Urlacher Fined $100,000

[big dog cowboy]

and you live up my arse

how's it smell?

Good Lord Summer take it easy. You don't like the guys response and that's your response? Like a wise man around here says, embrace the hate. OK now that is funny and irony at it's best.

 

[Hostile]

"it's" is also the contraction for "it has"

"it has already got too much air as it is"



I had 2 subjects actually, diction, and then your bulbous head, which my hot air comment was following



it's a message board Hos

My head would be the direct object. Bulbous is an adjective. The clause is still about the subject.

I know it's a message board. Long before you were aware of that. I helped build the dang thing. If that's all it is to you, don't post here.

 

[wileedog]

not really, Gatorade doesn't need the NFL, just like Nike doesn't need the NFL, they're still going to be successful since they are a household, brand name

They are a successful, household brand name because of their deals with the NFL and other sports leagues.

If the NFL and other leagues kicked out Gatorade and promoted Poweraid (or whatever), Gatorade would be done as a national brand within 5 years. Without that its just a pretty crappy tasting totally artificial fruit juice.

 

[Bleu Star]

Diction is your subject. You follow it with a dependent clause that is wrongly following a comma instead of a semi colon. That dependent clause contains the word,"it's" which means "it is." Thus...

"it is already got too much hot air as it is"

Yes, your "diction" is already impressive.[/sarcasm off]

Back to the point of it being a dependent clause. Dependant upon what? The subject, which is your "diction." So, the clause is about "hot air." What has this "hot air?" The subject, which is your "diction."

You then fail to close the clause and add an independent thought or sentence. "Information overload is not good for you."

I love irony.

I can always count on this place for a good laugh 24/7.

 

[Kilyin]

Oh, and regarding the main topic...

Most people probably didn't even notice Urlacher's hat. The REAL marketing and advertising is going to come from the publicized fine that he just incurred, since it specifically mentions the brand name. Way to go, Commish.

 

[Bleu Star]

Oh, and regarding the main topic...

Most people probably didn't even notice Urlacher's hat. The REAL marketing and advertising is going to come from the publicized fine that he just incurred, since it specifically mentions the brand name. Way to go, Commish.

I'm getting me some vitamin water on the way to work in the morning!

 

[Bob Sacamano]

My head would be the direct object. Bulbous is an adjective. The clause is still about the subject.

I know it's a message board. Long before you were aware of that. I helped build the dang thing. If that's all it is to you, don't post here.

Ha! My diction would make your bulbous head explode. Your head has got too much hot air as it is. Information over-load would not be good for you.

 

[bbgun]

"it's" is also the contraction for "it has"

"it has already got too much air as it is"

And any English teacher worth his or her salt would simplify it thusly:

"it already has too much air" or

"it has too much air as it is"

End of lesson.

 

[Hostile]

Ha! My diction would make your bulbous head explode. Your head has got too much hot air as it is. Information over-load would not be good for you.

Much better.

Class dismissed. I can't help you with why people market their products even though they are highly successful companies. I do think if you stop and think about it you'll easily figure it out.

If not, whoosh.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

They are a successful, household brand name because of their deals with the NFL and other sports leagues.

If the NFL and other leagues kicked out Gatorade and promoted Poweraid (or whatever), Gatorade would be done as a national brand within 5 years. Without that its just a pretty crappy tasting totally artificial fruit juice.

I was just doing a little research and this is a tid-bit I found...

In 1983, the Quaker Oats Co. purchased Stokely-Van Camp and, as UF marketing Professor Richard Lutz describes it, “launched Gatorade from a sleepy little brand into superstardom.”
Drawing on its vast marketing resources and utilizing the talents of arguably the world’s most famous athlete — Michael Jordan — Quaker Oats was able to secure more than 80 percent of the sports beverage market for Gatorade. Since 1983, Gatorade has enjoyed an unprecedented 20 percent annual sales growth rate, from about $100 million in 1983 to more than $2.2 billion in 2001. Pepsico purchased Quaker Oats in 2001, a move beverage industry analysts predict will eventually lead to an even greater share of the market for Gatorade.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Much better.

Class dismissed. I can't help you with why people market their products even though they are highly successful companies. I do think if you stop and think about it you'll easily figure it out.

If not, whoosh.

