Naug Blog

Let's Talk Business

Day: March 9, 2019

A Letter from Norm Waller, CEO of Millennium Tux

I opened Millennium Tux over 40 years ago with one mission: rent folks boxy, baggy, trashy suits.

And I’ve stuck with it! Renting a suit at Millennium Tux is exactly the same today as it was in 1973. Only now you can browse our catalogue online (you still have to come into the store to rent).

Why rent from Millennium Tux?

Why not? We rent the same garbage every other place does. And we promise what you see is what you get, and what you get is a suit made of trash.

And if you’re a fancy fashion man, we’ve got styles for every occasion: weddings, funerals, court arraignments, job interviews — even prom (pretty much an interview with dancing, am I right, guys??).

Don’t worry about the fit

Whether you like your suit boxy or baggy, we’ve got your size. All thanks to our guiding principle: “one size fits all.”

When you’re done, be sure to bring it back the next day or you’ll pay late fees. I don’t care if you’re hungover. Renting isn’t supposed to be fun, people.

I’m Norm Waller and I’m here to say renting a suit will NEVER change as long as me and Millennium Tux are still around. That’s my guarantee!*   In all seriousness, if you are looking to BUY an affordable suit there’s much better options then renting trash (literally).

*Guarantee void pending fraud investigation

Hey guys, a little confession….

I got real excited to don your first ever 100% garbage bag suit, get ready to be disappointed. Millennium Tux isn’t real.

The cardboard-box-clad models, the greasy CEO – all faker than a $10 Rolex in Chinatown.

But renting a tux IRL is almost that bad. You spend hours dealing with sketchy sales guys in musty stores, only to end up with cheaply-made suits that don’t fit well.

Do better with Cheap Suits

No more trips to the strip mall. No more glued polyester suits.

And since Cheap Suits ships your suits fast from Canada, you have plenty of time to make sure it fits. If it doesn’t, they will replace it, free of charge.

Cheap Suits is giving you wonderful premium suits for  $111 off your order , what are you waiting for, check out out this awesome and inexpensive blue suit. Let Cheap Suits know what event you have coming up so they can help you suitup in style.

Bye bye, trashy suits and gross salespeople. Hello, handsome.

The problem with programmatic ads

It all started when The Times ran a story highlighting a mid-roll ad for L’Oréal smack dab in the middle of a “hate-filled sermon” a couple weeks ago.

Then Alphabet stock took a 3% tumble, as they and other big brands started pulling their ads off YouTube after finding their logo next to “unsavory” content.

This year, internet advertising around the world is set to pass TV ads for the first time ever and Google has built a massive business on the back of metrics like “reach” and “impressions.”

But apparently, everyone was so obsessed with these metrics, they never asked the basic question,“Where are you actually showing my stuff?”

So now it’s all coming under question

JPMorgan Chase, one of the companies rethinking their ad strategy, narrowed down their whitelist (approved websites) from 400k websites to around 5k.

And if you were picturing a fancy algorithm instantly narrowing the list, think again. They started with the 12k sites (of 400k) that ever recorded a click. Then, an intern manually visited each of them one by one and cut another 7k.

Apart from realizing they should give that intern a raise, Chase also saw almost zero change in overall ad performance.

What? How is that possible?

The claim is that ad tech companies use garbage impressions to artificially adjust the conversion rate to a point where it’s clearly better than the alternatives (print, radio, TV) but still low enough to exhaust ad budgets.

Google gets paid more the more ads are shown — even if only 1% of the placements actually convert. So even though you’re looking for 1,000 people to buy your product, they’re still going to show your ads to 99,000.

But things could be changing

If this unrest continues, we may see a digital enlightenment period, where brands manually control their spend without reliance on programmatic (e.g., algorithms and stuff).

The result? No shampoo ads next to hate speech, more money for the “good” part of the internet, less money for the long tail (the “bad” internet), and fewer days of fresh, line-caught Alaskan salmon at Google’s cafeteria.

 

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén