they wanted to tell us - without numbers it is hearsay really

Edit: somewhat amusingly the iPad keeps changing hearsay to heresy. Take your pick, either seems to work 🙂

I'm with TJ on this, What's so surprising about ignoring/not being swayed by marketing. Some of us have a mind of our own. we are not all sheep!

Being able to think for yourself does not mean you are not influenced by marketing...

You need to understand that advertising/marketing communications are only a single component of what marketing actually is. There's far more to it than what you consciously experience as a consumer.

If you've ever made a buying decision ever, in your life, then you have made that decision, in part, under the influence of marketing.

Marketing is made up of:
The product itself
The price
The way its promoted (branding, advertising, social media etc)
Where you buy it from

It also sells stuff to people based on their motivations and various human needs. People very frequently are not as aware of their motivations for buying stuff, as they think they are.

I have a mind of my own but I am still influenced by marketing. There's no shame in that IMO...

Some of us have a mind of our own. we are not all sheep!

So the rest of us who argue that marketing does have an effect, are unable to think for ourselves? 🙄

Arrogance aside, you are telling us that you are in complete control of your subconscious and any subliminal attempts to market products to you?

[i]If you've ever made a buying decision ever, in your life, then you have made that decision, in part, under the influence of marketing.[/i]

My arse.

I punctured a car tyre after 11 hours of a 16 hour drive back from Europe. I changed to the little tiny spare about 30 seconds from the ferry doors closing. When we got to Dover, I drove to the first tyre place in the town and said 'Put me a new tyre on'.

Then I paid for said tyre, and carried on driving.

Marketing input? Nil.

Although I am a little sceptical of TJs dismissal of any marketing input, I am also sceptical of the insistence that each and every purchasing decision that is made in the UK and the wider world is attributable to the wonders of the marketing genius.

Marketing has an impact, but much of that is over-rated by people who use a goodly amount of 'hair product'.

I do find it most amusing how any of the anti-marketing squad can stand in any shop with a product in their hands, ready to buy it, and can say that they are not affected by marketing.
While I could agree crikey, I feel compelled to ask you how easy it was to find the tyre supplier?

How easy? I drove off the ferry and turned right off the main road.

I know you are going to suggest that this indicates the all powerful hand of the marketing genius, but I already knew there was a tyre place there because two years earlier, while waiting for a mate to buy some petrol, I'd walked round the corner and had a wee in their forecourt at 4:30 am in the morning.

Marketing or bladder capacity?

I know you are going to suggest that this indicates the all powerful hand of the marketing genius

...I buy lots of stuff based on the way it is marketed, but I also [b]don't[/b] buy lots of stuff based on the way it is marketed.

Rapha is a case in point; I wouldn't buy it because of the marketing, despite it being very good cycling clothing.

[i]No, I'm going to suggest the tyre company chose the place to locate their workshop/sales area that would make it easy for customers in their market to find.[/i]

a) It's in Dover.

Dover is essentially a street at the bottom of a cliff with a ferry port at one end and a way out to the rest of the UK at the other.

b) It's on a road.

..you are correct that it was not in a pedestrian area, but that doesn't indicate that it was placed there because the owner had been to marketing college, it would indicate that is was placed there because he is not a dick.

..you are correct that it was not in a pedestrian area, but that doesn't indicate that it was placed there because the owner had been to marketing college, it would indicate that is was placed there because he is not a dick.

one of my favourite ads of all time. and yet i never eat cadburys, i'm more of a galaxy man, myself....

[i]I also assume he had a sign large enough for you identify that he sold tyres[/i]

Nope.

I knew they sold tyres because I saw them through the window when I was having a wee. The signs were taken in overnight, presumably to avoid alerting the French invasion force that they could obtain rubber wheel coverings to commence and continue their journey to London to kidnap the Queen. Or to avoid them being nicked.

I feel the fundamental problem in this debate is the definition of the concept of marketing; it would appear that those who need to support and defend the concept adopt a definition so over-arching and all encompassing that nothing should be considered to be 'not-marketing'.

I am quite prepared to accept that many of the purchases we make are influenced by marketing, but I am not prepared to accept that the reason human children are born with eyes is to be informed about what stuff to buy.

Marketing input? Nil.

Wrong. There was a marketing decision to site the tyre workshop just where people would see it coming off the ferry. As you then drove there to make your purchase, as opposed to driving round Dover randomly, and ignoring said marketing, you were affected by the marketing decision on where to site the store

Simples

I feel the fundamental problem in this debate is the definition of the concept of marketing;

[i]There was a marketing decision to site the tyre workshop just where people would see it coming off the ferry[/i]

Brilliant!

...but if you had read the words that I have written, you would see that the tyre place was not, in fact 'just where people would see it coming off the ferry'.

Would you like to try a bit harder?

[i]marketing does influence the passage of every product from conception to final market.[/i]

I agree to some extent, but I would suggest that

[i]marketing does have [b]some variable and ill-defined influence on[/b] the passage of every product from conception to final market,[/i]

to be rather more accurate.

Would you like to try a bit harder?

I am not prepared to accept that the reason human children are born with eyes is to be informed about what stuff to buy.

I'm with you on this. We were given them to work out which fruits to pick or not pick, which animals looked easiest to kill, which animals looked like they might kills us and which mate looked best to procreate with... amongst other things.