Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Good one. I vote on moving the phrase to "next year" so you don't have to cringe so often.
Also, if we adopt this giant tortoise perspective, then the new website may indeed by "coming soon".
np... just messing with you... after a long day of work my mind is shot and i do not read my posts before i click submit
Sorry, I was as gentle as I could be. I don't think it was mean at all.
that is just mean
"wear", but yes, I did see a pattern there.
investors where shoes too lol
it is not the equivalent of, let's say, too much emphasis on a websites ir page over the actual product, if that is where you were going...
I'm not getting any footwearetc.com today on Yahoo, just an occasional "Rack Room Shoes", even when I'm not on the Skins board.
I must be tagged by Yahoo now as a "shoe person".
Yuck.
Kind of feels like "My Tivo thinks I'm gay".
Just was on yahoo finance and saw a footwear etc. ad featuring Skins.
LOL! I appreciate that. The others in that list and myself have been coined "the ihub 9".
Fair enough and all I ask. I think (and hope) that though we may be talking among ourselves, there are a lot of eavesdroppers. I read a lot of MBs here and on Yahoo that I don't contribute to because I don't have anything to add to the discussion. I find them immensely valuable, but make my own decisions and don't rely on others for advice, just information and leads.
I didn't spend a lot of time following the MONA information in your signature, but from what I saw you must have done some kick a## work to be named in a "basher" lawsuit. That earns you a lot of respect in my book.
I do understand and appreciate all point sof view. Unfortunately for you, faith and myself; it seems we are only talking to ourselves anyway.
Just for the record, I'm with you on the financials, but disagree on this one. Now, I will leave it at that.
I'm not "accusing" skins of anything. I don't understand why, because I disagree with you and faith it has to be a personal and/or Skins grudge. I simply see ads for shoes on stock message boards as highly unusual and a not particularly good way of selling shoes in this case since those who come to the Skins MB are already aware of the brand and in fact, predisposed to buy it in many cases.
It make perfect sense to me since Skins can only sell through footwearetc.com online now, that they would advertise using that site. Your earlier point that Skins will eventually (maybe soon) have it's own sales site in fact reinforces my belief that footwearetc.com would not use its own money to promote a brand that would soon be selling direct, at least not if it were not a hugely popular one that they were using to bring in customers.
You're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you or faith, so let's agree to disagree and let those who read the board draw their own conclusions. I have nothing against Skins and wish them all the success in the world. But that doesn't mean I'm going to sit quietly when I feel I have some useful information to contribute. Based on your prior ihub involvement, I would hope that you would understand and appreciate that.
No, I posted that I saw a footwearetc ad on ihub that featured Skins. The original debate was who's advertisment was it. You claim that it is a Skins advertisment bought and paid for by Skins. I disagree. I already said it could very well be a co-op thing between Skins and Footwearetc were each share the cost, but it's not just Skins. If it were, then Skins is advertisining footwearetc? That makes no sence!
You have seen the MDT, or whatever, and I have also seen one for Uggs. All 3 of the advertisments were the same, just the brand was different. All three were footwearetc ads.
As for why Skins isn't on footwearetc featured list, that is easily explained. In fact you explained it for us. Skins is too new to be very popular yet. If it's not popular enough to bring in customers, it is not featured. Again marketing 101.
As for advertising on iHub, that has been explained as well. If MBT was on the Yahoo boards, then I guess they are guilty of whatever you are accusing Skins of too then... right?
I wish I could remember where I saw the Ugg one.
Truly words of wisdom. Your perspectives are irrefutable.
I am not trying to convince anyone of anything.
I observe
The only place where footwearetc.com ads seem to feature Skins is on this message board
Other footwearetc.com ads seem to feature MBT.
Footwearetc. does not list Skins as a featured brand. It is very far down when sorted by "popularity"
The ad you posted showed only the brand name. How would it "bring people to footwearetc. stores"? Because they liked the name? Why wouldn't footwearetc. use it's featured and most popular brands for advertising?
