FUCK Smirnoff

[Soundstream]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by stretchandhooker:
I think that these "corporate" events
should be FREE !

Really why are they charging entry fee's?

...

Through various channels I have heard about the massive loss of $ from this event, and I can only really see one reason why !
</font>

Re-read your statements. You first post about how this event should be free and be paid for entirely by the sponsor. Then you mention how you have heard that they lost money. Now if they "lost money" (as you put it) even by charging $25/ticket, think of how much more they would "lose" if they let everyone in for free as you think they should.

Smirnoff does not see this money spent as a "loss". They probably knew all along that ticket sales would not cover the cost of putting on the event. This "loss" is just the cost of doing business. The cost of their advertising for the evening.

Cheers ... Ian

 

[fleaflo]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gizmo:
Moral of the story: Everyone should have made the trek to Montreal to see Danny T at Stereo instead. </font>

Were you there too?

 

[MoFo]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gizmo:
Moral of the story: Everyone should have made the trek to Montreal to see Danny T at Stereo instead.

</font>

I concur. *sigh*

 

[Stormshadow]

As I posted in another thread, Smirnoff wasn't a corporately sponsored event, it was an event thrown by a corporation.
Corporate sponsorship is how XBox funded iDance so they could advertise at the party. Smirnoff Experience was a non-club promoter trying to throw its own party as an excuse for a giant marketing scheme.
That's pretty gross, and I'll never support that.

 

[Gavin the Bass]

Are the dj's any less valid because they're playing for a corporation?
Is it only ok to see dj dan if hes playing for a well-established promotion 'company'?

'Company' is the key word, how much of your money did you throw at destiny/syrous/awol/effective/hullabaloo/milk?

Think of life-force events with thousands of people and how they did that with no corporate sponsorship, but that they had to become a serious corporation to do so...
Think of their budgets and the profit margins they were imagining when throwing events...

 

[Guest]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Stormshadow:
As I posted in another thread, Smirnoff wasn't a corporately sponsored event, it was an event thrown by a corporation.
Corporate sponsorship is how XBox funded iDance so they could advertise at the party. Smirnoff Experience was a non-club promoter trying to throw its own party as an excuse for a giant marketing scheme.
That's pretty gross, and I'll never support that.
</font>

I don't know for sure but I would assume that someone from outside the company(ie: a promoter) would be brought on to organize the actual event for a fee, percentage of the door. They would also do this in each city. But like I said I don't kow for sure, I just know of several events/concerts that worked like this.

 

[ADT]

now that the cops and the city and everyone else have taken their fukin cuts... our scene is dying fast...

we need money more than anything to bring the good artists back...

smirnoff is offering that..

they have a right to market and research..

i didnt mind the advertisements everywhere.. because i didnt spend the whole night staring at them.. i didnt really notice them at all..

if smirnoff wants to keep bringing lineups like that to town they can tatoo their fuking logo on my ass..

its still about the music for some of us..

fuck the politics..

v..abstractdatatype

 

[MoFo]

There's certain things that we as consumers should be able to control or at least, voice our opinions about.

If it's about the music than why was there so many logos? It's not about the music and that's why it was such a bad party.

I mean, there's a difference between ignoring the logos and branding and having a good time anyway (which I did and I'm sure a lot of people did as well) and passive people who let corporations step all over you.

You essentially become a slave.

No one's fucking "logoing my ass" without clearance.

Being in the know is a good thing even if you can't control the world's evils directly.

 

[PosTMOd]

Now this company is getting free publicity in this thread...

I'm not so sure it's true, that aphorism that "there is no such thing as bad publicity"; Naomi Klein would argue probably that their branding method is working, while I would say I don't care, since I don't drink... yet, by even saying something in this thread (albeit without mentioning said company's moronic name), am I being used?

Like cattle, we are being branded with logos, whether we like it or not.

 

[PosTMOd]

Whoa... MoFo and I are having some sort of brain link.

Congrats for not mentioning said company (what was it... Molson?) in your post...

 

[MoFo]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PosTMOd:


Like cattle, we are being branded with logos, whether we like it or not.</font>

What's a branded?

I'm definitely not the radical, innocent one sitting in the corner preaching and pointing my finger at everyone. Even if I was, I'm sure the chances of me sittin' in an IKEA chair with Ralph paint on the wall is quite high. NO ONE is free of corporate culture.

But when the time comes (I'm gonna sound like one of those insane prophetic homeless guys), be ready to take action when the corporations start to control everything from our air to our toilet paper. They already got our water.

And now they're trying to control our precious "underground" electronic scene.

