dixieland_conjunction
If it isn't dixieland, it isn't REAL jazz
I have something that’s bothering me about some of the Cigar retailers.
For those of you that don’t know, I earned a degree in marketing (and economics) and have a job in marketing. Actually, everyone has a job in marketing, but that’s a different rant I won’t bore you with ever. I’m “officially” in marketing because I have a windowed office in the marketing department. :thumbs:
There are several rules and regulations regarding advertising. Some rules are stricter than others, but there are very serious infractions regarding deceptive advertising. This is different from “false advertising,” because no facts are in question. One simply isn’t allowed to say a product is “biggest” or “fastest” or any other quantifiable superlative if it isn’t true. However, it is acceptable to say, “best” or “favorite” because that can neither be proven nor disproved.
There are certain unethical violations of the “code” of advertising. For instance (though this one I disagree with), one cannot advertise “$0.50 each or 3 for $2.00.” People automatically assume that a bulk purchase will render a discount. And, quite frankly, Americans are not skilled in math. Another thin-line topic is the labeling in extremely small print “inspired by” on packages. This is often found in gas station’s perfume selections “inspired by Tommy Girl.”
Anyway there is also a rule concerning deceptive associations. Meaning, it is not legal for a Swatch ad to show a picture of Rolexes and Movados piled around the Swatch. To better illustrate, it would seem inappropriate and an obvious stretch to advertise “..and from the makers of the world-class Corvette comes the newly redesigned Geo Metro!!!!” While, yes, this is true, there is a deceptive and obviously intended correlation between the styling, performance, quality, and prestige of the Corvette and the Metro. This is not legal.
Therefore, I find it irritating and irresponsible that a lot of the mail order catalogs and such will advertise, “from the same factory,” or “from the same master blender” as “Davidoff” or “the 96-rated CAO….” comes La Caca de Nicaragua!!!” So, while it might be true that they’re at best sweeping the floor to come up with the shaving of La Perla’s, etc., to put into the doggie brand being advertised, it doesn’t make it legal.
I’m done.
Cheers,
Dixie
For those of you that don’t know, I earned a degree in marketing (and economics) and have a job in marketing. Actually, everyone has a job in marketing, but that’s a different rant I won’t bore you with ever. I’m “officially” in marketing because I have a windowed office in the marketing department. :thumbs:
There are several rules and regulations regarding advertising. Some rules are stricter than others, but there are very serious infractions regarding deceptive advertising. This is different from “false advertising,” because no facts are in question. One simply isn’t allowed to say a product is “biggest” or “fastest” or any other quantifiable superlative if it isn’t true. However, it is acceptable to say, “best” or “favorite” because that can neither be proven nor disproved.
There are certain unethical violations of the “code” of advertising. For instance (though this one I disagree with), one cannot advertise “$0.50 each or 3 for $2.00.” People automatically assume that a bulk purchase will render a discount. And, quite frankly, Americans are not skilled in math. Another thin-line topic is the labeling in extremely small print “inspired by” on packages. This is often found in gas station’s perfume selections “inspired by Tommy Girl.”
Anyway there is also a rule concerning deceptive associations. Meaning, it is not legal for a Swatch ad to show a picture of Rolexes and Movados piled around the Swatch. To better illustrate, it would seem inappropriate and an obvious stretch to advertise “..and from the makers of the world-class Corvette comes the newly redesigned Geo Metro!!!!” While, yes, this is true, there is a deceptive and obviously intended correlation between the styling, performance, quality, and prestige of the Corvette and the Metro. This is not legal.
Therefore, I find it irritating and irresponsible that a lot of the mail order catalogs and such will advertise, “from the same factory,” or “from the same master blender” as “Davidoff” or “the 96-rated CAO….” comes La Caca de Nicaragua!!!” So, while it might be true that they’re at best sweeping the floor to come up with the shaving of La Perla’s, etc., to put into the doggie brand being advertised, it doesn’t make it legal.
I’m done.
Cheers,
Dixie
:sign: >
