No, though I would be interested to read how you've worked that out (via PM, obviously - I doubt anyone else will be).cityprod wrote:Projecting much, Bilky?
TV Forum Watch News and Information Board
-
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Sat 08 Nov, 2008 19.48
It's really quite simple. You worked something out in your own head, and thought that everybody thinks that way, so therefore so must cityprod. So you projected your own opinions onto me.bilky asko wrote:No, though I would be interested to read how you've worked that out (via PM, obviously - I doubt anyone else will be).cityprod wrote:Projecting much, Bilky?
Except, I don't think that way. I'm less worried about the numbers, and more concerned with the fact that the audience can actually think for themselves. I'd value 1,115 independent thinkers, over 1.115million who aren't.
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Wed 11 May, 2011 01.28
Would your '1,115 independent thinkers' be able to acquire an advertising deal with a mobile phone company that crosses over with the television channel brand? MTV has a clear demographic and companies who wish to advertise with them to target that audience, so those figures are important.cityprod wrote:bilky asko wrote:cityprod wrote:
Except, I don't think that way. I'm less worried about the numbers, and more concerned with the fact that the audience can actually think for themselves. I'd value 1,115 independent thinkers, over 1.115million who aren't.
TVF's London Lite.
Completely irrelevant. It's a different audience that MTV has to what I have, both in terms of size, and political leanings. Corporate synergy and many other buzzwords, not to mention the quarterly profit lines are all these companies think about.Martin Phillp wrote:Would your '1,115 independent thinkers' be able to acquire an advertising deal with a mobile phone company that crosses over with the television channel brand?
I'm more interested in things that will make a difference, and things that will do something different, and providing a product that is a bit different, but yet still feels familiar.
Different worlds, different ideas. I may voice my displeasure at the fact that programmes like Geordie Shore even exist, even though it was a pretty blatant copy of Jersey Shore (there goes that lack of imagination again), but I can't deny that getting over 1 million is excellent figures.
-
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Sat 08 Nov, 2008 19.48
I was making the link between what you consider mindless drivel and what I consider mindless drivel from you. Clearly you didn't take the hint, as with the rather obvious hint that I couldn't care less about how you misinterpreted a forumer's posts yet again.cityprod wrote:It's really quite simple. You worked something out in your own head, and thought that everybody thinks that way, so therefore so must cityprod. So you projected your own opinions onto me.bilky asko wrote:No, though I would be interested to read how you've worked that out (via PM, obviously - I doubt anyone else will be).cityprod wrote:Projecting much, Bilky?
Except, I don't think that way. I'm less worried about the numbers, and more concerned with the fact that the audience can actually think for themselves. I'd value 1,115 independent thinkers, over 1.115million who aren't.
-
- Posts: 764
- Joined: Thu 01 Apr, 2004 15.36
- Location: Edinburgh
Can I just add that I rather enjoyed seeing this question not only asked, but a reply had an image contributed, and the second response "dignified" the thread with what looks like an accurate answer to the question. The thread is now sinking down the list, it's purpose complete.Steve in Pudsey wrote:Have I missed a subtle piss take or is this a serious question?
Riaz wrote:CITV presentation from 1986 to 1988 features images of electronic circuit boards. Does anybody know what type of machinery they are out of?
Surely that's how the forum should work?
It may be ultra niche, but still more interesting (to me) than the breathless reporting of how many women were on Loose Women, or how Piers was given a funny look by Suzanna on GMB.
Or, and this is potentially a revolutionary idea to you, you thought you were making a link, but in fact you weren't, you missed the target. You tired to be too clever by half, rather like a lot of advertisers these days, and rather than communicating what you thought you did, you said something entirely different.bilky asko wrote:I was making the link between what you consider mindless drivel and what I consider mindless drivel from you. Clearly you didn't take the hint, as with the rather obvious hint that I couldn't care less about how you misinterpreted a forumer's posts yet again.cityprod wrote:It's really quite simple. You worked something out in your own head, and thought that everybody thinks that way, so therefore so must cityprod. So you projected your own opinions onto me.bilky asko wrote:
No, though I would be interested to read how you've worked that out (via PM, obviously - I doubt anyone else will be).
Except, I don't think that way. I'm less worried about the numbers, and more concerned with the fact that the audience can actually think for themselves. I'd value 1,115 independent thinkers, over 1.115million who aren't.
Maybe you should just stick to talking straight, saying what you mean, meaning what you say. Though, if you think I talk mindless drivel, then I don't know how you are going to cope with some actual mindless drivel.
-
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Sat 08 Nov, 2008 19.48
Sorry, I don't appeal to the lowest common denominator. And if you think a Bond Theme Marathon is anything but mindless and, for community radio, drivel, then you're far more of a self-aggrandising hypocrite than I previously thought.cityprod wrote:Or, and this is potentially a revolutionary idea to you, you thought you were making a link, but in fact you weren't, you missed the target. You tired to be too clever by half, rather like a lot of advertisers these days, and rather than communicating what you thought you did, you said something entirely different.bilky asko wrote:I was making the link between what you consider mindless drivel and what I consider mindless drivel from you. Clearly you didn't take the hint, as with the rather obvious hint that I couldn't care less about how you misinterpreted a forumer's posts yet again.cityprod wrote:
It's really quite simple. You worked something out in your own head, and thought that everybody thinks that way, so therefore so must cityprod. So you projected your own opinions onto me.
Except, I don't think that way. I'm less worried about the numbers, and more concerned with the fact that the audience can actually think for themselves. I'd value 1,115 independent thinkers, over 1.115million who aren't.
Maybe you should just stick to talking straight, saying what you mean, meaning what you say. Though, if you think I talk mindless drivel, then I don't know how you are going to cope with some actual mindless drivel.
bilky asko wrote:Sorry, I don't appeal to the lowest common denominator.cityprod wrote:Or, and this is potentially a revolutionary idea to you, you thought you were making a link, but in fact you weren't, you missed the target. You tired to be too clever by half, rather like a lot of advertisers these days, and rather than communicating what you thought you did, you said something entirely different.bilky asko wrote:
I was making the link between what you consider mindless drivel and what I consider mindless drivel from you. Clearly you didn't take the hint, as with the rather obvious hint that I couldn't care less about how you misinterpreted a forumer's posts yet again.
Maybe you should just stick to talking straight, saying what you mean, meaning what you say. Though, if you think I talk mindless drivel, then I don't know how you are going to cope with some actual mindless drivel.
There's nothing lowest common denominator about talking straight, in fact, it seems to be a sign of actual intelligence these days, where as most duck and dodge and generally avoid.
Really, back to this again? So boringly, pathetically predictable. You can do better than that, surely.And if you think a Bond Theme Marathon is anything but mindless and, for community radio, drivel, then you're far more of a self-aggrandising hypocrite than I previously thought.
Turns out it's quite a bit of rare bit of kit - but really ought to have had some sort of anti-theft device on it.scottishtv wrote:Can I just add that I rather enjoyed seeing this question not only asked, but a reply had an image contributed, and the second response "dignified" the thread with what looks like an accurate answer to the question. The thread is now sinking down the list, it's purpose complete.Steve in Pudsey wrote:Have I missed a subtle piss take or is this a serious question?
Riaz wrote:CITV presentation from 1986 to 1988 features images of electronic circuit boards. Does anybody know what type of machinery they are out of?