Stupid marketing decision

[Blue Mountain]

During the summer I ride my bike to work, but once the snows of winter fly I put the bike away until spring. Work for me is relatively close to home, so in winter I get to the office on transit and, weather permitting, walk home.

My route home take me past the Convention Centre. It covers an entire city block, and for for thirty years on the south side there were two large signs at street level that announced the current and upcoming events. Many times I have paused in my walk home to attend an event in the Convention Centre based on what I read on the signs.

They are now gone. In their place, four large, bright animated displays have been erected, one at each corner of the building. In the minute or so I have to read them as I pass by, more often than not they're running an advertisement for a commercial product or service unrelated to the Convention Centre itself.

Yes, the ads are punctuated with announcements about events. But if I happen to see something flash up on the screen that piques my interest, I have to stop and wait for the precious few moments when the all-important information about the event's date is displayed. The other day, for one event it was on the screen for half a second. I barely had time to even locate the text on the display, let alone read it.

I wonder who the genius was who decided to remove the static signs when the animated displays went up? Thanks to this stupid decision, I no longer know what's on at the Convention Centre when I walk by.

Sometimes simple technology is the best.

 

[Puppycow]

Luddite.

 

[tkingdoll]

Luddite.

See Brodski for a lesson in why your usage of the word is wrong.

As to the OP, yes, that's a stupid decision. However, a silent protest is useless. Have you pointed out the problem to them? It may simply not have occurred to them and you could be doing them a huge favour.

 

[balrog666]

During the summer I ride my bike to work, but once the snows of winter fly I put the bike away until spring. Work for me is relatively close to home, so in winter I get to the office on transit and, weather permitting, walk home.

My route home take me past the Convention Centre. It covers an entire city block, and for for thirty years on the south side there were two large signs at street level that announced the current and upcoming events. Many times I have paused in my walk home to attend an event in the Convention Centre based on what I read on the signs.

They are now gone. In their place, four large, bright animated displays have been erected, one at each corner of the building. In the minute or so I have to read them as I pass by, more often than not they're running an advertisement for a commercial product or service unrelated to the Convention Centre itself.

Yes, the ads are punctuated with announcements about events. But if I happen to see something flash up on the screen that piques my interest, I have to stop and wait for the precious few moments when the all-important information about the event's date is displayed. The other day, for one event it was on the screen for half a second. I barely had time to even locate the text on the display, let alone read it.

I wonder who the genius was who decided to remove the static signs when the animated displays went up? Thanks to this stupid decision, I no longer know what's on at the Convention Centre when I walk by.

Sometimes simple technology is the best.

Computer controlled signs are actually much cheaper, more versatile, and have significantly greater utility than large billboard sized signs that need a lot of labor to update.

!

 

[leftysergeant]

Computer controlled signs are actually much cheaper, more versatile, and have significantly greater utility than large billboard sized signs that need a lot of labor to update.

!

They are also less able to convey the more important information to passers-by in vehicles. What is their reason to exist, then?

 

[Blue Mountain]

Computer controlled signs are actually much cheaper, more versatile, and have significantly greater utility than large billboard sized signs that need a lot of labor to update.!

These weren't billboards--they were very much like the signs of the type you can find at the Church Sign Generator. Yes, they do require labour to update, but the job can be done by a person with a grade six education who don't mind being outside for half an hour at a stretch.

The animated signs need people who can do graphic design and can operate a computer. And because they're high-tech, they're more likely to break down, especially in the -30 degree weather we get here.

 

[Blue Mountain]

As to the OP, yes, that's a stupid decision. However, a silent protest is useless. Have you pointed out the problem to them? It may simply not have occurred to them and you could be doing them a huge favour.

The thought has passed my mind, yes. Unfortunately, it usually just passes through.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

During the summer I ride my bike to work, but once the snows of winter fly I put the bike away until spring. Work for me is relatively close to home, so in winter I get to the office on transit and, weather permitting, walk home.

My route home take me past the Convention Centre. It covers an entire city block, and for for thirty years on the south side there were two large signs at street level that announced the current and upcoming events. Many times I have paused in my walk home to attend an event in the Convention Centre based on what I read on the signs.

They are now gone. In their place, four large, bright animated displays have been erected, one at each corner of the building. In the minute or so I have to read them as I pass by, more often than not they're running an advertisement for a commercial product or service unrelated to the Convention Centre itself.

Yes, the ads are punctuated with announcements about events. But if I happen to see something flash up on the screen that piques my interest, I have to stop and wait for the precious few moments when the all-important information about the event's date is displayed. The other day, for one event it was on the screen for half a second. I barely had time to even locate the text on the display, let alone read it.

I wonder who the genius was who decided to remove the static signs when the animated displays went up? Thanks to this stupid decision, I no longer know what's on at the Convention Centre when I walk by.

Sometimes simple technology is the best.

Why do you hate America?

 

[balrog666]

They are also less able to convey the more important information to passers-by in vehicles. What is their reason to exist, then?

Less? Less? You think that bright colors, readable fonts, and dynamic messaging is less able to convey information? What prior century do you prefer for your information technology?

!

 

[Blue Mountain]

Less? Less? You think that bright colors, readable fonts, and dynamic messaging is less able to convey information? What prior century do you prefer for your information technology?!

You're confusing content with information. As I explained in the OP, there is lots of content: bright colours, cool animations, and text--sometimes moving, sometimes static, but often in not-so-readable fonts, and at times it disappears before people can read and retain it.

Since most of this content is commercial advertising promoting stuff unrelated to the building's main purpose, the four new digital displays provide less information than the two static signs they displaced.

 

[bruto]

Less? Less? You think that bright colors, readable fonts, and dynamic messaging is less able to convey information? What prior century do you prefer for your information technology?

!

The placement of the sign is an important factor. If this were, for example, a billboard on an interstate, visible for a mile as you approach, it might make sense. If it's a sign on a building in a city, it simply may not be in view for long enough for a passing motorist, or even cyclist, to see the information. Remember, the sign alternates information with advertising.

The Civic Center in Glens Falls, NY has one of those signs. It's very colorful, but it's hit or miss whether or not you will see what the next show is as you drive by. Just because the technology is brilliant doesn't mean it's well used. The sign itself is fine, and if those programming it were less interested in pushing Pepsi and trying to impress us with the gee-qhiz technology of a giant screen, they could use it to convey information better than ever. But the real purpose of the new technology is not to inform better, but to advertise.

 

[Francesca R]

[ . . . ] In the minute or so I have to read them as I pass by, more often than not they're running an advertisement for a commercial product or service unrelated to the Convention Centre itself. [ . . . ] Yes, the ads are punctuated with announcements about events. But if I happen to see something flash up on the screen that piques my interest, I have to stop and wait for the precious few moments when the all-important information about the event's date is displayed.

Since most of this content is commercial advertising promoting stuff unrelated to the building's main purpose, the four new digital displays provide less information than the two static signs they displaced.

Just maybe the centre earns more money by running adverts net of the financial hit associated with annoying you and others who now face a higher cost to get the information you want.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Just maybe the centre earns more money by running adverts net of the financial hit associated with annoying you and others who now face a higher cost to get the information you want.

Well, that's probably exactly what's going on: they're using the fancy displays to generate advertising revenue. And they likely removed the static displays to force people to watch the ad-laden animated ones.

If that's the case, screw 'em. I'll just not pay attention to their idiot displays. And because of that, it's likely I'll never again go in to the Convention Centre because I saw an event that looked interesting.

Sigh. Yet more stupid ads for yet more stupid crap that I have no freaking interest in. Welcome to a world where more and more space and effort are dedicated to blasting us with junk messages about junk crap.

 

[bruto]

Just maybe the centre earns more money by running adverts net of the financial hit associated with annoying you and others who now face a higher cost to get the information you want.

Quite possible, and as such perhaps it's not a stupid marketing decision, at least on its face. But it's still irritating and the possibility remains that even if some people used to seeing information there linger long enough to find it, in the long term people will view the sign as being uninformative, miss the information and thus miss attending events. Assigning responsibility for falling revenue in times that are hard anyway might well be difficult. But it might still end up a stupid marketing decision if it diverts the sign from its primary function and ends up producing a flat revenue stream from advertising where it could otherwise have been better used to bring new customers to paying events.

Besides, if people become frustrated with the inability to read the event information on the signs, there's little reason to bother looking at all, and the value to advertisers will decline. The value of the advertising depends in large part on the viewer's expectation for information in a timely and legible form. People aren't looking at the signs for entertainment after the novelty wears off. The technology of the sign has great potential, but the choice of how it is used remains questionable.

e.t.a I see blue mountain has pretty well nailed the reaction I would expect from the public if such signs fail in their primary function.

 

[Francesca R]

Sure it's irritating. But they think you'll get used to it and they are probably right (they might not be). It's irritating that my web e-mail account is covered in adverts and so is my paid online subscriptions to the FT and The Economist. It's irritating that if you buy a DVD you still can't skip the adverts. It's irritating that the cinema doesn't tell you when the film starts so you end up having to see adverts there too. But it lowers costs.

 

[bruto]

Sure it's irritating. But they think you'll get used to it and they are probably right (they might not be). It's irritating that my web e-mail account is covered in adverts and so is my paid online subscriptions to the FT and The Economist. It's irritating that if you buy a DVD you still can't skip the adverts. It's irritating that the cinema doesn't tell you when the film starts so you end up having to see adverts there too. But it lowers costs.

Indeed, we get used to a lot of stuff, but in the cases you cite you have the time and the motivation to await the content. It's an irritation, but you don't decide to leave your mail unread, or stop watching movies. You tune out the ads, but not the content.

But I think with an outdoor sign like the ones mentioned, the more likely outcome is that when people get used to it they will simply tune out the whole sign. Unless they are already aware of an event, and planning to find out about it already, they won't bother to look at the sign, and the sign will devolve into a simple billboard. When that happens, its value to advertisers may well also drop.

 

[Francesca R]

Indeed, we get used to a lot of stuff, but in the cases you cite you have the time and the motivation to await the content. It's an irritation, but you don't decide to leave your mail unread, or stop watching movies. You tune out the ads, but not the content.

Actually I tend to use a business e-mail for just about everything, and I hardly watch movies at all, but that's just me I tolerate the FT and Economist sites.

But I think with an outdoor sign like the ones mentioned, the more likely outcome is that when people get used to it they will simply tune out the whole sign. Unless they are already aware of an event, and planning to find out about it already, they won't bother to look at the sign, and the sign will devolve into a simple billboard. When that happens, its value to advertisers may well also drop.

Possible, but such displays might have died out already if that was what happened.

 

[bruto]

Actually I tend to use a business e-mail for just about everything, and I hardly watch movies at all, but that's just me I tolerate the FT and Economist sites.

Possible, but such displays might have died out already if that was what happened.

Well, as a followup, I passed by the former Glens Falls Civic Center, AKA Pepsi Arena, today, and although both my wife and I had been under the impression that the sign used to contain non civic center advertising, it no longer appears to. Whether this is a mistaken memory on my part or whether they have changed their policy I cannot be sure, but as it stands now, it alternates rather flashy announcements of coming events with schedule information in relatively large and easy to read print, with a cycle time short enough so that there's a reasonable chance that a passer by will see some real information. I didn't linger long enough to see how long the total cycle is, but at least it appears that the sign is being used as a proper event sign, so I either apologize to the Pepsi Arena for mistaking the previous use of the sign, or congratulate them for tuning it a little better.

The position of this particular building relative to the surrounding streets is such that I doubt they could do better with stationary signs, so this may well be an optimal use of the technology.

 

[Francesca R]

Ah. This probably means that the socialist hard left have taken over your town which will result in forced work-programs and famine in a few years. All because of opposition to flash adverts