nolangherity
Banned
:wall: It still confounds me that people get this upset by something that was an integral part of the roots of this sport. Get over it. Its now legal in 3 states and DC..
thank you.
(also its 4 states now!)
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
:wall: It still confounds me that people get this upset by something that was an integral part of the roots of this sport. Get over it. Its now legal in 3 states and DC..
Oops, my memory must be bad........:hfive:thank you.
(also its 4 states now!)
You seem to have misinterpreted my point, either deliberately or because of the length of my post. Celebrity endorsements can be effective. Mike Trout, Dwayne Wade, Peyton Manning, Paul McBeth, and Will Schusterick are all guys you probably want as your pitchman. They're accomplished, recognized by their fan bases without being divisive. They're likable and non-polarizing, and maybe a little boring, but very successful.Using "well known" names to endorse products seems to be a fairly sound marketing strategy that many super successful business employ. I don't agree that there is a silent majority of consumers rejecting celebrity endorsements. Most people will probably say that the name on a product doesn't mean anything but I think it brings eyeballs to the product/service. It may not convince a person, but it's definitely a piece of the puzzle.
Say WHAT?!? Nowhere did I say anything against pot. In fact, I'm very strongly PRO-legalization. But when you look like a counter-culture dirtbag, and frequently act like a spoiled child, you're not a good face for a company.:wall: It still confounds me that people get this upset by something that was an integral part of the roots of this sport. Get over it. Its now legal in 3 states and DC.
Insanity/plasma anode/Wave release coming soon?.......*insertdroolfacesmiley*This is insaneView attachment 52433
I spent 10minutes trying to come up with something to this effect. There are plenty of secluded spaces in a lot of courses, use them.Discretion is a nozy citizens worst enemy.
This is insaneView attachment 52433
Which one is the insanity again?
You seem to have misinterpreted my point, either deliberately or because of the length of my post. Celebrity endorsements can be effective. Mike Trout, Dwayne Wade, Peyton Manning, Paul McBeth, and Will Schusterick are all guys you probably want as your pitchman. They're accomplished, recognized by their fan bases without being divisive. They're likable and non-polarizing, and maybe a little boring, but very successful.
Mike Vick, Barry Bonds, Rob Gronkowski, Allen Iverson, Nikko Locasto and Josh Anthon are examples of people who have had success, but who you may not want as the face of your company. Especially when you're a small, growing company like MVP. IMO they'd have been better served to wait a year and see if they could land someone better.
To be more clear: I think a recognizable spokesperson has value for almost any product. However, I don't believe they're the direct reason people buy, and if you have the wrong endorser, things can backfire quickly, and you derive more harm that you would have by simply not having a "famous person" pitch your product."I question your rationale for buying a product if you're buying it because someone else uses it. In fact, I'm a vocal part of what I usually consider a quiet majority: People who don't care what name is on the product if it works for them."
I was mainly addressing this part of your post.
I understand the issue with a questionable spokesperson, but it also reads like you were questioning the entire idea of product endorsement. Two different arguments going on here.
Is celebrity endorsement effective or is there a "silent" majority that do not buy in? You seem to be making both claims.
To be more clear: I think a recognizable spokesperson has value for almost any product. However, I don't believe they're the direct reason people buy, and if you have the wrong endorser, things can backfire quickly, and you derive more harm that you would have by simply not having a "famous person" pitch your product.
As a positive example, Rob Lowe is a better spokesman for satellite tv than some random guy off the street. However, if you asked people why they actually bought the product I believe that most people (certainly the people I know) would not buy it because Rob Lowe has satellite. They're buying because the price is better, or they can't get cable, or they're mad at the cable company, or they want programming that they can't get elsewhere (Sunday Ticket) etc. They may remember that the commercial made them laugh, but that is more important than WHO was in the commercial. I hope the number of hardcore Rob Lowe fans who saw that commercial and ran out and got Direct TV or Dish or whoever it was for can be counted on the fingers of one hand. On the other hand, there are probably an equal or greater number of people who Rob Lowe has upset in some way (an inevitable part of celebrity it seems) who will now not buy from the company he advertises for.
My main point is that if you don't have a bulletproof celeb/pro athlete endorser you're better off doing without. Innova was lucky that Josh Anthon was not a bigger part of their image. Fortunately it was him, not McBeth or Climo who got arrested for felony hit and run, and they were able to quietly drop him. I'm NOT saying Nikko = Anthon, but he isn't squeaky clean, and if I were running a company I wouldn't want to take the risk of negative association.