Bad UAL ad placement

[ScottM]

Placed at Ground Zero

Not sure if UAL even knew that it was being placed there or if it was the ad company they hired. But it is sure in bad taste. Couple this with their recent reuse of 911 flight numbers and you start to have a real perception that the company just really does not care about 911 and is insensitive. That is a real PR nightmare.

 

[steingar]

Somebody over there sure is dumb.

 

[Doggtyred]

And anyone want to guess how ling Continental might have been leasing that sign/site??

These flubs everyone is getting atwitter over are CONTINENTAL related flubs. Continental didnt think about retiring flt 93 because it wasn't an issue till they merged.

I betcha COA had a similar slogan near WTC for a while before they merged.

 

[chucky]

The news report I saw said MTA had control over where the adds were placed, not United.

 

[wsuffa]

The news report I saw said MTA had control over where the adds were placed, not United.

That's not usually true. MTA has control over where the boards are, but the advertisements on the boards are controlled and place in one of two ways: 1) by the client that specifies which boards they want, or 2) by the advertising company that installs the boards and sells a "package" or "network" of locations around the boards they control. Most likely, this case was #2 - the client (UA) bought x number of board placements within the MTA system for a period of y weeks with the placements being rotated every week or two.

 

[TMetzinger]

And all of this could have been avoided if they'd just kept the Continental name.

 

[wsuffa]

And all of this could have been avoided if they'd just kept the Continental name.

Worms. Can of, one. Now open.


via Tapatalk

 

[SCCutler]

Worms. Can of, one. Now open.


via Tapatalk

(snort)

I gotta say, I think the whole thing's a tempest in a teapot.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

(snort)

I gotta say, I think the whole thing's a tempest in a teapot.

+1. Time to move on.

 

[SkyHog]

*groan*

What an emergency, and what a sign of a horrible corporation. 10 years ago, a horrible incident occurred and because of that, United has to forever make sure that nothing can ever be misinterpreted ever again.

 

[chucky]

That's not usually true. MTA has control over where the boards are, but the advertisements on the boards are controlled and place in one of two ways: 1) by the client that specifies which boards they want, or 2) by the advertising company that installs the boards and sells a "package" or "network" of locations around the boards they control. Most likely, this case was #2 - the client (UA) bought x number of board placements within the MTA system for a period of y weeks with the placements being rotated every week or two.

Well, I think it was this Avweb piece that I read it on. I miss-remembered it - Avweb blamed it on a third party vendor, not MTA. So it looks like you're right about that.

 

[wsuffa]

Well, I think it was this Avweb piece that I read it on. I miss-remembered it - Avweb blamed it on a third party vendor, not MTA. So it looks like you're right about that.

And just to be clear, there are a few (very few, but a few) smaller systems that sell their own ads. Larger ones sell the advertising rights in exchange for a guarantee and/or percentage of sales.

Once upon a life I was involved in that business.

 

[Gsim Aviation]

United did not fly or land any plane at the WTC, it was the hijackers that did it. What happen at the WTC was not the fault at all of United or AAL.

 

[Fearless Tower]

United did not fly or land any plane at the WTC, it was the hijackers that did it. What happen at the WTC was not the fault at all of United or AAL.

Exactly.