Polaroid Yanks Y2K Ad Over Bankers' Protests

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Polaroid Yanks Y2K Ad Over Bankers' Protests

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (Reuters) - To bankers, at least, the Y2K bug is no laughing matter, as instant film maker Polaroid Corp. (NYSE:PRD - news) found out.

The Cambridge, Mass.,-based company Wednesday said it has stopped running a humorous television ad to promote its PopShots disposable camera after the American Bankers Association complained the spot could hurt consumer confidence in the banking industry.

The ad, which had been running on network and cable TV since mid-June, showed a bank customer snapping an instant picture of his bank balance at an ATM. At the strike of midnight, the balance drops, then leaps by $1 million.

Created by longtime Polaroid agency Goodby, Silverstein & Partners of San Francisco, the ad had been intended to reach young customers in a lighthearted fashion, Polaroid spokeswoman Nancy Childs said. But a complaining letter from the ABA convinced Polaroid the ad was ``disaffecting'' a chunk of the audience, she said.

The ad's creators could find no good way to modify it, so Polaroid decided to stop running it, Childs said.

-- Rickjohn (rickjohn1@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999

Answers

An honest banking system has no fear of bank runs or other manifestations of lack of "consumer confidence."

As this banking system is fundamentally fraudulent, dishonest, manipulative, with only 1% or 2% of demand deposits available in "cash" (which itself is fundamentally worthless), is it any wonder the banksters are a bit touchy?

If everyone wanted their balances in cash, everyone would get just 1% or 2%. Or, only the first two in a line of 100 would get all their money (on average). If you're number 3+, you're S.O.L.

Withdraw early and withdraw often. (Inspired by Chicago saying about voting).

-- A (A@AisA.com), June 30, 1999.


Told ya they would be forced to pull it.

Damn - it scares me being correct. Bank holiday starts Dec 25. Cash withdrawal limit of 1000.00 imposed early December (1st or 2nd?), then the limit reduced (within 2 days) to 100.00.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 30, 1999.


Polaroid has to keep their money in a bank too. Or perhaps the Bankers have no sense of humor? (It WAS a funny ad).

Or perhaps...?

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.


No doubt Polaroid also has loans and lines of credit which could be affected by the ole American Bankers Association too.

I don't like this. In the last year I've seen more done to manipulate this "free market system" than I feel comfortable with.

Talk about a confidence game.

Mike =================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), June 30, 1999.


"A"

Nothing dishonest about it you "lesson" (as opposed to moron). The other 98% of the deposits are put to work building factories, homes, hiring people, etc. etc. etc. Sometimes they even loan the money to idiots like you who can then buy a computer get on line and demonstrate you ignoran

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.



That WOULD be true, EXCEPT that there are federal guidelines on WHAT % of assets must be be kept "available" to the public on demand. These regulations are UNIFORMLY broken, with NO regulatory interference from any government agency. This has been true for years.

I strongly suggest that you do a little more research into the legalized "fraud" in the fractional reserve banking system.

(I bet you even believe that the FDIC will "protect" your deposits, too. Dontcha?)

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), June 30, 1999.


Yes denny and I believe in the tooth fairy and santa and that you are most likely a very intelligent and knowledgable person about a whole bunch or really, really complex stuff.

Smooche

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.


According to the logic 'a' uses, every business is 'fraudulent', that lacks on-hand inventory to sell their product to everyone at the same time. 'a' is so intent on his crusade, he's forgotten to make sense. I wonder why people buy into this?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 30, 1999.

Well, I'm sure this will end up being a truely fascinating thread, but Maybe we should just "wait and see" as far as banks go, what happens later in the year. It should make for some interesting tales for the grandkids...

(Personally, I see withdrawl limits by November 1st... But maybe I'm just the tooth fairy)

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), June 30, 1999.


Fint and Corrine -- separated at birth? There is no necessary connection between capital markets and demand deposits. See article titled (something like) "What's wrong with Banking" on http://www.e-gold.com
Probably also stuff on gold-eagle site.

For all the newbies, Flint is a well-known supporter of all things establishment -- "My Big Brother -- right or wrong -- my Big Brother"

-- (A@AisA.com), June 30, 1999.



Gee Flint, that sure is an interesting response from someone that has stated that they plan to remove their currency from their bank. I've never seen anyone try to play both sides of the fence more than you have on this forum.You seem to think that your superior intellect puts you above both Pollies and Doomers, when in reality , most of the time you just come off sounding like an asshole.

-- John (...@...), June 30, 1999.

John - have you considered that the actual outcome is most certainly uncertain - and he may well the most accurate of all? Not all Polly statements (and their conclusions from their attitudes) are false, not all "gloomy doomy" predictions will be correct either.

I know his preparations are far more thorough than most. So please don't aimlessly criticize. Having said that - yep, it does seem to be a paradox that he does plan on getting cash, while also not expecting extreme problems.

