If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
Was just curious Retro. Your argument runs contrary to how I understand advertising to work, and as such I wondered if there was anything actually backing up what you were suggesting.
Originally posted by msteuk:
Was just curious Retro. Your argument runs contrary to how I understand advertising to work, and as such I wondered if there was anything actually backing up what you were suggesting.
Nah - unless we're talking history I'm largely philisophical, and I'm usually raising a point in order to get an answer from someone who knows what they're on about.
In short I raise a contrary point to find out stuff, and to have a discussion that could last a few hours and waste some time I should be working. Devil's Advocate and all that.
Cadbury's have money to burn on advertising? I wonder how this random garbage will affect their reputation. However, it may find itself perfectly at home with the current advertising sequences, EG:
car advert, loan / debt advert, mobile phone advert, "get yourself into more debt" advert, car advert, interior design / fixtures & fittings advert, mobile phone advert, "debt is so good - you like? / make your life even better with a greater financial burden" advert.
Originally posted by Docker:
In fact if you could tell me where your basis that all advertisers require an uplift in sales from a campaign, again I will concede your point.
I didn't say uplift. I said it was based on sales; be it maintaining or increasing.
Linear Mode
