Quaker2001 1251 Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 Love this. It's fun being chastised for a point of view that you don't even hold, isn't it? I don't think it's chastising, but I know better than than to start an argument over semantics around here. Again, it is interesting though that you've replied to 2 of my posts now and neither of FYI's post (perhaps you hit the ignore button for him). I find that very curious, that's all Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FYI 1191 Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 ^AF has said before that's he's put you on ignore, too. So who knows. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Rols 1901 Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 Ya, they've cracked down on "ambush marketing". Yeah, but what Atlanta had wasn't ambush marketing - all the bazaar store vendors were licensed by the City. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ofan 696 Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 Yeah, but what Atlanta had wasn't ambush marketing - all the bazaar store vendors were licensed by the City. But they were still capatalizing on the Games being in town. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Rols 1901 Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) But they were still capatalizing on the Games being in town. Yeah, but ambush marketing is when a company tries to capitalise on the games when they have not signed up for any rights to do so. That wasn't the case for the Atlanta flea market - the IOC had no legal means to move the Atlanta hawkers away as they were in their rights to set up as they did. There was nothing "ambush" about it - apart from some of them selling unlicensed t-shirts and trinkets. Edited July 11, 2013 by Sir Rols Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.