BUT - it is his cash, his business, and his choice. Well - at least he thinks its his cash. The government thinks it's the bank's cash.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 30, 1999.


John - right on - asshole indeed.

And Corrine - you told someone else on another thread to shut up and stop posting about banks.

Then you spout your know-nothing bullcrap about banking above.

If you do not understand the fiat money system and how the fed was illegally created and how the international banking cartel is manipulating the price of gold then please do us all a favour and shut your gob as you requested a previous poster to do.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 30, 1999.


Angie, angie, angie. you're such a big silly. (but my mind's eye spies a beefcake none-the-less.) i know how the banky wankys work. i recently unloaded over one hundred thousand dollars woth of stock in an ohio based bank. got out the day rubin announced he was leaving the admin. stock is down at this minute (give or take the market delay of 20 min.) $6.63 per share since the day i got out. let's see 6.63 x 1421 = 9421.23. my oh my wasn't my timing good. if you're concerned about the thiry seven dollars you have in the bank than by all means take it out. my earlier posting was only trying to bring to light that the reason banks have only such a small amount of money on reserve is that the formula has worked since the 1930's. as the saying goes nothing succeeds like success. i agree that the potential for runs makes the fractional reserve equation hugely dicey but what is your immediate solution? you want the banks to call in loans on demand (i.e make people pay off loans immediately or risk forclosure) just so the banks can have a larger percentage of deposits on hand. the rules are about to be re-written. y2k's gonna throw a curve don't sit around and play the blame game after the fact and fault the mean old banks.

A big $100 kiss to y

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.


P.S.

By the way I happen to like Fiats. Especially the ones designed by Pinnan Farin

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.



okay - if you don't like the fact that they pulled the ad - protest it!

www.Polaroid.com (top level)

email address:

http://www.polaroid.com/cgi-bin/mailto-support.cgi

Their point of contact is in the press release above.

Or better yet, give them an idea for another ad:

Guy is on the mountain (or tall building above the city.) It night time, but all likes are out. He takes the polaroid photograph, then all lights (block by block) go out, finally evrything is black. End with a flashlight beam showing the developed polaroid photo, and the words: Polaroid. Powerful. Portable. Self-contained. With flash. And it developes itself - when the corner drugstore can't.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 30, 1999.


robbie nice ad. not sure what you're presently doing but you could have a future in advertising.

one david olgilvy attaboy for you bud.

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.


Can't type, can't spell, but can imagine scenarios. Thank you. (I think....)

What if the guy is shown walking into the bank boardroom or government office (populated with fat old fogies like in the movie "Mary Poppins"), takes their picture "to have soemthing to remember you by", then walks out as the lights go out. Same tag line and flashlight closes the scene.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 30, 1999.


what if indeed

-- corine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.

Corine you're talking gibberish, you are a complete moron now go away and play with the traffic.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 30, 1999.

And Robert,

GREAT ad, but the Electricity Council would have a fit, I don't see how polaroid can repeat the concept without upsetting some assholes...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 30, 1999.


angie your mommy ain't gonna tell you again. put the toys away and go to bed.

.

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.


The bottom line is that Polaroid should be able to advertise based upon the currently accepted criteria and not fear having an ad like this pulled. It wasn't overtly profane, it didn't infringe on the rights of any particular group, it wasn't false or misleading regarding the product itself.

This is a nightmare for anyone in advertising when TBTB can pull this kind of crap and get away with it. Especially when you consider the budget to develop and produce this kind of spot and how the relationship between the client and agency could be affected by this action.

Mike ============================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), June 30, 1999.


Robert - thanks for the suggestion - I emailed the company to show support for the ad.

maybe another ad idea would be to team up with the SPAM folks to take pics of y2k spam cook-off.

(so i'm not being brilliant tonite - sigh)

-- justme (finally@home.com), June 30, 1999.


Mike has a good point - the one I was going to make. You can argue about whether it is morally or legally correct to either run or pull the spots, but if it is from a protest from a third party group (not Polaroid or their customers, but banks), then the third party (banks, govt, etc.) should have to foot the bill of production costs, people's time, etc. It's kind of a twist on income taxes. This has always been a pet peave of mine, but you are _required_ to file a tax return, but you have to use your own stamp - the envelope is not "postage paid." I HATE THAT!

-- jim (x@x.x), July 01, 1999.

Rickjohn:

A DGI recently told me about this Polaroid commercial because it reminded him of my Y2K concerns. Since I don't watch any television, he described the basic actions of the commercial. I asked him, "Won't that give people ideas?"

I guess the-banks-that-be don't want certain ideas spread to the masses. Too late.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), July 01, 1999.


Darn, I liked that commercial...I laughed so hard when I first saw it I cried.

-- consumer (private@aol.com), July 02, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