Advertising Archons

February 12 25 Comments Category: Advertising

Small and big

Duration : 0:4:58


[youtube yCp0ZFYLeAE]

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Facebook comments:

25 Responses

Write a comment
  1. In Korea Pepsi is …
    In Korea Pepsi is cheaper then Coke, there is actually a 35 cent difference (which is 35% price difference) Coke is more established in Korea, thus the price difference (assuming your logic)

    underdog3 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  2. I didn’t say it was …
    I didn’t say it was evil, I just said it results in less capital investment that creates real wealth.

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  3. advertising is not …
    advertising is not evil…

    LibertineMachine 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  4. Crypto-WN …
    Crypto-WN Crypto-Statist AHAHAHAH! Everything sounds way more serious and ominous when you add “Crypto” to it! I have to start using that more often.

    My friend Aaron is a Crypto-Rimjobist!

    UcanbeGOD 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  5. I hate myself for …
    I hate myself for it but I loooove that Pepsi commercial, yes I admit it, I looove that commercial. No matter how much I deny it or how dirty I feel for it, I cannot get enough of that ty blonde dancing!

    UcanbeGOD 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  6. For sure. I do that …
    For sure. I do that with a lot of things if I can. The quality is usually the same. There are SOME instances where having a large company provide the product is advantageous. For example I wouldn’t tell my grandparents to buy computer parts and then emble the machine themselves, because DELL will do all that for them and provide them with tech support, even if it is a lot more expensive.

    DotPaulish 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  7. I named my sons …
    I named my sons Archon and Archon II in the hopes that they will live up to their names and perpetuate the Dynasty that I am creating. Please don’t let to many people know what cryptically lies beneith the sacred word. I could possibly end up having to rename my sons and drinking walmart brand soda. Think before you act and remember every action has a reaction.

    thetinfoilhatter 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  8. Nope. That’s why I …
    Nope. That’s why I find this thorny. All I can really say is “buy generic”.

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  9. Did you not …
    Did you not understand what I meant by the word as I was using it?

    Yes, I am using the word in a different sense. You can do a google search for archon and find definitions ranging from one of the nine chief magistrates in ancient athens to just ruler. An archon of the mind, a ruler of the mind.

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  10. Smaller buisnesses …
    Smaller buisnesses might need advertising to get off the ground. To get an initial customer base. It is kinda annoying to see large corperations like coca-cola advertise when they are one of the most recognized name brands out there. It makes me wonder how much I would be paying if they weren’t trying to sell me something I was already going to buy. Of course these companies don’t really have the most efficient allocation of resources for society in mind when they operate, but that is OK IMO.

    DotPaulish 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  11. are you acquiring …
    are you acquiring the word archon and redefining it?

    premitive1 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  12. I play with fire …
    I play with fire like this all the time, which is why a lot of people think I’m a crypto-statist of some sort.

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  13. I’ve been thinking …
    I’ve been thinking lately about how since corporations like Pepsi steal from the general public indirectly through subsidies and other government privileges, I’m not really seeing any problem in stealing from big corporations.

    Rainzkul 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  14. Yup.
    Yup.

    MORECOWB3LL 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  15. The first world war …
    The first world war broke out after public education.

    Click! Something to that!

    On a related note, yesturday in class, I openly said that taxes were extortion and explained that, in the end, people would be shot for not paying taxes, a lightbulb went off in my professor’s head. When I said, “Try it and see what happens.” She nodded and said “Ah!”

    AnethSvartalf 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  16. Thanks
    Thanks

    seneca4295 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  17. * And I ume you …
    * And I ume you understand that the “rounds of spending” caused by Britney Spears spending her paycheck doesn’t generate wealth.

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  18. Pepsi does profit …
    Pepsi does profit on the ad. Some of the additional profits will be put into capital.

    But this is at the expense of other things consumers would have bought, and those industries now have less profit. It’s a zero sum game, and Pepsi increased how much it invests in capital by less than what it caused others to decrease b/c it paid for the ad. It also mutated the capital investments, and now there is too much soda capital, unless Pepsi can stimulate demand even further.

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  19. Apparently I beat …
    Apparently I beat you to the punch.

    Sepero1 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  20. The burden is on …
    The burden is on you to show how advertising increases capital. It’s a simple logical step: would that Britney Spears ad exist if not for the prospect of raising the eq. price of pepsi? Of course not. Outside of the context of achieving archon status for Pepsi, that ad is a supply that satisfies no demand: consumers wouldn’t have paid for the ad just to see it.

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  21. By default, Pepsi …
    By default, Pepsi must have a return -greater- than what it spent on the advertising. 100% of advertising revenue can not go back into advertising, or they would be on the verge of losing profits due to advertising costs.

    This excess amount returned by advertising is allocated to endeavors that create more wealth, and increase the production of capital.

    Sepero1 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  22. “If there were no …
    “If there were no advertising, then consumers would have more money to spend on other things, and those resources would be allocated to endeavors that would actually create more wealth in the long run, instead of tricking consumers to spend more money on Pepsi, which then just goes to advertisements, which does not increase the production of capital.”
    That’s one of an economic hypothesis you’ve got there. May I see your scientific evidence to back this up?

    Sepero1 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  23. /watch?v=U9NSWyyxA3U
    /watch?v=U9NSWyyxA3U

    confederalsocialist 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  24. Hey Stodles , would …
    Hey Stodles , would you be so kind as to tell me the title of the ww1 documentary from witch you took those images? This presuming that the images were taken from a documentary, of course.

    Thank you.

    seneca4295 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink
  25. confederalsocialist …
    confederalsocialist

    Please notice that Muslims don’t accept watching half naked women.

    The rest is your opinion, and we respect it. Unless we object on a point or something, which is in the good of developing the best arguments.

    Peace!

    Bakkuto 12 February 2009 at 7:39 am Permalink

Write a Comment

Commenter Gravatar