Old 12-20-09, 09:13 PM
  #26  
umd
Banned
 
umd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 28,387

Bikes: Specialized Tarmac SL2, Specialized Tarmac SL, Giant TCR Composite, Specialized StumpJumper Expert HT

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Suzie Green
I just can't see the logic behind it. We're not talking about a company that practically every American uses, like the USPS, or Discovery Channel, or 7-Eleven. I can't remember the last time I stepped into a Radio Shack store. I don't know how they justify spending the money, do they really think that advertising from this is going to profoundly enhance the business?
Advertising is all about getting your name out there and getting people to remember you. So you and a lot of people have basically forgotten about Radio Shack, and they would like to remind you. Is that so hard to understand?

Originally Posted by Doohickie
Actually, I was against USPS sponsorship, simply because I don't there is a rational argument why that government organization should be spending money sponsoring any sporting team. And why should "a company that practically every American uses" need to advertise anyway? A company that is looking to expand its business base should sponsor the team, not "a company that practically every American uses" already.
Although it is a "government organization" it does not operate on taxpayer money, it has to operate on it's own income.

Originally Posted by sideshow_bob
Why would you promote a brand, USPS that essentially has no competition and everyone is going to use anyway? That makes perfect sense.
Are you serious? They were losing a lot of business to FedEx and UPS. No competition my ass.
umd is offline