"Scott T. Jensen" > wrote in message
...

> Because unless you live within reasonable driving distance of that
> draught-only brewery, you'll very likely never have an opportunity to
sample
> and enjoy their beer. What I'm seeking is a contest amongst those that
> distribute their beer thus are more available for the consumer to possibly
> purchase, drink, and enjoy. Just as GABF doesn't accept home-brewed
beers,
> my contest wouldn't accept draught-only beers.

Well, it strikes me as being arbitrary and not fitting with the supposed
goal of finding the best beer available to consumers. But, hey, it's your
contest. Go crazy.

> And are you saying your opinion is everyone's opinion?

Nope. I'm just saying I'm far from alone in that opinion.

> > > > Sure, everyone finds out about beers they might not have
> > > > otherwise via these contests, but I've seen enough cases
> > > > where an award winning beer isn't any better than a lot
> > > > of similar beers out there.

> Given your statement that winning beers taste like "a lot of similar beers
> out there" and that I used the word "perhaps", I think my statement was
> reasonable.

Except that's not what I said. I preserved the original above. I said that
I've had award-winning beers that are *no better* than similar beers.
There's a difference between that and tasting the same.

> > Especially on the basis of a statement like I've seen
> > plenty of cases where award-winning beers weren't
> > better than other beers available out there. Why does
> > that seem such an absurd statement?
>
> Did I say it was an absurd statement? Please don't go the strawman route.

OK, fine. You didn't say "absurd." But you've chosen to pick on that
statement twice now as some sort of indicator that my opinion on that point
is wrong and somehow calls into question my ability to have discerning taste
when it comes to beer.

> Odd. I would have then assumed that if you're a marketing consultant you
> would have always had a spellchecker look over your posts before letting
> them go.

I'm capable of telling the difference between professional and formal
communications, and personal and information communications. Usenet is
neither professional nor formal. That's no excuse for bad use of the
language. But typos do not constitute bad use of the language.

>
> > There's a difference between what I'd recommend for a
> > business to do and what I do. Let's take awards. My
> > current client is an automaker. They have a new car that
> > has won gobs of awards, including some of the most
> > prestigeous ones out there. Has it helped their sales?
> > Nope. They are well, well below their sales targets.
>
> Perhaps that's due to the one that is handling their marketing. ;-)

The little smiley face doesn't mitigate the fact that you're approaching
asshole territory right here. I'm not questioning your professional acumen.
I'd appreciate it if you'd extend me the same courtesy. I could go on and on
about why the company's missing its sales targets, how it's unrelated to the
particular marketing areas I'm involved in, etc. but it's irrelevant here.
Other than to suggest that you stick to topic you actually have a basis to
comment on.

>
> > Awards are important for one thing: creating recognition
> > and getting a product more visibility in the marketplace.
>
> That's incorrect. Awards can also help in the consumer decision process.
> Many consumers do pay attention to what awards products and services earn
> and they are wise to do so.

It depends. If car is one of Car and Driver's 10 Best, yes, that's something
that a consumer can take a lot of stock in. But, there are a lot of contests
(and, to be pedantic, something like Car and Driver's awards and reviews
aren't technically contests) that are bogus and not at all indicitive of
quality.

Take the classic example of a restaurant advertising it's been recognized as
having "the best burger in town." By whom? A lot of times the cites aren't
even listed. Is it dumb for the restaurant to say that? No. Because most
consumers aren't going to bother checking into it or even noticing that
there's no indication of who said it was the best burger in town. Same thing
goes with movie reviews: take a look at the citations on a lot of the
glowing praise in movie ads, especially for movies of marginal quality.
They're often from organizations that you've never heard of, from TV
stations in Wichita and Indianapolis, etc.

Again, certain ratings, awards, etc. are important ones to have. Getting JD
Power's top quality rating is huge, for instance. But, to speak in broad
abstracts, awards are more important for raising visibility and recognition
than as a mark of quality. Again, because most consumers will not do the
homework to check into an award's veracity and pertinence. There are
exceptions for well-known ones, like the examples I've cited.

> If you're a marketing consultant, it is rather
> odd you don't know this.

If you're a marketing consultant (that's only part of my job, by the way),
it's rather odd that you as a consumer don't recognize the shortcomings of
awards.

>
> > It does not mean the product is better...
>
> It does, however, lend credence to that view.

No. It leads to the *perception* of that view. Subtle, but huge, difference.

>
> > ...- or that it's going to be commercially successful.
>
> Quality does help sales, but no business should depend on just that to
> generate sales.

Most certainly. The marketplace is littered with the lower-quality product
having hte dominant market share. The Betamax/VHS example I cited earlier is
a textbook example.

-Steve