Bad Sales and Marketing Promotions - If You Are Not Going to Do it Right, Don't Do it At All

I see some really bad promotions and marketing all of the time. They make me want to pull my hair out. Spending money on promotions is great, but if you run a company and your folks aren't going to go out and spend the effort, elbow grease, sweat  and time to make the promotions a success, you shouldn't do those promotions... Or you need to find someone who will spend the effort.

I think the biggest mistake of promotions, and you won't find a company executive who disagrees with me, is thinking that throwing money at a promotion will make it good. Even though you won't find a company executive who doesn't agree with me, you'll find one heck of a lot of them who are guilty of doing this very thing or, at the least, allowing it.


I see it all the time.


Frankly speaking, if you are not going to do a promotion right, then don't do it at all. Little things are what really make or break a promotion to potential customers; to me, to you. Far too many company executives look at a promotion purely from their point of view and fail to see it from the other side.


Need proof that little things make a BIG difference? Here's one that everyone has seen: When you see a clock in public and the clock is broken do you think well of that clock makers merchandise? No. No one does. Of course.


How much more basic can you get than that example?

It takes a licking but keeps on ticking

Here's a few other examples that I can give you of promotions I saw recently with my own eyes that were absolute disasters.


I recall a time at a very famous record company when they were preparing the release of the CD of a new artist. The artist management was demanding (as they should) all sorts of promotion and cooperation from the label.


The label promised this and that. The one item I clearly remember was the label boss bragging to the artist's agent that they were going to go all out and print the most in-store flyers they'd printed in years to push this one artist. A few months later, when sales didn't materialize, I was visiting the record label. There I saw, under the desk of the promotions manager, stacks and stacks of unused flyers for that artist stored under his desk. There must have been 50,000 flyers there. This was two months after release.


So they spent a lot of money on the promotion but the people were too lazy to get off their rears and hit the streets and distribute those flyers. Needless to say the promotion was a flop as well as a waste of money.


That was several years ago. Last I heard was that this same guy was still in charge of promotions. Any wonder why their sales do not increase? 


The guy is lazy. That's all there is to it.


Another example that made me want to pull my hair out was a promotion for a famous automobile company. It was a charity banquet at one of the top hotels in Hong Kong. There were famous politicians and movie stars there too. Besides those folks, a lot of movers and shakers in town were also in attendance.

CLICK ON IMAGE FOR LARGER VIEW

Banquet table. Can you pick out the automobile promotion? 

An American automobile company was a co-sponsor for this event. On the banquet tables they put boxed automobile models of their newest car. Guess what? No one knew what was in those boxes because they didn't bother to open one and make the model for display for each table. They left the model cars in the boxes!


Now, that is inexcusable. Any good promotion will allow the potential customer to recognize instantaneously what the service or product is. That the end user has to pick up the box, look at it and think, "What is this?" is just plain embarrassing for the sponsor. How long does it take to recognize a Coca-Cola promotion? One one-hundredth of a second?


On the cluttered tables at the banquet, the cars got lost in the shuffle and few people knew what they were (I took home a dozen to give to my kid and his friends). When I was taking boxes of models, one lady (who sat next to me all night) asked me, "What are those?" I showed her and she exclaimed, "Oh? I want some for my kids too!" and she grabbed a few from the neighboring table... Why not? No one at the neighboring tables took any home. Why should they? They didn't know what they were either. (By the way, including opening of the boxes, it required the average chimpanzee about 30 seconds to assemble one of the models).


Great promotion, eh? These things are sitting on a table right in front of people and no one even knew what they were.


Just before the banquet started, I asked one of the guys from the automobile company to open the boxes so that people would know what the heck they were but he told me that he "didn't have time."


Think about that folks. The guy from the automobile company says he "didn't have time." So what he is saying is that, "I didn't have time to get my butt over here an hour or two early to get the job done right." 


Hell, they could have at least tried to display the cars correctly on some of the tables. But they decided that they didn't have time to do them all so they didn't even start or make an attempt, so they didn't do any! 


The guy is lazy. That's all there is to it.


In spite of what you see going on around you, folks, there are a lot of people who are observant and thinking. In both the examples above, anyone can see that this is incompetence. 


