Eggshell Green

Mr Tit Award

Ok, this is a little belated but today’s Mr Tit Award goes to the munt who left his 5 month old by himself. In a car. At 3am. While he visited a strip club.

You munter. Some people don’t deserve to have kids.

See stuff.co.nz’s article Strip club visitor left baby in car.

Mr Tit Award

Ok, after reading about the man suing Lynx after failing to get a girlfriend, I have to say that advertisers and those that control advertisements worldwide get my My Tit Award today.

It might not be the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard today, but it certainly got me thinking about the rubbish that advertisers are able to get away with.

Everyone seems to claim that they’re the best or cheapest or any other superlative that one can think of in relation to their product. However there can only be one number one so how does that work…?

How about those “if you find cheaper we’ll match/beat it” type claims? That implies the store has the best prices, but not always. They only mean that if you can be arsed going somewhere else, then coming back again with proof that the other place has a better price, then they’ll match it, or if you’re lucky they’ll beat it by a small fraction which in most cases wouldn’t be worth the petrol and effort it took for you to return. Yet they are allowed to make these claims to consumers who would assume they’re getting the best deal – is that not deceptive? How much of an advertisement can we believe nowadays?

There is a certain assumption that advertisements are not to be taken seriously if it’s obvious that their claims are just for effect. I suppose Lynx relies on this defence as you shouldn’t expect women to flock to any man just because he’s wearing Lynx. But if you take that imagery away from their ads then you’re effectively left with nothing. Come to think of it, most ads are like this.

Take away the claims that are only for effect, and most products would be seen as “same-same but different”. It’s the fact that most things are made “equal but some are more equal than others” – depending on how much they can trash-talk their products I suppose.

Finally some honest advertising

Tags: media

Mr Tit Award – iSnack 2.0

So, what stupid Marketing manager decided to go with the name iSnack 2.0 for the new Vegemite variant?! (I only assume it’s a Marketing manager because I’ve had my share of stupid ones.)

Vegemite iSnack 2.0 fails

I think iSnack 2.0 is an utterly silly name for a food product! For one, it’s not even a snack, it’s a spread. And maybe the ‘versioning’ number is relevant, but that’s going to cause confusion for those less tech-savvy (like the average mum that does the grocery shopping) – is it “two point zero”, “two dot oh”, “just two”, “why is there a number in the name again?”…

iSnack 2.0 would be a suitable name for a personal vending machine – like  a robot that could follow you around and dispense snacks when you wanted. Not really something I’d associate with a jar of salty spread that’s apparently got a more creamy texture to it than the classic Vegemite. I haven’t tried it yet, but the name is so lame that I am a little hesitant to buy it.

As one critic, Nick Foley of branding agency Landor Associates puts it They are taking the ‘i’ that is associated with the iPod and 2.0, which is a term for the web. So what does … that have to do with a food product?. Here here! (Although I don’t agree with the part 2.0, which is a term for the web, because it’s an example of a version numbering system that applies to software in general.)

In the article Cheesy name a big turnoff on stuff.co.nz, it is reported that

A spokesman, Simon Talbot, admitted it was polarising consumers but said the negativity was confined mainly to older consumers.

I guess being in your late 20s puts me in the “older consumer” bracket, or maybe I’m one of the few younger ones that don’t like this name. Regardless of age, who wants to say “Can you get a jar of iSnack 2.0?” Not only is it a mouthful but you feel like a bit of a dork saying it out loud.

Kraft, if you want to be original, then be original. Don’t leverage off something popular in another completely different product line with the defence that it’s appealing to that particular age group. If you want to be like that, then why not call it Facemite (hehe), or Twittermite, or Viimite? Or how about  Newversionofthesatlyspreadthingthatkidslike-mite?? At least that’s original and doesn’t confuse a food product with an electronic device.

Congratulations iSnack 2.0 on winning my Mr Tit Award today.

Mr Tit Award

Today’s Mr Tit Award goes to the family who is now mega-rich.

I’m only giving this award to the women who won the Big Wednesday jackpot last night because of the ridiculous amount of money they now have – $36.1million! And not only that, they also won second division which was $696,795!

Bitches. I am seriously jealous.

But nah, good on them. My only consolation is that they have to split it four ways – bahahahah, shame.

Still jealous.

Tags: gambling