Have a voice and be in the know so that we can sustain our right to have options in the future. I mean, no beer, just vodka? Are they for real?

 

[PosTMOd]

brand:

1. a mark burned on the skin with a hot iron, formerly used to punish and identify criminals, now used on cattle to show ownership, and on sheep so they buy stuff

2. the iron thus used

3. a mark of disgrace; stigma

4. a) an identifying mark or label on the products of a particular company; trademark

b) the kind or make of a commodity "a new
brand of tea" c) a special kind "his brand of nonsense"

 

[graham]

your faces down asses up, that the way how you got Fucking.

 

[MoFo]

^^^

booty house?

 

[MoFo]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by MoFo:
What's a branded?

</font>

I was being sarcastic in a Ralph Wiggums voice. But thanks for the definition anyway.

 

[pr0nstar]

Are you guys still whining.

Holy shit.

pr0nstar

 

[sohaness]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by MoFo:


If it's about the music than why was there so many logos? It's not about the music and that's why it was such a bad party.

</font>

i think what ADT meant was that for some of the people who attended the party, it was about the music - hence, they couldnt give a rats ass who sponsored the event.

its funny, i've been reading this thread, and the review in the review forum, and it seems to me like a lot of people got free passes; yet, they are still complaining that it was sponsored by smirnoff!

shit, smirnoff gave us a wicked lineup AND free drink tickets! be thankful for that.

and as was said about the smirnoff experience many times on this board, if you are so against the idea of smirnoff sponsoring this event, then you shouldn't have gone!

steve.

 

[MoFo]

Kenny, I know you went on a trip but I don't think you mentioned where you went.

Can u please enlighten us?

 

[PosTMOd]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by MoFo:
I was being sarcastic in a Ralph Wiggums voice. But thanks for the definition anyway.</font>

I knew that you were being sarcastic

But, those definitions are funny.

 

[MoFo]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by sohaness:
i think what ADT meant was that for some of the people who attended the party, it was about the music - hence, they couldnt give a rats ass who sponsored the event.

its funny, i've been reading this thread, and the review in the review forum, and it seems to me like a lot of people got free passes; yet, they are still complaining that it was sponsored by smirnoff!

shit, smirnoff gave us a wicked lineup AND free drink tickets! be thankful for that.

and as was said about the smirnoff experience many times on this board, if you are so against the idea of smirnoff sponsoring this event, then you shouldn't have gone!

steve.</font>

Nice one.

 

[Tara]

i agree

 

[D-Monic]

I had a great time at the last one. Why wouldn't I? Finally, a corperate event that supports Breaks AND locals...

But as far as the marketing goes, if you give your phone number out, you're going to get a call. Period. If you don't want a call, don't give out your phone number.

Simple.

Did they deny entrance to people that didn't give their phone number? No.

And, now to throw some gas on the fire...

I'm curious why no one else noticed this:
I notice that Alex never has a bad thing to say about B&H, but has no problem ripping into Smirnoff. You don't think Alex is swayed by the fact that B&H advertises in Tribe and Smirnoff doesn't, do you?


<---- always an instigator

 

[MalGlo]

I think thats an obvious one.....

 

[ADT]

I love smirnoff....

they sent me a $20 gift certificate for answering a bunch of stupid questions... and threw us a wicked party at a great price....

you gave them your phone number and then complained about it when they called....

ha

 

[alexd]

Originally posted by D-Monic
I had a great time at the last one. Why wouldn't I? Finally, a corperate event that supports Breaks AND locals...

But as far as the marketing goes, if you give your phone number out, you're going to get a call. Period. If you don't want a call, don't give out your phone number.

Simple.

Did they deny entrance to people that didn't give their phone number? No.

And, now to throw some gas on the fire...

I'm curious why no one else noticed this:
I notice that Alex never has a bad thing to say about B&H, but has no problem ripping into Smirnoff. You don't think Alex is swayed by the fact that B&H advertises in Tribe and Smirnoff doesn't, do you?


<---- always an instigator

Smirnoff has advertised with us before, repeatedly, and probably will agin in the future. If B&H had a market research company call attendees the next morning I would rip into them too.

Also, B&H seems to be the inovator when it comes to these corporate gigs and Smirnoff the imitator so they are fair game. As well, I noticed that their PR tactics of sending a bottle of vodka to each publication with their event flyer did not give them any editorial (and probably had the opposite effect) - or what they got was negative in the alternative weeklies.

Smirnoff events are clearly run and promoted and planned by brand managers whereas the B&H events are planned by promoters that used to throw their own parties and have long histories in our scene.

That is the difference to me.