The No-Ad!

[Dusty Donuts]

The No-Ad! anti-ad TV spray is a specially designed spray to stop ads from constantly being show! Just remove TV backing or reach exposed circuits and spray and wonderously there will never be another ad on your TV again! 73% guarantee!
(Disclaimer : TV may never show anything again. We at No-Ad! are not responsible or cannot be held liable for any losses because of No-Ad!. It did what you thought it would, just not in the way you expected)
This is a thread for stupid ads. *sits back* I'm am preparing my 'laugh' glands.

 

[Hazy]

Ok?
I have a DVR, so I don't personally watch the commercials. But they're essential to the life of a station. No Ads = No money. No money = No channel. Lets face it, they don't get money from magic beans.

I guess an annoying commerical is the recent Palm-Pre extended one. It goes on for like a minute and a half. Not necessarily "Stupid" it's just really drags on.

 

[MasterSqueak]

This would fit better in Forum Games.

Trorplyi Laser Ionizer! A gun as powerful as the name is hard to say!

[sup]Warning: Gun may be too complicated to be used by someone with an IQ of less than 420.[/sup]

 

[scotth266]

This would fit better in Forum Games.

There is a discussion point here: he just didn't make it clear. The thread is to talk about ridiculous adverts.

Honestly, I don't get medicine adverts. If your doctor knows his stuff, he knows what medications there are for your condition, and he's probably a lot better judge of what you need than you are. Please note I am reffering to SERIOUS medication, not stuff for the common cold: I'm talking about companies advertising perscription meds. The worst one I saw was the one where the commercial could last the whole break: it was a blue backround with white words forming everything.

 

[Insert Comedy Here]

It's Sniff and Stiff!

God, I hate that ad. Funny thing is, the product they sell has been scientifically proven to not work, so it's a double whammy to the guys that bought the product.

1) They admit they have erectile difficulty.
2) They paid upwards of six hundred dollars for a product what don't work.

 

[Anarchemitis]

If I were a billionare, I would deliberately put super-short films, video viginettes, and interesting stock footage into prime-time bought advertising space.
Imagine you're watching CSI: Miami, and it breaks for commercial. Instead of seeing stupid McFartface trying to sell your Grandma insurance, you see a guy holding a Microphone. "Mark, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, Fire." *Military Footage of the Nuclear Castle Bravo Detonation* for two minutes, and then CSI would be back.
Or instead of [Commercial], something like this.
That's what I'd do.

 

[JemJar]

Ok?
I have a DVR, so I don't personally watch the commercials. But they're essential to the life of a station. No Ads = No money. No money = No channel. Lets face it, they don't get money from magic beans.

Does anyone else note the problem with this philosophy?

 

[blaze96]

Well cracked did something on misleading ads so there is that.
http://www.cracked.com/article_15768_as-seen-on-tv-10-most-laughably-misleading-ads.html

These ads are usually the most shameful. products that never work as advertised and are just barely on the legal side, anything less than what they provide and they get sued for false advertising. Movie or game adverts are also horrible as well, bad games somehow find a way to get quotes like "best game I ever played" or "game of the year" which I think they just lop worst off and put it in the commercial.

 

[Hazy]

Ok?
I have a DVR, so I don't personally watch the commercials. But they're essential to the life of a station. No Ads = No money. No money = No channel. Lets face it, they don't get money from magic beans.

Does anyone else note the problem with this philosophy?

Lets look at it this way: If they didn't need the money they get from letting companies advertise, why would there be any advertisements?

 

[JemJar]

Ok?
I have a DVR, so I don't personally watch the commercials. But they're essential to the life of a station. No Ads = No money. No money = No channel. Lets face it, they don't get money from magic beans.

Does anyone else note the problem with this philosophy?

Lets look at it this way: If they didn't need the money they get from letting companies advertise, why would there be any advertisements?

My point is that you're happy to watch TV Show X, but with more and more people skipping the adverts, advertisers will get lower response to campaigns and TV companies will have to lower the pricing on ads, meaning the budget for TV Show X will fall.

Whilst clearly there is nothing illegal in your way of doing things at all, in some ways it has comparable effects to torrenting TV shows. I should reiterate that I'm not accusing you of anything sinister at all - in effect it's no different to deliberately turning up to a movie in the cinema ten minutes late so you miss the adverts.

But on some level both actions slightly damage the revenues collected for the production of the show / movie. It's just an interesting thought I had.

 

[Hazy]

Ok?
I have a DVR, so I don't personally watch the commercials. But they're essential to the life of a station. No Ads = No money. No money = No channel. Lets face it, they don't get money from magic beans.

Does anyone else note the problem with this philosophy?

Lets look at it this way: If they didn't need the money they get from letting companies advertise, why would there be any advertisements?

My point is that you're happy to watch TV Show X, but with more and more people skipping the adverts, advertisers will get lower response to campaigns and TV companies will have to lower the pricing on ads, meaning the budget for TV Show X will fall.

Whilst clearly there is nothing illegal in your way of doing things at all, in some ways it has comparable effects to torrenting TV shows. I should reiterate that I'm not accusing you of anything sinister at all - in effect it's no different to deliberately turning up to a movie in the cinema ten minutes late so you miss the adverts.

But on some level both actions slightly damage the revenues collected for the production of the show / movie. It's just an interesting thought I had.

A good point. Sorry, I just assumed you meant That I was wrong by Companies paying the broadcasting station to advertise their product. Which, I very well could be, I'm no television aficionado