Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!convex!swarren
From: swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Commodore & Advertizing
Message-ID: <100552@convex.convex.com>
Date: 13 Mar 90 15:27:22 GMT
References: <13629@baldrick.udel.EDU>
Sender: news@convex.com
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation; Richardson, TX
Lines: 46

In article <13629@baldrick.udel.EDU> BARRETT@owl.ecil.iastate.edu (Marc Barrett) writes:
>
>   I guess I am going to have to post this message again.  I
>posted it once, but the message did not get across.  After you
>have read this message, please feel free to frame away to your
>heart's content.

Oh, please, this is so arrogant.  Do you really think you are the
only person with a brain reading this news group?

>   Commodore does not spend enough on advertizing.  This has
>been clearly established.  The general oppinion is that Commodore
>cannot afford to advertize.  This is totally wrong.  If Commodore
>cannot afford to advertize, Commodore cannot afford to be in
>business.  Period.

I have no idea why Commodore doesn't advertise more, and I don't
think you do either.  I agree that all businesses need to advertise.
However I think you are arguing from a position of little or no
knowledge.  I think that if you were sitting in the chair where
that executive is sitting, and had all the knowledge and constraints
that he has, you might not make the same decision, but you would
certainly be a lot less critical.

>   Take a case study of the Gilette company.  Overall, this company is
>like Commodore, getting most of it's revenues overseas.  Gilette takes
>in less than 1/5 of the total word-wide revenues that Commodore takes
                             [...]
Gillette makes razor blades and related products.  These are products
that change little over a period of time, and differ little from
manufacturer to manufacturer.  The computer market, or any high-tech
market for that matter, is such a totally different world that trying
to draw any conclusions from this kind of comparison is ludicrous.
                             [...]
>   Like I said, go ahead and turn your flamers to FULL!!  Try your
>best to disprove all this, I am waiting.  The theory is sound, and
>anyone who thinks not shows that they know absolutely nothing about
>business.

Marc, why don't you tone it down a bit?  If you are such a business
whiz, why aren't you running a multinational corporation by now?

--
--Steve
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
	  {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM