Can Annika make the cut? Friday's action at Colonial (LIVE DISCUSSION)

[TomB]

You are fixated on the inconsequential,

The TRUTH is not inconsequential to me.

I don't need referrences to point. Again, the idea that the mention of a sponsor's name is less valuable than dedicated commercial time with an agenda is self-evident.

If someone else has references then, yes, you do need references.

Forgive me if your idea of "self-evident" doesn't inspire confidence in me.

[presidio9]

How is it not clear to you that dedicated commercial time with a message is more valuable that the mere mention of the sponsors's name? This is not debatable. A child could understand it.

On the one hand you have an agenda, the audience's undivided attention, and the ability to inform you audience. On the other, they hear the name of you company as part of a larger name to a sporting event. This point could not be any clearer.

[an amused spectator]

Because none of you could credibly show how Sorrystam's involvement and subsequent failure to make the cut made one bit of financial difference to BofA.

LOL! I remember the time I got in a long-running flame war with a poster who knew more about American colonial history than a professor who had a PhD in American colonial history.

That is when I learned that even the truth can be brushed off on the Net. ;-)

[TomB]

That is when I learned that even the truth can be brushed off on the Net. ;-)

Our psychotic friend proves that very well.