The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]


A Back Handed Proposition …
September 25, 2012, 6:15 am
Filed under: Comment

For reasons I don’t think I want to know, I got an email from Andy recently that said this:

“Hello Campbell. What about this for a brand proposition?”

Underneath that heartwarming message, was this:

To be honest, it left me in a bit of a pickle.

Not because Andy sent it to me … nor the fact Andy must have been looking at some weird shit to come across it [no pun intended] … no, what bothered me was whether it was a good proposition or not.

Without doubt, it has a clear point of view that will peak the interest of many, but – and it’s a big but – who would want to go to a website to hook up with ugly women?

Alright, there are a whole host of other, bigger issues than that – but for the sake of focus, let’s just stick with that.

Isn’t a proposition like that basically saying:

1. Your face &/or personality is so horrific that you can’t attract a nice lady by yourself.

2. Your face &/or personality is so horrific that you have to resort to the internet to get laid.

3. You’re such a sexual deviant, you don’t care who you shag as long as you shag?

In other words, if you click on the link, you are basically admitting you are a character with huge flaws – be they physical, mental or sexual.

Or all 3, probably.

And then there’s the issue of the women who sign up to get laid by these monstrosities.

Seriously, who would do that except the mentally ill, the victims of human trafficking or the sexually questionable?

Or – to be fair – the incredibly, brutally honest.

Anyway, without wanting to take this post down the road of ethics, I am utterly perplexed whether this is – as Andy implied – a proposition of unplanned, planning greatness or utterly mental.

Well, obviously it’s mental and also incredibly sad [both in terms of who would do it and why they would have to do it] plus I’m pretty certain the people who would sign up for such a thing probably doesn’t give a toss what anyone thinks of them [though I doubt they shout what they have been up to from the treetops … unless they’re Tommy Lee] … but seriously, what do you think?

Is this …

[A] An utterly clear proposition in terms of who it’s targeting & what they are offering?

or

[B] The sort of madness you’d expect from a Landor/FutureBrand proprietary positioning system … ignoring the fact that this is no way near ambiguous or bland enough for them to have come up with?

You decide. Please.


42 Comments so far
Leave a comment

What’s the point of posting this and not giving us the website?

Comment by Billy Whizz

dont worry billy, i signed you up.

Comment by andy@cynic

I figured you were too busy with all your other lady friends to care Billy. Ahem.

Comment by Rob

I only want to check out the pictures so I can answer your question properly. I have loads of women who want me. All hot.

Comment by Billy Whizz

You forgot to end you sentence with “for 75 years old.”

Comment by DH

youre a fucking evil bastard dave. no wonder i like you.

Comment by andy@cynic

Of course.

And Dave, that is evil genius.

Comment by Rob

Andy sent it to you?

Sure he did Rob. Sure he did.

Comment by DH

i did. campbell isnt that fucking interesting to find that sort of shit himself. he probably reads playboy for the articles. and actually would read the articles.

Comment by andy@cynic

after all, the fucker pays prostitutes to talk to him.

Comment by andy@cynic

You’re both jealous pricks.

Comment by Billy Whizz

my job here is done.

Comment by andy@cynic

Only Andy could make NOT checking out jazzmags or using prostitutes [beyond talking] sound like a bad thing.

And Billy, I’m assuming you meant to put your comment in the box above. I hear losing your eyesight is one of the first signs you’re engaging in too much “self pleasure”. God, I feel sick just typing that.

Comment by Rob

The good news is this is the only blog that would post this sort of thing. The bad news is this is the only blog that would deconstruct every none existent point in mind numbing detail.

Planners.

Comment by DH

and its only good news when i give him the fucking material.

Comment by andy@cynic

the answers fucking “a” campbell. deal with it. besides those wankers with proprietary tools couldnt come up with anything half as attention grabbing as every fucking nestle food ad ever fucking made proves.

Comment by andy@cynic

This post gives me the chance to share one of the best proposition/endlines I’ve ever seen. It was for Razzle magazine – a grotty British porn mag from the 80s. Their slogan was very simple and to the point – ‘Razzle. It makes your cock big.’

Comment by Simon

razzle. a proper jazz mag. i think that might be the mag campbell did his “one for the ladies” hoover ad. but i might be wrong. maybe it was fiesta. higher class readers wives.

Comment by andy@cynic

It was Fiesta. I remember the fallout that occurred afterwards.