Now be honest with yourselves? How do these examples reflect on the companies that ran these promotions? Good? Bad?


I think the impression is decidedly bad. It is half-a*sed and poor work. It is unacceptable. 

CLICK ON IMAGE FOR LARGER VIEW

Question: What does a model car in a box look like? Answer: A box. 

Think about it: If, say, an automobile company can't even handle a simple promotion at a dinner show, how am I to expect that they will make their cars or run their business? How can I confidently purchase their vehicles? I can't.


The point? If you are going to do a promotion then do it right or don't do it at all. A poorly run promotion is damaging to a company image.


Now why in the world would a company spend money on a promotion that is just going to create a bad image or hurt their brand?

CLICK ON IMAGE FOR LARGER VIEW

This is my rendition but, anyone can see, within one-twenty-fifth of a second that above the black boxes is a model car. It shouldn't be too difficult to figure that this is an automobile promotion.

Radioactive air filters in cars!?

Arnie Gundersen says something really stupid again. Now he claims that there is dangerous radioactive "Hot Particles" in Tokyo car air filters and that this radiation is deadly yet it cannot be detected. This is getting really ridiculous. Seriously, is this old age, dementia or Alzheimer's with this guy?


His most recent idiocy is on Al Jazeera with an article entitled, Fukushima: It's much worse than you think.


Radioactive air filters from cars in Fukushima prefecture and Tokyo are now common, and Gundersen says his sources are finding radioactive air filters in the greater Seattle area of the US as well.


No. Gundersen, besides normal levels, there no "common" radiation finding in car filters in Tokyo. Fukushima is not much worse than we think. Your wild imagination and fast progressing senility is much worse than we, or even you, think. 

BRAZILIAN TROPICAL ORCHESTRA - FOOL ON THE HILL

"Radioactive air filters from cars in Fukushima prefecture and Tokyo are now common"!? That's just total and complete bullsh*t. Jeez Louise, Gundersen, the ground around us emits natural radiation all the time! So does the sun! I'm sure that all cars emit some levels of radiation. It is a course of common sense. 


Are these levels of radiation dangerous or something to be concerned about? Not according to the University of Washington. But facts haven't stopped Gundersen yet from auditioning for the lead role in the new Chicken Little movie...


Well, I think, Arnie, you are failing miserably. If anything, the more you talk, the dumber you look. The only ones who look stupider are the mass and alternative media who blindly pass on your nonsense without taking a few minutes to research (or even think about for a moment) what you say. 


Just to show you what a crock of sh*t this idiocy Gundersen is saying is, I just did a Japanese language Google search looking for "車のエアフィルター　放射能." (In English this is "Automobile air filter + radiation"). There are zero results for this search excepting articles that refer to Gundersen as a source. Get that? Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Gundersen, you are caught red-handed! You are making up sh*t again.


Here's a screen capture of all results:

Are there any readers and Gundersen fanatics who do not believe me? Here's a shortened URL to the Google search: http://bit.ly/lUUYH0. I hope that, by now, dear reader knows how to use Google Translation.


The Al Jazeera article continues with more fluff about dangers:

According to Gundersen, the exposed reactors and fuel cores are continuing to release microns of caesium, strontium, and plutonium isotopes. The hot particles on them can eventually lead to cancer.

"We are discovering hot particles everywhere in Japan, even in Tokyo," he said. "Scientists are finding these everywhere. Over the last 90 days these hot particles have continued to fall and are being deposited in high concentrations. A lot of people are picking these up in car engine air filters."


The hot particles on them can eventually lead to cancer.


"These get stuck in your lungs or GI tract, and they are a constant irritant," he explained, "One cigarette doesn't get you, but over time they do. These [hot particles] can cause cancer, but you can't measure them with a Geiger counter. 


Wait a minute, Grandpa! You just put your foot in your mouth again... What's this? You are quoted as saying at least three stupid things in one breath here: 


In one part you say about "Hot particles" that:


"Scientists are finding these everywhere."


Yet, you do not name these scientists. All the while you say that these "Hot Particles" are dangerous you also claim: 


"...you can't measure them (hot particles) with a Geiger counter."


Riiiiiiight. They are radioactive and dangerous but we can't measure them witha Geiger counter!? Earth to Gundersen! Earth to Gundersen! According to Wikipedia about "Hot Particles", under the heading "Attributes" it clearly states:


Hot particles can be identified by a Geiger counter, or by autoradiography. Their age and origin can be determined by their isotopic signature.


In a previous article, Gundersen makes another unsubstantiated claim. It is an audio interview with him. Here's a snippet from an interview with another fool named Chris Martenson who needs a convenient slap right up side the head too:


“Arnie Gundersen said he received 7 used auto air filters that came from Tokyo, probably from a repair shop. Five of them had no traces of radiation, but two of them were heavily irradiated. He said the fallout will be patchy..."


OK. I'm game, Arnie, old boy. Just how did you detect these Hot Particles in air filters "from Tokyo" (by the way, do you have a receipt and proof they are from Tokyo?) when you claim that the radiation, which is normally detected with a Geiger counter, is not detectable with a Geiger counter? Are you using some sort of sodium iodide crystal device or Ion chamber? Or is it just alchemy or some sort of magic potion? 


If your results would stand up to scrutiny, then why don't you make these results public (a Youtube video would be great - you seem to like being on Youtube) and also why can't you make these claims available for confirmation by other scientists (and no, I don't mean the "scientists" that you always refer to but never name) using the Scientific Method? 


Or do we all have to go and take your word for it?... The word of a guy who makes claims about all sorts of things using "anecdotal evidence" mysterious "sources" and other claims as proof?


It gets even more silly... Gundersen goes on to compare the dangers of "Hot Particles" in car filters to to the dangers of... are you ready for it?... Cigarette smoking!!! Laughable!


"One cigarette doesn't get you, but over time they do."


So, what you are saying Gundersen is that, besides not being able to keep your  story straight, with all the pollutants in our foods, water, industrial contaminants in the air and chemicals in our over processed foods, you think that this most recent news from your "sources" (Guffaw!) is cause enough for you to scare people and cause hysteria because the level of radiation is comparable to smoking cigarettes over a long time? 

This guy looks well over 75, maybe 80. Is anyone surprised when 

an over 75-year-old guy says some pretty wild stuff?

Oh please! Someone make sure Grandpa Gundersen gets his rest and makes sure he properly takes his meds everyday and on time. This guy is losing it quickly.


Grandpa, why don't you warn people about heart disease or high blood pressure? That kills tens of thousands more times the numbers of people annually than cigarette smoking does. From the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention here's the numbers for deaths of the leading causes of deaths (2007):

• Heart disease: 616,067
• Cancer: 562,875
• Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 135,952
• Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 127,924
• Accidents (unintentional injuries): 123,706

From the same site, in 1990, deaths attributed to smoking were, get this... 5,619! That's the most recent information I could find. Sales of cigarettes and tobacco products keep declining every year so I imagine that they've found it a waste of money to keep track of this anymore.


But Gundersen wants to compare the big bad "Hot Particles" to the evils of smoking when you have over a 200,000% higher chance of dying from heart disease or cancers (food preservatives, chemicals, too much salt, and car accidents). I also showed the relative dangers of this in a previous post entitled: For Every One Death Due to Nuclear Power, 4,000 Die Due to Coal in which the title of the post speaks for itself.


Gee, Arnie, why don't you do something more useful with your 15 minutes of fame and urge people to slow down and drive more safely? That would save a hell of a lot more lives than this nonsense you keep saying... 


Oh, but then again, I forgot. You work in the nuclear industry advising people on how to decommission nuke plants and not as an adviser to automobile safety organizations. But, nah! You don't have any conflicts of interest.


You are a REAL scientist!


Gundersen is a joke. I've already blasted Arnie for saying stupid stuff before. In Metallic Tastes in Mouths Prove Nuclear Disaster in Japan! Or Does it? I wrote:

Once again, Arnie Gundersen and a bunch of illogical panic stricken fools say something stupid about Fukushima and radiation. 