You were the one who posted that you saw a Skins ad on this website. You posted a picture. Because I think that's unusual I am "disproving anything remotely positive about Skins".
Anyone is welcome to present their argument that a stock message board is the best place to advertise shoes or that the footwearetc.com ad has appeared all over the web. I don't believe either, but I'm certainly willing to listen.
As I keep saying, board readers should have all perspectives, not just from those who own the stock and stand to benefit by brining in new investors. Some seem to have made it their personal mission to discredit my POV, not by presenting counter evidence, but by attacking me personally. To me, that's not only ridiculous, but also counterproductive to making their points.
It's not a contest. It's anonymous opinions, so being "right" or "wrong" is meaningless. Message boards are all about discussions with different points of view. In the end it's up to each reader to decide who and what they believe, do whatever research they need to to figure that out and invest or not accordingly.
I hate to say it Kezzek, but you have convinced me of nothing. I don't agree with you even a little bit. I saw the MBT shoe as well and it is not a competitive brand.
If anything it reaffirms that footwearetc.com pays for advertising by promoting brands that will bring people to the footwearetc stores. I am not beyond the idea that footwearetc and the brands have a co-op agreements for advertising together.
I have seen footwearetc advertisements with Skins, MBT and Uggs. As for the featured brand thing, I still say its because MBT and Uggs are known names that will bring customers to their stores. Skins, however, is still mostly unheard of. If the Skins idea does end up working in time and starts bring in customers, it will be added to their featured list.
I must agree with faith, why are you so adamant on disproving anything remotely positive about Skins? Trying to be the other side of the coin and describing the financial situation for those new to SKNN in one thing, but this is a little ridiculous. It is almost a personal issue, like you have an axe to grind with Skins.
Obviously if Skins had "no money" they would be out of business as employees are loathe to work for free. Perhaps your limited experience with a personal website has confused you as to sites like investors hub, which are large enough to sell their own ads.
A simple review of the rate card - http://adserv.stocksite.com/media_kit.html will show advertising on ihub is pretty inexpensive, and of course Google and AOL ads are even less so when they only show up on sites like stock message boards and have few click throughs.
Lastly, if you're going to make the argument that footwear etc. is footing the bulk of the bill, you might want to consider why they would use Skins only on this MB while even on Yahoo's Skins MB they promote MBT, as well as why Skins is not even a "featured brand" when it's so (according to your logic) valuable in obtaining new customers to the site.
I'm not sure why this has become such an obsession. It's not a "fight", it's a dialog with differing perspectives. As I've said several times now, each person who reads the board will form their own opinions, do their own research (I hope) and make their own investment decisions based on information provided by the board.
Once again you've stated the same points that I have dominated.
If one ad in a slot shows "Ads by Google," then the entire slot is run by Google Ads. If one ad in a slot shows its root coming from AOL, then the entire slot is run by AOL. I think you should research ads before arguing me here. Code is involved and just because one ad says "Ads by Google" and the next does not does not mean that both are not from Google. I have ads from Google on my own website and when they are flash ads the "Ads by Google" is not shown.
You yourself say that Skins has no money, so how are they paying Footwear Etc. for the ads? There may be some agreement, but Footwear Etc. is definitely paying for the majority of the advertising fees.
Once again, you saying that promoting shoes on a stock message board is unusual is an oxymoron when content is the basis of when and where ads appear.
I'm still in disbelief of your audacity to repeatedly bring up points that I have continually shot down well and succinctly.
There is no leaving it to the readers when it is clear who is wrong. Like I said, keep fighting--it's great for me!
I've obviously hit a nerve here, and it has already taken up way too much space on the board, so I'll leave it with my contention that http://adserv.stocksite.com/media_kit.html is not a fake inducement to get advertisers to pay money for ads on investors hub that they actually use AOL and Google (two unrelated companies) for. I'd also like to observe that in the ad for Skins posted on this board, the words "Ads by Google" did not appear.
