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?
--
D a v i d H i l l m a n
hillman@planet-torque.com
/// 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
///
|