On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Alan Pozner wrote:
> Mark's got it spot on. Interesting has nothing to do with what gets on TV;
> all it takes is someone to pay for the airtime. The obvious example is the
> infomercial : does anyone consider Ron Popiel's "show" on his rotiseriere
> oven interesting or good entertainment? No. Yet it's on TV. Why? Cause
Ron's
> paying for the airtime.
Right, that was my point too, "interesting" has nothing to do with
getting on TV. Money does.
That still doesn't explain it all though, since I'm willing to bet the
market for performance cars and automotive equipment ( "what you'd
advertise during a solo on TV" ) is significantly larger than the market
for performance ( or otherwise ) logging equipment ( "what you'd advertise
during Timbersports" ) for example.
So it isn't just a "sponsorship" issue, and it isn't about being
"interesting".
Could it just be that the Timbersports people just have better
marketers?
If any of you have seen the latest marketing videos from SCCA you would
realize that almost anyone has better marketers than our friends in
Denver....especially true regarding Solo II, our 'entry level' motorsport.
The 30 second ad is no more than a road race corner worker recruitment ad,
while the 4 minute promo is simply action shots of road racing, Denver HQ(
who wants to see that?),solo II, and road rally set to music with one
exception....a ten second interview of a road race course worker and his
reasons for doing the same. To say the least, I was disappointed!
I would think that Denver has the responsibility to promote Solo II as the
easiest way for first timers to get into the SCCA where they can then find
their own way. Perhaps we should insist that a percentage of the Solo II
operating budget goes to such an effort.
John Hartsock, RE Delta Region SCCA
/// autox@autox.team.net mailing list
///
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe autox
///
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///
|