jmac_or

So, how many of you checked out the Bear Archery add linked on the ArcheryTalk discussion?
One vote here.

JMAC

JeffB

In what way? Serious question here, I'm not arguing.

Purely from a marketing standpoint? From an "informational" standpoint? Cause they have girls w/ big boobies?

AFAIC Mathews has everyone beat hands down from an informational and marketing perspective. They describe thier product fully, the features of each model, and their technology in general (the "mini-catalogs"). Even on the less than desireable"slam" ads they do a good job of provinding information for the reader/potential customer (regardless of whether it's true, false, or partly both)

Pretty girls, pro-hunters, and pro-shooters do little to sell bows AFAICT. Actually discussing the product in detail is a huge part of Mathews success.

Arthur P

Well, in Mathews' informational standpoint, you can count on seeing a good bit of misinformation. Or maybe 'exaggerated' information would be a better way of putting it. Frankly, I get bored with Mathews' ads after the first 3 or 4 pages.

I have to admit Matt McPherson is a salesman delux, but Martin's ads have more eye appeal and are definitely NOT boring.

JeffB

I agree Arthur. I've been one of the biggest "opponents" of thier half-truth advertising for years, even though I love their product. My point was that unlike most companies at least they PROVIDE some information about the product. Most other companies show a pic of the bow, maybe some "famous" person who shoots one, or a "nobody" with a big deer. Half the time no specs are even listed.

nub

#2, I even clicked to enlarge.

Straightarrow

I prefer to look at a pretty girl, then some fat bowhunter or some ad spewing exagerated claim about how great their bow is. The typical dribble found in most bow ads is enough to bore me to death. Showing me a bowhunter with a trophy does nothing to get me to look at an ad. I am completely aware that the bow brand has nothing to do with the harvest of the animal. Maybe I understand advertising too well. Maybe I just want something that's easy on the eyes. Whatever it is, I know I prefer Martin's ads.

I'm never going to buy a bow because of an ad. At least Martin's ads grab my attention and are pleasant to look at. Hands-on is the only method I will use to buy a bow, so the ad just has to get my attention that a particular bow exists. Then, maybe I'll go check it out. When I think about Mathew's ad (not picking on them), I can't pick out anything that has remained in my mind. They're all one big blur. However, I can picture the details of each Martin ad very easily. Without a doubt, the details of that ad are far more easily recalled. In my opinion, Martin has been very smart by using this type of advertising. The tasteful use of beautiful women is a great way to get bowhunters, that are predominantly male, to stop and look at the ad. Goal number one accomplished. I can't even tell you what the last Hoyt or Bowtech ad was. I'm sure that I didn't read them or pay any attention to them.

JeffB

SA,

Fair enough..I truly was curious

oldelkhunter

Wheres the bow in the picture ?

Straightarrow

If you can't remember that, you must have had your eyes closed. It was in a very noticable area of the ad. [8D]