<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Online advertising and the New Consumer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jon</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878/comment-page-1#comment-754287</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:25:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878#comment-754287</guid>
		<description>Actually, good advertising can be fun, and effective. I was born in London and I&#039;ll never forget the old British Heineken beer (the beer which reaches parts other beers can&#039;t) ads featuring Victor Borge. 

There are some clever ads here: http://uaddit.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=642

A little humor goes a long way but Google, et al, prefer sneak attacks, or the sledge-hammer approach.

Cheers!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, good advertising can be fun, and effective. I was born in London and I&#8217;ll never forget the old British Heineken beer (the beer which reaches parts other beers can&#8217;t) ads featuring Victor Borge. </p>
<p>There are some clever ads here: <a href="http://uaddit.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=642" rel="nofollow">http://uaddit.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=642</a></p>
<p>A little humor goes a long way but Google, et al, prefer sneak attacks, or the sledge-hammer approach.</p>
<p>Cheers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878/comment-page-1#comment-754238</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 22:04:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878#comment-754238</guid>
		<description>The first thing to say is that if people have to toot their own horns through advertising then there is something wrong with the product that it won&#039;t command sales on the basis of it&#039;s own products performance. If it is worth the money and does the job as expected, your neighbor will tell you about it for free. They will also happily tell you what doesn&#039;t work. It costs nothing in the form of advertising dollars to do that. 

Anytime I go into a store to buy, the very first consideration I have when I walk up to the display, is how has this maker bothered me with advertising? If I see one that has, next item. There is a hidden surcharge in each and every product to pay for all that advertising. That extra money doesn&#039;t buy you more product, it doesn&#039;t buy you better materials that work more efficient. It costs you more for the same product than one that doesn&#039;t advertise. Why should I pay for what I see as at best an annoyance and at worse an intrusion into my privacy? 

I hate advertising with a passion. You can&#039;t sell me what I don&#039;t want. Showing me something I am not interested in will not bring me to the store. Showing me something I am interested in will not guarantee a sale. If I recognize the products maker as the one that ate up my time, without my approval, I will pass it by on that basis alone. I do not reward those that tee me off. Get over the idea that advertising works. It has exactly the opposite of the desired effect on me. Makers are spending money to ensure I will not buy their product.

When I see a product at eye level in the store, it&#039;s not the product I want. Those makers paid money for it to set there on that placement, I get nothing for the eye level stare that improves the product. I want a product that works and is reasonable in cost. Not one that has an inflated price or has been diluted to make you use more and get you back in the store for another. If it does not preform as expected I will not purchase a second at any price. 

Targeting me, will not have the desired effect. I will remember while standing in front of the store display who bothered me and it will be reflected in my purchasing habits. I do not pay for those items that the makers do not adhere to my ideals on. Get used to it. You can not force me to pull money out of my wallet, only I can do that. I make decisions before I buy and my dollar is a vote for whom I do or do not believe in. So do I spend my money. As the major labels will continue to find out about over time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The first thing to say is that if people have to toot their own horns through advertising then there is something wrong with the product that it won&#8217;t command sales on the basis of it&#8217;s own products performance. If it is worth the money and does the job as expected, your neighbor will tell you about it for free. They will also happily tell you what doesn&#8217;t work. It costs nothing in the form of advertising dollars to do that. </p>
<p>Anytime I go into a store to buy, the very first consideration I have when I walk up to the display, is how has this maker bothered me with advertising? If I see one that has, next item. There is a hidden surcharge in each and every product to pay for all that advertising. That extra money doesn&#8217;t buy you more product, it doesn&#8217;t buy you better materials that work more efficient. It costs you more for the same product than one that doesn&#8217;t advertise. Why should I pay for what I see as at best an annoyance and at worse an intrusion into my privacy? </p>
<p>I hate advertising with a passion. You can&#8217;t sell me what I don&#8217;t want. Showing me something I am not interested in will not bring me to the store. Showing me something I am interested in will not guarantee a sale. If I recognize the products maker as the one that ate up my time, without my approval, I will pass it by on that basis alone. I do not reward those that tee me off. Get over the idea that advertising works. It has exactly the opposite of the desired effect on me. Makers are spending money to ensure I will not buy their product.</p>
<p>When I see a product at eye level in the store, it&#8217;s not the product I want. Those makers paid money for it to set there on that placement, I get nothing for the eye level stare that improves the product. I want a product that works and is reasonable in cost. Not one that has an inflated price or has been diluted to make you use more and get you back in the store for another. If it does not preform as expected I will not purchase a second at any price. </p>
<p>Targeting me, will not have the desired effect. I will remember while standing in front of the store display who bothered me and it will be reflected in my purchasing habits. I do not pay for those items that the makers do not adhere to my ideals on. Get used to it. You can not force me to pull money out of my wallet, only I can do that. I make decisions before I buy and my dollar is a vote for whom I do or do not believe in. So do I spend my money. As the major labels will continue to find out about over time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonah</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878/comment-page-1#comment-754190</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878#comment-754190</guid>
		<description>If only ONE of them listens then it will have been worth saying!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If only ONE of them listens then it will have been worth saying!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paulus</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878/comment-page-1#comment-753811</link>
		<dc:creator>Paulus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:34:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878#comment-753811</guid>
		<description>Well said. But they will not pay any attention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well said. But they will not pay any attention.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonah</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878/comment-page-1#comment-753245</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 10:13:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16878#comment-753245</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s Patently obvious why Phorm &amp; Nebuad are in trouble, despite all their PR firms &amp; hype!

When asked any type of Question Legal or Technical they seem to have no idea of how to answer the question &amp; no answer as to why anyone should accept such a massive loss of Privacy; plus the total loss of the basic integrity of the Internet Structure!

{FORCED Packet Injection into a TWO WAY private conversation is to be honest an ABOMINATION, which could lead to total control of the Two way  conversation by a THIRD party!}</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s Patently obvious why Phorm &amp; Nebuad are in trouble, despite all their PR firms &amp; hype!</p>
<p>When asked any type of Question Legal or Technical they seem to have no idea of how to answer the question &amp; no answer as to why anyone should accept such a massive loss of Privacy; plus the total loss of the basic integrity of the Internet Structure!</p>
<p>{FORCED Packet Injection into a TWO WAY private conversation is to be honest an ABOMINATION, which could lead to total control of the Two way  conversation by a THIRD party!}</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