I'll also stick with my opinion that the ad was paid for by Skins (either directly or through a payment to footwearetc.com) and not a general footwearetc.com promotion.
Lastly, I'd like to emphasize my original point, that promoting shoes or any fashion product on a stock message board is unusual.
As always, I leave it to those who read the posts to decide what information they think is correct and what is valuable.
I'm glad you keep fighting your loss on this discussion. It proves what you are up to on this board to the readers. I have twice shown evidence of your loss regarding the ads and yet you keep arguing. Keep fighting!
http://www.sharkchild.com/images/other/ihubad2.tiff
Bam! Proven wrong again in the face of your own post! What does it read on the lower right corner of the top ad?
Your ad purchase link means diddly. These ads are run by Google and AOL. No one needs to decide anything. I have shown the evidence. Evidence also for your futile rebuttal.
I think the link proves it all. I believe it was your argument that was destroyed, twice now.
But you believe what you want, I'll believe what I want and we'll leave it to the board readers to decide if in fact footwearetc.com has a skins add running through Google/AOL.
BTW, just for fun, go to footwearetc.com, select "all brands", sort by popularity. Look at the first entries, then do a search for "skins". I think you'll see why MBT is featured in their ads on the Yahoo MBs and not Skins.
At least we can agree that you are confused.
Why would you show that link (http://adserv.stocksite.com/media_kit.html) again??? I just proved to you as simply as A, B, C that iHub uses ad rotation for specific slots. They may sell space direct, but not on the Skins message board here--this board is run by Google Ads and that AOL platform.
I am very confused still as to why would you revert to that point again? Your argument got destroyed.
I did just see a footwearetc.com ad on the Yahoo Skins MB. It was for MBT - The Anti-Shoe. It's pretty easy to find. Just go to http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_S/messagesview?bn=44601 and keep hitting refresh. It appears on the side and on top from time to time. Lo and behold, MBT is one of footwearetc.com's "featured brands".
I'll keep an eye out for the skins version as this is clearly an adserved site, but it's kind of funny to see a competitive brand advertised on the Skins MB, especially through an online seller of the shoes.
Looks like ihub doesn't use ad rotation from the big guys though, they sell space direct. - http://adserv.stocksite.com/media_kit.html.
You're so full of yourself faith it's quite funny.
Do you work for footwearetc or skins? If not, how would you possibly know who is paying for the ads? Do you really think that footwearetc. is paying to promote their store using skins, but then not presenting them as a featured brand?
I don't think footwearetc. is paying anyone for skins ads, unless it's skins coop money.
So, why don't you take a crack at how you know it's footwearetc. providing the ad and then we can debate how it got to ihub and whether or not that's a normal place for clothing item ads to show up.
You keep answering in riddles. I know that what I write is clear to you, but you always try to loop around it.
The ads are content driven.
Footwear Etc. uses Google Ads and the AOL ad platform, so their "Skins Ad" is in the mix of ads that Google and AOL uses to fill their ad slots.
There is a lot of SKINS content on message boards.
Google/AOL's analysis sees there is a lot of content on these pages with the words "skins" and "skins footwear" and "skins shoes."
Google/AOL looks through their available ads on hand and sees the Footwear Etc. ad with the words "Skins Footwear."
"A perfect match" Google/AOL tells themselves.
Google/AOL inserts the Footwear Etc. ads on those pages.
No manipulation. Straight programming. Nothing unusual except your argument.
P.S. The debate was not about whether or not the ads were Footwear Etc. ads; the debate was whether or not Footwear Etc. was paying iHub directly to place the ads.
CONCLUSION: Footwear Etc. is NOT paying iHub to place their ads; they are paying Google and AOL.
Can you for once admit you were wrong?
faith, you are welcome to ply your online ad expertise as heavily as you like. Perhaps Skins will hire you to finish their website.
I stand by my original statement that product advertising, let alone for shoes, primarily or exclusively on a stock message board website, regardless of the cause, who is paying for it or what phase of the moon tonight, is unusual and IMHO reflects and attempt to influence investors to buy the stock, not the shoes.
I'm not sure that Google or AOL determining that the best place to display a Skin's ad is on a stock message board is much better anyway.
Either way, I hope we have put to rest the notion that this is a footwearetc.com ad, as was previously suggested.
Yeah, I actually do know why. That particular ad slot comes from bannerfarm.ace.advertising.com (a.k.a. platform-a.com) which is an AOL ad interface just like Google Ads--content driven just like Google Ads.
Why do you keep fighting? So now we know the top and bottom ad bars are Google Ads and the block ads next to posts are AOL ads. All of these are ads used based on content on web pages. Come on. Why do you keep trying to argue something you may not fully understand. You hit a dead end with this one. Do you lack the courage to say you are wrong?
Sorry faith, looks like it's you who is busted, once again.
Go back to the original posting (msg 2744) and look closely at the ad. Do you see the words "Ads by Google"?
No? Do you know why?
Looks to me like you got caught in the wrong and are trying to weasel your way out of it.
The ads that you see on these stock specific pages are Google Ads. Google Ads are solely content driven. Google analyzes the content of the page and then places an ad from its pool of users that it finds as a good fit. Just like I said before.
Why are you so quick to prove everyone wrong? You acted a little too fast this time and slipped.
Here is a little proof to run you through.
http://www.sharkchild.com/images/other/ihubad.tiff
Here you go - http://adserv.stocksite.com/media_kit.html
(clicking on the link probably won't work as ihub inserts formatting characters - cut and paste it into your browser window).
How do you know they don't rotate with others? Did you have some direct contact with the person who bought the ihub ads? I don't know if they rotate or not. I have read a post claiming some saw them on Yahoo, but I never saw them myself.
I'm not saying they do or don't rotate because I don't know, but you sound pretty matter-o-fact that they don't.
Sorry faith, ihub (advfn) takes ad placements directly. They don't rotate with ebay, myspace, etc.
Someone bought ihub ads and that's just odd, IMHO.
Kezzek, you should learn more about web ads before making such a point.
Internet advertising is content driven. Ads appear based on the content of a particular web page. Now, where would we be seeing the most Skins content specific pages? These message boards!! Thus, the ads show up on these message boards at a much higher rate.
I have also seen the Skins ads on eBay, MySpace, and several other sites, but I mainly see them on this message board and on Yahoo's message board because the content is 24/7 Skins, Skins, Skins.
And of course, you can pay a lot more money to have your content appear, but for the most part, when you are trying to have an effective, cost efficient campaign, you allow content to find your target market.
I see LOTS of ads in "other places" and that's my point. Who advertises a consumer product like shoes exclusively on a stock message board?
Do you think the people reading this board need to know about the product? ihub is probably the one place you don't need to promote the PRODUCT. See how you keep making my point?
The ad says "best selection on line", not only selection. Perhaps I chose my word wrong with "exclusive". Should have used limited.
I see similar ads with Ugg and MBT other places. Are you suggesting those manufacturers are just promoting their shoes or is it footwearetc.com promoting their business by using those brands?
The fact is, Skins is still new and not a big money maker for footwearetc.com yet. Therefore, they do not show them as a featured shoe. Featured shoes are the ones that bring in the most money and customers because they are the most popular.
Why do they advertise on iHub? I can't answer that with certainty, but maybe it has something to do with ihub has a concentration of people who follow this company. Kind of like targeted demographic marketing. It's not like iHub is the ONLY place you hear of Skins. It just so happens to be where most of those paying attention to Skins congregate.
Because Skins has no website to promote to. It's been "coming soon" for what, a month now? And if you believe (as I do) that the main purpose of the ad is for the company, aka, its stock, then it really doesn't matter what site you are directed to.
