Ed Kowalczyk's new album "Alive" and single "Grace", Official Release Dates Options

[+Ed+]

Nick, open your eyes.

It was released YESTERDAY.

YESTERDAY

Clear enough?

Who tought you to say bad stuff about the people you do not even know AT ALL!

Keep it up.

[sh4rpz]

There are 3 obvious flaws with the Billboard.

1. The Gracious Few logo is very hard to read if someone does not already know what the band is called. This is tenfold when driving past a billboard at 70 miles per hour.

2. An effective Billboard is simple and usually contains under 8 words or less. TGF's billboard is convoluted and contains over 20 words.

3. There waste most of the space on the billboard on a picture of 5 individuals(4 with sunglasses) that are unrecognizable to 99 percent of the population. Focus on the brand, your faces are not needed.

see, usually if someone read that in any other context, perhaps then you would have an argument - however, having a knowledge of billboards myself, I can tell you the following:

1. a) Billboard positions are chosen very carefully - i.e. contextually and by theme in most areas
i.e. perhaps a particular billboard would be famous for being in the financial sector like banking advertising a particular bank, in this case, it could be famous for promoting music and more importantly new music on a regular basis - in that case, if you passed it the 1st time and saw something, the next time you passed it, knowing that it was a billboard known for promoting music, you'd have a better look the next time.

b) Billboards are not situated in places you can just drive by without noticing it or having a decent read even at a stretch.

2. It is not a street poster - in which case I would agree with your arguments.

3. At that size, the logo would be easily visible

4. depending on laws, the website should be enough as well - as well as the tag line mentioning LIVE and Candlebox

Depending on how long the billboard will remain out there, it would be a good idea to have invested in it in the long term, cos billboards are marketing 'irritants' and people usually notice them one way or another. eg. your argument and my argument number 4. about the logo not being prominent enough to be visible or read - if/when someone can't make out easily what it says, they will one day pull up there or try hard enough the next time they pass it to have a decent look at what it says, and then, having had a long hard look at it, will probably never forget the name The Gracious Few, having slowed down, and made an effort to read a billboard.

I think that is the point of billboard marketing. Getting noticed for the right and the wrong reasons.

[+Ed+]

I LOVE professionals

[Live4Life]

post tldr

Bottom line.
Gracious few will not do as well as Ed will.
The end.

[Live4Life]

I LOVE professionals

Why, who here is a professional? Dudeeeee.

[Live4Life]

Omg, I have a rep now...dayam.

[+Ed+]

Why, who here is a professional? Dudeeeee.

sh4pz, working in marketing.

Oh of course he can not be more professional as you. Sorry. How could I forget

[Soxwsc]

God dammit! You know things have gotten bad when fans are arguing over billboards. WTF?

[Live4Life]

sh4pz, working in marketing.

Oh of course he can not be more professional as you. Sorry. How could I forget

Cannot, = one word.
The one-word spelling is by far the more common.

Some internet spelling popo you ARE. Jeeshhh.

This post has been edited by Live4Life: Jun 25 2010, 2:52 pm

[+Ed+]

Cannot, = one word.
The one-word spelling is by far the more common.

Some internet spelling popo you ARE. Jeeshhh.

Well done. Bitching: A+

Now you can live a happy life finally?

[Live4Life]

Well done. Bitching: A+

Now you can live a happy life finally?

Yes.

[Sonic Tonic]

Cannot, = one word.
The one-word spelling is by far the more common.

Some internet spelling popo you ARE. Jeeshhh.

The Washington State University language site says:

These two spellings [cannot/can not] are largely interchangeable, but by far the most common is “cannot” and you should probably use it except when you want to be emphatic: “No, you can not wash the dog in the Maytag.”

Bottom line
There’s no difference in meaning between cannot and can not.


Take that for what it's worth. I've used both before for English essays in school and both were acceptable. So having cannot be more common does not make can not wrong.

This post has been edited by Sonic Tonic: Jun 25 2010, 3:08 pm

[Live4Life]

The Washington State University language site says:

These two spellings [cannot/can not] are largely interchangeable, but by far the most common is “cannot” and you should probably use it except when you want to be emphatic: “No, you can not wash the dog in the Maytag.”

Bottom line
There’s no difference in meaning between cannot and can not.
Take that for what it's worth. I've used both before for English essays in school and both were acceptable. So having cannot be more common does not make can not wrong.

Didn't mean it was wrong, just that the one-word spelling is by far the more common..so poop.

[Sonic Tonic]

For a woman your age you sound like a 14 year old brat. (and this is coming from a grown up asshole too) Please don't respond. This is the last time I'd like to have any conversation with you. Have a nice day.

oh, wait, so poop?

[OutToDry]

Bottom line.
Gracious few will not do as well as Ed will.
The end.

Talk to me by the end of the year.