I'm just saying that Gatorade has been doing well for awhile now, heck, they used Michael Jordan alone to boost marketability, and now they are under Pepsico, and you know the vast marketing rescources they have, and plus there's Gatorade now being an entity, losing the NFL would put a dent in sales, for sure, but it wouldn't destroy anyone's livelihood over there

and I know I could put some periods in there, but this is a Internet forum, thus you don't have to

 

[Bob Sacamano]

And any English teacher worth his or her salt would simplify it thusly:

"it already has too much air" or

"it has too much air as it is"

End of lesson.

thanks for the lesson?

 

[Hostile]

I'm just saying that Gatorade has been doing well for awhile now, heck, they used Michael Jordan alone to boost marketability, and now they are under Pepsico, and you know the vast marketing rescources they have, and plus there's Gatorade now being an entity, losing the NFL would put a dent in sales, for sure, but it wouldn't destroy anyone's livelihood over there

Let me paint a scenario for you BS, then I want you to do the very simple math.

Jerry Jones is building a new stadium for the Cowboys. Economic and marketing advisors are suggesting it will be one of the largest (if not the largest) advertising fee ever paid for a naming right.

A company who could afford to do that is obviously hugely successful already. They aren't looking to "get their name out there." Their name is already out there.

By your logic in this thread they don't need to. Then why do it? That is critical. Why did Gatorade make that deal? Why would the company that pays that fee make that deal?

The answer to that should be very obvious to you. If it isn't, raise your hand.

Now, let's continue the discussion. If you work for the company that pays that fee for that right then the success of your company affects your bottom line. If this isn't readily obvious to you then you are either too young to collect a paycheck or lost.

The better your company does, the better your chances of financial gain if you do your job well. That is called "livelihood." You questioned this concept. I don't see how. That is why I said "whoosh."

If you pay a large sum for a naming or marketing right then a breach of that right is a violation to you. In other words, your millions spent is not being protected.

Now, do the math.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Let me paint a scenario for you BS, then I want you to do the very simple math.

Jerry Jones is building a new stadium for the Cowboys. Economic and marketing advisors are suggesting it will be one of the largest (if not the largest) advertising fee ever paid for a naming right.

A company who could afford to do that is obviously hugely successful already. They aren't looking to "get their name out there." Their name is already out there.

they're doing it to increase sales, I know all that, any business is all about making money, and then making more money, simple business economics

By your logic in this thread they don't need to. Then why do it? That is critical. Why did Gatorade make that deal? Why would the company that pays that fee make that deal?

that is not my logic Hos, my logic is that Gatorade doesn't necessarily need the NFL to market themselves, they only do it because the NFL is the hottest thing going on right now, and is a way to increase sales

If you work for the company that pays that fee for that right then the success of your company affects your bottom line. If this isn't readily obvious to you then you are either too young to collect a paycheck or lost.

Gatorade can lose the NFL, and latch on to the NBA, since you have to pay whoever you're trying to market off of, like Gatorade has to pay the NFL $60 mil to be featured, and Gatorade is apart of a Fortune 500 company w/ a multitude of marketing tools, resources, and money

they might not make as much money, but they won't be hurting

The better your company does, the better your chances of financial gain if you do your job well. That is called "livelihood." You questioned this concept. I don't see how. That is why I said "whoosh."

the only thing I'm questioning is the idea that the Gatorade employee's livelihoods are staked on the NFL, they aren't

 

[Hostile]

Whoosh.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Whoosh.

Gatorade will live

 

[Hostile]

Gatorade will live

That isn't the point and never was. In fact it isn't even in the same vicinity. They spend millions for a right that someone else tries to get for free.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

That isn't the point and never was. In fact it isn't even in the same vicinity. They spend millions for a right that someone else tries to get for free.

yeah, what was that part about Gatorade and livelihood? and that last part makes no sense, since the NFL won't give anyone a right to market themselves w/o them having to pay for that right

btw, you're missing the point that in order to increase sales, you have to get your name out there, they both go hand in hand, that's why there's such a thing called advertising, and which Gatorade pays the NFL in order to do it w/ the NFL brand behind them

 

[Kilyin]

In one ear and out the other.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

btw, this argument brings up a great point

the reason the NFL is being so harsh on Urlacher is probably because Gatorade gave the NFL an earful about it, afterall, 60mil is alot of money to be paying them to be the only drink sponsor of the NFL, yet one of their players is advertising for someone else, they probably see that as a major infringement