Many manufacturers advertise their products by promoting sales locations- it only makes sense, especially when you have no internal sales capability.
And footwearetc. has NO exclusivity on Skins. It's on Amazon for goodness sake.
Sorry, but I don't accept that of all the potential venues for selling shoes or directing traffic, Skins and/or footwearetc decided that ihub provided the best bang for the buck in terms of PRODUCT sales.
No, my contention is that footwearetc.com decided to spend their own money advertising footweaetc.com. They used the Skins shoes to promote themselves because it is a unique offering they have that can be found at few places, footwearetc.com happens to be one of them. Marketing 101 promote what you offer exclusively. It would be idiotic for footwearetc.com to promote Nike when every place on the planet offers Nike.
Also, why would Skins promote going to footwearetc.com to buy their shoes when Skins is coming soon with their own website to sell their shoes. Since Skins will get 100% of the revenue when bought on their site as opposed to only a percentage when bought on footweraetc.com, why on earth would Skins promote a soon to be competing website? Well, maybe not competing, but I'm sure they would rather you buy from their own website where they make more money on the sale. How smart would it be for McDonalds to advertise Burger King french fries?
So it's your contention that footwearetc.com decided to spend their own money to buy an ad promoting skins on ihub, even though they don't seem to be promoting it elsewhere, including their own website?
Why would Skins want to direct you to their sales website when it's still "coming soon"?
Sorry, IMHO, ihub is a very strange place to find the only (that I'm aware of) ad for Skins shoes.
LOL OK your right, It's actually an ad for Skins who just hijacked the footwear.com name. The fact that it says free shipping on orders over some amount is just a head fake. They probably just pulled some number out of their butt to make it look legit. We all know Skins doesn't even sell the shoes themselves, so how can they offer free shipping on something they don't ship.
These Skins guys are tricky aren't they? Either that or the advertisement really is for footwear.com.
Did I mention that when you click on the advertisement you go to footwear.com. I wonder why you would go there instead of skinsfootwear.com since it's really just an advertisement for Skins and footwear.com has nothing to do with it?
Oh I know why... maybe because your not right after all. Maybe it really is an advertisement for footwearetc.com and they are using Skins to promote themselves. Heaven forbid a company sells a new innovative product that is only at limited amounts of outlets and uses that product to promote themselves. Good GOD what a travesty! What is this world coming to?!?!?!?!?
Sorry, I don't buy that this is a footwear.com ad. Their website has promotions and they e-mail them all the time. I've never seen one for Skins. It's not even listed in their "Featured Brands" list.
Most of the ads at ihub are for financial services firms. I can see someone like Progressive using it as part of a huge marketing campaign (they are after all using national TV), but this is the only ad I've ever heard of from Skins.
So, sorry, but I find it very odd and not in a positive way.
Ummmm NO!!!! It's not odd at all. Perhaps you don't realize this because you don't see the advertisements, but:
A) That is actually a promo for footwear.com. They are using Skins to promote themselves. Nowhere does it mention a ticker symbol or a tag line like "buy our stock".
B) There are also advertisements for Scotttrade, Progressive, VeriSign, Viagra and other brand names. Should I be skeptical of buying car insurance from Progressive because they advertise on a stock message board?
Me also. But, I noticed them popping up again.
Don't you find it odd that Skins is paying for product ads on ihub, an investor site? Coupled with the fact that the new product site is still "coming soon" and the new investor site is up for a while, I'm not sure this is actually good news.
It's certainly not a distraction though.
I have seen it on different boards, not just SKNN. You would have to log out of your account to see ads. I was seeing it pretty regularly for a while, but now I haven't seen them as often.
I am. I guess since I'm a paying member I don't see ads. So is this on the skins MB or all of ihub?
Sorry for the "distraction", but here it is again
Are you really asking me that?
Followers
|
37
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
3071
|
Created
|
10/05/06
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |