|Posted on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 - 03:45 pm: ||
After spending what I imagine was sqillion rebranding, the company gets wound up next quarter.
It's not hard to imagine the rebranding had something to do with it - is it?
Anybody seen any comment from the agency responsible?
|Posted on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 - 04:47 pm: ||
The thought had occurred to me, but I didn't seriously think it was the cause. I did think it was a bit odd though, spending all that money and effort only to close it down. This only reinforces my belief that it was a spur-of-the-moment-knee-jerk-decision to shutter Buell.
|Posted on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 - 05:20 pm: ||
A squillion is slightly less than a brazillion
and a bit more than a motza.
I've since had an email stating it was in fact a Gazillion.
|Posted on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 - 06:58 pm: ||
Must have been a sweet heart of a deal, all the money, none of the accountability, none of the responsibility, and a product that is obsolete in under 6 months.
Next best thing to the hedgefund managers.
|Posted on Wednesday, January 13, 2010 - 09:54 pm: ||
Never warmed up to the new logo, and after HD put Buell asleep I hated it.
|Posted on Thursday, January 14, 2010 - 10:11 am: ||
"I've since had an email stating it was in fact a Gazillion."
If HD spent a Gazillion, wouldn't that reinforce the fact that the shutdown wasn't the result of the rebranding, because they would be waiting for a return on that investment?
Anything else interesting in the email?
I did contact the agency, CP+B, before Christmas regarding BoB and the 2010 Blast, but they fobbed me off to H-D Australia.