They are now saying that there is "anecdotal evidence" of people having a metallic taste in their mouths and, from this, they draw the wild conclusion that this means there is an uncontrollable nuclear chain reaction going on at Fukushima. This nonsense has no basis in science, reality, nor does it have any evidence backing it up. It is fantasy.. 


"Anecdotal eveidence!" Isn't that hilarious? I already showed you how he has motivation for saying this and a possible conflict of interest (making him no more credible than, say, George Bush)... And speaking of "air" and "filters" I ripped him a new air-hole when he claimed that "the winds have now shifted and are blowing from Fukushima to Tokyo." 


This most recent rubbish is just plain embarrassing. I guess the mass media is now latching onto Gundersen because they realize (as I demonstrated) that their last "expert" Michio Kaku was definitely a few CDs short of a boxed set. But, they'll soon see that Gundersen isn't any better.


I suspect, one day soon, people are going to realize that, when it comes to Gundersen, we are talking about a senior citizen here who seems to be losing his grip on reality. Anyone who has a father or mother over 75 or so, may have had  this experience. 

But I guess I shouldn't be too hard on the old guy. I mean, think about it, they say that radiation causes all sorts of damage to the body and to the human brain. There's no argument there. Gundersen also claims that he worked in the nuclear industry for over 38 years (something that has been proven as a gross exaggeration along with his claims of many of his other "qualifications" here)... If anything, I suppose that means that the nonsense he says is the best proof so far that radiation is damaging to humans. 


OK. Let's say that he did work at nuke plants for 38 years... That and Gundersen repeatedly spewing out unconfirmed, hysterical nonsense is a great argument that radiation does cause brain damage.

Japan Still Makes the Best Cars in the World

The verdict is in! Japan still makes the best cars in the world! Japan! Cars! Quality!

GARY NUMAN - CARS

In spite of all the problems reported in the main stream US-based mass media with Japanese cars being recalled and other alleged problems with accelerators and mechanical parts, Consumer Reports shows that Japanese cars, using a 10-year scale measuring reliability, beat out all the competition.


Well, I thought Japan still meant "quality." I'm glad to see my suspicions confirmed. 


Before anyone wants to jump on me about accelerator problems in Toyotas, let me show you evidence that this was not true at all and a US Transportation Department 10-month study showed that there were no problems at all with electronics or mechanical parts in Toyota's. It was all media hype.

My 2004 Toyota. Driven everyday for the last 7

years and never been in the shop for repairs even once.

Well, the alleged problems were media hype. The results finding no problems with Toyota's was barely reported in the main stream mass media. Associated Press carried the story, but many major news outlets didn't. The AP reported:


The Obama administration's investigation into Toyota safety problems found no electronic flaws to account for reports of sudden, unintentional acceleration and other safety problems.


Anyway, reports of alleged problems are just that: supposed; accused but not proven. 


The test of time is the best judge, in my opinion, and the results of this 10-year survey are in: Toyota and Honda are the best cars made in the world.


Yahoo! Autos reports:

The Best of the best list guides you to the 2001 to 2010 models that scored well in our road tests when new and have been consistently reliable over time. Each has achieved multiple years of above-average used-car verdicts (available to subscribers), indicating that owners have had relatively few problems.

Models built by Toyota and Honda dominate the list once again, and many of the best used vehicles are from Asian manufacturers. But high-quality vehicles are available from domestic and European automakers as well.

The Worst of the worst list shows models that have had multiple years of below-average reliability in our survey. It is dominated by vehicles from domestic and European manufacturers, primarily General Motors, which had 16 of the 29 models listed.

Actually, it doesn't surprise me that there are no Japanese cars on the Worst of the worst list. I am, though, a bit surprised that there are so many lousy GM cars (Lousy? GM? Oh, but I repeat myself). And I am quite surprised to see that there are no Fords on the list.

I suppose the reason there are no Fords could be because they don't live past three years old. As they say, "F-O-R-D stands for 'Found on the roadside, dead."

Congratulations to Japan for still leading the world in building quality cars.

The proof is in the pudding. Japan may be the #3 world economy in 2010, but we're still #1, by far, for quality assurance and superior automobile manufacturing.

Thanks to Philip Oshiro