latest issue- gcpro ad

drewbass · Post by **drewbass** » Fri May 19, 2006 12:18 pm

omg. they did it again. pg 63 they are talking about this combing technique again.
why do they allow this? does anyone feel the need to tell them?
drew

drewbass · Post by **drewbass** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:05 pm

again pg. 67. no one feels compelled to tell these people?
drew

John Jeffers · Post by **John Jeffers** » Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:49 pm

Let it go, man. They're giving TapeOp money, which is a good thing.

drewbass · Post by **drewbass** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:13 am

i don't think the money is the bottom line. it seems contradictory to the point of the article on pg 98.

John Jeffers · Post by **John Jeffers** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:27 am

OK, I'll bite. What's the point of the article on p. 98? I don't have my copy here at work, so I can't look for myself.

drewbass · Post by **drewbass** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:04 pm

cool john. it's larry's article addressing proper archiving and labeling. i gleaned that he would like a higher level of professionalism.
devil's advocate:
-if we submit a client's master for replication and there is a spelling error on it that shows up on 1000 units- it doesn't matter because the client gave us money?
- is one spelling error acceptable as long as tapeop is getting paid? is two typos per issue acceptable?
- is it ethical to accept money from a client repeatedly and not simply tell them the copy has a typo?

i have been happily purchasing tapeop for years. this is just constructive feedback that's been ignored. i don't love the mag any less. but there might be other advertisers that find this unprofessional.
drew

auralman · Post by **auralman** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:29 pm

I loove to comb to things together.

Post by **TapeOpLarry** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:59 pm

It's their ad, they submit it to us. We have told them it's flawed. Seems odd to me, I guess it just gets overlooked.

drewbass · Post by **drewbass** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:36 pm

thanks. that having been said (by larry) i feel bad for them. trying to attract buyers within that cash bracket, but ignoring something so small, simple and easy to resolve yet so huge.
goes back to my original locked post about attention to detail. i buy a lot if stuff, it will never be from them.
as john recommends, i officially let this go.
drew

;ivlunsdystf · Post by **;ivlunsdystf** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:05 am

Maybe there's a saboteur within the gc marketing dept.

cgarges · Post by **cgarges** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:17 am

drewbass wrote:ignoring something so small, simple and easy to resolve yet so huge.

Sounds just like corporate procedure to me.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

syrupcore · Post by **syrupcore** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 5:22 pm

drewbass wrote: i buy a lot if stuff,

really, it can happen to any of us.

John Jeffers · Post by **John Jeffers** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 6:41 pm

syrupcore wrote:
drewbass wrote: i buy a lot if stuff,
really, it can happen to any of us.

But I bet he'd catch it on second printing.

syrupcore · Post by **syrupcore** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 8:36 pm

of course, I was just teasing. he also likely doesn't have a team of 'professionals' looking at it before it ever leaves the building. it's pretty silly. it must have hit the copy writer, graphic designer and marketing director before it got 'approved'. I'd say it speaks volumes...about something.

John Jeffers · Post by **John Jeffers** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 8:53 pm

syrupcore wrote:of course, I was just teasing.

Oh yeah, me too. I forget my little smiley faces sometimes. So here's a few extra for the next time I forget:

Message Board

latest issue- gcpro ad

latest issue- gcpro ad

Who is online