Comment by George

That was back during the time when even I wouldn’t hire me. And that’s saying something.

Comment by Rob

back in the day? who the fuck are you kidding. youre just better at hiding your evil these days, thats the only fucking difference.

Comment by andy@cynic

As a Dutchy I can only offer you my expert advice regarding sexuality as a commodity. Economically men are always in demand and there is a scarcity in beautiful women. Whether you pay them diner or arrange a jetset escort, it will cost you a fair amount Less prettier ones cost you less. However, like cars, when nobody buys them you are off worse because you’ll have to pay for the demolition (which in this case would be the equivalent to ugly women of hiring a Gigolo). You better sale the cars at a dump price and lose money on the sale instead of losing all. Ugly women for which there is low demand will therefore naturally offer there sex for free at some point. Therefore, sex as a commodity knows two marketplaces as there will be two parentum optimums. The fist one is after the point at which men consider women to be better looking than average. The second one at 0. Everything between the first and the second one could be the target market considering the ad you posted. That is, all women that are average good looking and less than average looking will at some point offer their sex for free at least once. The closer they are to the average looking woman the less frequent they will do this. The ugliest ones will offer it as much as they please (I consider it will never approach zero and therefore the ugliest woman will never exist).

So I say it has to be A and the benefit is clearly stated, it will cost you no money (which is, considering the economic model only fair).

Comment by Paul

you know when i said i liked you and you should come back on this shithole and comment more? i was wrong.

Comment by andy@cynic

It was that time I felt all warm and fuzzy inside, I keep it close to the heart.

Comment by Paul

pervert.

Comment by andy@cynic

You’ll still be the reason why I read this blog.

Comment by Paul

youre only human.

Comment by andy@cynic

WOW Paul, that’s some comment. Scary …

Comment by Rob

Come on give me a break. The only reason I thought of it is because it is exactly the same problem our econometry teacher proposed to my class in my first year at uni. Including floating variables such as taste and opportunity.

Comment by Paul

You say that, but what about beauty inflation? Most people assume they’re more beautiful than they are, until they look at dating sites and kinda go ‘oh…wait’.

On one hand you overestimate yourself, on the other hand everyone can find the best photo of themselves to make everyone else feel bad. You create a sort of artificial beauty inflation – anyone looking will think these people are more attractive than they are in real life.

Men who look at hot women always go on to say the ‘average’ ones as less attractive – they now have something to contrast with.

And if Andy saw that on a porn site (which is where you’ll find variations of it – old/fat/”ugly” girls, ie the “average” or below it by some people’s standards), then yes – it makes sense. It’s almost saying, “you, the man, are not hot enough to make it on your own so you pay to sleep with the hot ones. But why pay if your goal isn’t to take them out to the movies and meet mum and dad?”

I go for 1+3.

Comment by Andrea

Nice to see fatherhood hasn’t completely changed you Andrew. As for the answer to your question Robert. As you state in your post, I don’t think anyone who responds to those sorts of ad would care in the slightest how others perceive them, at least within their sordid circle. So ‘A’. I feel dirty just responding to this post.

Comment by George

i didnt order a cake of a giant pair of tits. pervert.

Comment by andy@cynic

Sorry George, but he does have a point.

Comment by Rob

But does cock need ugly girls?

Comment by Mr Philosopher

Depends on the cock – both figuratively and literally.

Comment by Rob

Jesus… This is going to take fucking years to read all the comments on this one. At least a fucking month just for Andy’s. I’m too busy for this shit. I have to add to my “World’s biggest collection of Kate Moss and Hitler pictures.” See Ya…
Cheers/George “AdScam” Parker

Comment by adscamgeorge

Trust me George, you’re not missing out on much and Kate Moss is oh-so-much more important … or at least she was when she was young, hot & off the booze.

Comment by Rob

Lord above.
I’ll stick to Youporn

Comment by northern

I believe that’s where he got it from.

Which goes to show youporn holds their viewers attention longer than all the reality TV shows put together. Well, at least for 3 minutes. Ahem.

Comment by Rob

So you’re suggesting Google targeting thinks Andy is so ugly he can only get munters, while I have a fighting chance?

Comment by northern

No, I’m suggesting George & Pete are abusing their position in Happyland Towers.

Comment by Rob

dont fucking judge me by your dirty bastard habits thank you very fucking much. you can judge auntie and pete, just not me.

Comment by andy@cynic




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



%d bloggers like this: