<?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: Silly advertisers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/</link>
	<description>by Jeff Jarvis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:40:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Are ad agencies holding back a flood of ad dollars to the Internet at their clients&#8217; expense? &#171; The Future of News</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365874</link>
		<dc:creator>Are ad agencies holding back a flood of ad dollars to the Internet at their clients&#8217; expense? &#171; The Future of News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Dec 2007 00:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365874</guid>
		<description>[...] when you read in the NY Post and at BuzzMachine that advertisers are paying for more and more network TV spots, at higher and higher rates, because [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] when you read in the NY Post and at BuzzMachine that advertisers are paying for more and more network TV spots, at higher and higher rates, because [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy Hoffman</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365861</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy Hoffman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 17:01:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365861</guid>
		<description>Three simple reasons, in my opinion. Jeff touched on a couple: 1) the symbiotic relationship between ad agencies and media. An 18% increase in TV rates is usually an increase in either revenue or ad budget to the agency. 2) Senior corporate managers still love to see their brands on television. And most senior corporate managers are, at best, uncomfortable with new technologies, or at worst, tech illiterate. 3) The relationship between marketing directors and their agencies. This relationship is often built on business given with one hand while goodies are received by the other. (Remember the Wal-Mart marketing fiasco?) 

I don&#039;t think anything is going to change anytime soon. Which is good news for those marketing folks willing to work a little harder.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Three simple reasons, in my opinion. Jeff touched on a couple: 1) the symbiotic relationship between ad agencies and media. An 18% increase in TV rates is usually an increase in either revenue or ad budget to the agency. 2) Senior corporate managers still love to see their brands on television. And most senior corporate managers are, at best, uncomfortable with new technologies, or at worst, tech illiterate. 3) The relationship between marketing directors and their agencies. This relationship is often built on business given with one hand while goodies are received by the other. (Remember the Wal-Mart marketing fiasco?) </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think anything is going to change anytime soon. Which is good news for those marketing folks willing to work a little harder.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Jarvis</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365860</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Jarvis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 16:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365860</guid>
		<description>Uh, nut, the audience isn&#039;t scarce. In fact, there are more ways than ever to reach them. What&#039;s scarce is the old way and that is the only thing artificailly raising prices: advertisers&#039; stupidity (or rather, agencies&#039; hopes they remain stupid so they can still charge high percentages of high prices).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uh, nut, the audience isn&#8217;t scarce. In fact, there are more ways than ever to reach them. What&#8217;s scarce is the old way and that is the only thing artificailly raising prices: advertisers&#8217; stupidity (or rather, agencies&#8217; hopes they remain stupid so they can still charge high percentages of high prices).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CaptiousNut</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365855</link>
		<dc:creator>CaptiousNut</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 14:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365855</guid>
		<description>Scarce ads are rising for the same reason Manhattan condos are so high - it&#039;s the economy stupid.

TV ad rates have been a function of general economic health more than anything else.  In fact, they have been rising for years amidst shrinking audiences.  It&#039;s got to be near the end though, IMO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scarce ads are rising for the same reason Manhattan condos are so high &#8211; it&#8217;s the economy stupid.</p>
<p>TV ad rates have been a function of general economic health more than anything else.  In fact, they have been rising for years amidst shrinking audiences.  It&#8217;s got to be near the end though, IMO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lucas Grindley</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365832</link>
		<dc:creator>Lucas Grindley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Dec 2007 23:13:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365832</guid>
		<description>One can&#039;t blame TV for raising rates in the face of increased demand. But in the long run, it might hurt them. Any increase in TV ad rates is good for the Web because it increases demand for lower-cost options. Advertisers who would have been slower to consider the Web become more likely to try now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One can&#8217;t blame TV for raising rates in the face of increased demand. But in the long run, it might hurt them. Any increase in TV ad rates is good for the Web because it increases demand for lower-cost options. Advertisers who would have been slower to consider the Web become more likely to try now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: T</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365829</link>
		<dc:creator>T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Dec 2007 22:45:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365829</guid>
		<description>The problem with big companies is that it&#039;s easier to just keep doing things the way they&#039;ve always been done and flying beneath the radar then sticking your neck out by rocking the boat and pointing out a solution that requires actual thinking and change, even if that solution makes perfect sense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with big companies is that it&#8217;s easier to just keep doing things the way they&#8217;ve always been done and flying beneath the radar then sticking your neck out by rocking the boat and pointing out a solution that requires actual thinking and change, even if that solution makes perfect sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kenneth Bunker</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365777</link>
		<dc:creator>Kenneth Bunker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 07:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365777</guid>
		<description>Hey JEFF. Nice Blog, i&#039;m a first time visitor. Surely I&#039;ll be back. 

Merry Christmas</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey JEFF. Nice Blog, i&#8217;m a first time visitor. Surely I&#8217;ll be back. </p>
<p>Merry Christmas</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Jarvis</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365773</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Jarvis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 03:07:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365773</guid>
		<description>thanks. i&#039;m hoping it&#039;s fixed now. rss may be cached still. please do let me know. thanks much.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks. i&#8217;m hoping it&#8217;s fixed now. rss may be cached still. please do let me know. thanks much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve K.</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365772</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve K.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 02:46:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365772</guid>
		<description>yep, Jeff, it showed up in my Google Reader as well -- &quot;cheap cialis&quot; and the like. It&#039;s bad. Better check into that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yep, Jeff, it showed up in my Google Reader as well &#8212; &#8220;cheap cialis&#8221; and the like. It&#8217;s bad. Better check into that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark</title>
		<link>http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365769</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Dec 2007 01:36:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/12/24/silly-advertisers/#comment-365769</guid>
		<description>Jeff, has your blog been hacked? There&#039;s a bunch of spammy links in your code to this post -- they show up in Google reader and you can see them if you use View Source to look at the source code. Invisible in regular browser viewing, though. Weird.

Hope you have a merry Christmas!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff, has your blog been hacked? There&#8217;s a bunch of spammy links in your code to this post &#8212; they show up in Google reader and you can see them if you use View Source to look at the source code. Invisible in regular browser viewing, though. Weird.</p>
<p>Hope you have a merry Christmas!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

