Frantic Four promotion

Hahahahah, so discountng the award, which was promotion for the tour.... and another article in the magazine..

Relating to the award, they were all intereviewed and it was shown on tv...and on youtube (which gets big numbers, not including the amount these interviews were posted up and shared on various Quo forums and on (what seems to be your favourite) Facebook.

Ignoring the fact it was on TV, two very big news channels...that get millions of viewers

Just completely discount magazines, that were actually still selling... and funnily enough, I still see Classic Rock being sold, saw it in Tesco just the ther day.

At the time, it was the main page of the Status Quo website, as it was one of the first places you could get tickets early.... and because it practically sold out really early, people must have been visiting the Quo website to get the links for tickets.

But yeah, completely disregard all those things.... just go with Facebook posts... yup... no promotion what so ever.

I don't think I'm saying there was no promotion... I'm counter arguing the point that you are saying there was hardly any promotion.

But you ARE disregarding what I'm saying and pretty much only using Facebook as your counter argument.

Firstly, Quo's management will have had a hand in Quo receiving the award from Classic Rock, it wasn't just Classic Rock just off their own back suddenly giving Quo an award for best live album.... conveniently that same live album they were announcing as a "template" for the reunion shows. What better way to publicise the event than the original line-up in Classic Rock magazine (a magazine that might pull in the old Quo fan who no longer had an interest in the current band and might not have heard or seen the news about the original line up getting back together.) It was an award won for publicity to get attention on the reunion shows. SO yes, it was down to Quo's marketing team and Classic Rock magazine getting the promotion done.... it's how these things work.

"The TV and magazine promo is par for the course for Quo (in any form). It what they've always got - and should expect really."

So, you agree, that this is also promotion....which totally goes against the whole  "hardly" any promotion...

"You talk about TV channels being watched by millions (which technically isn't true, btw. Never mind...) but if someone likes or shares a post on Facebook it is seen by their friends. Given that Quo have nearly half a million subscribers and each one of these people has, say, 100 friends, if just 10% (50k) of subscribers pick up on what Quo post, the potential customer base is massive.




This picture is a screen grab from www.barb.co.uk, the Broadcasters Audience Research Board, taken from the first week in March 2013, when both BBC and Sky News had shown the reports about the Reunion Tour... as you can see from BBC News, it had 5 MILLION viewers on the Monday and Tuesday 6'oclock news.





This picture shows you that over 2 million watched Sky News on the day that the report was shown. Again, taken from the same source.

So technically it is true that millions of people watch TV.

I never said that Facebook wasn't a good promotional tool, nor do I like it or not.

The point being that at the time, trying to appeal to an audience of people who may (and most likely were) fans of the band way back when and had stopped following them, sadly, because of how we as humans are, this "older generation" weren't exactly what would have been classed as a "Facebook" audience and so other means of promotion were used. Yes there were some posts on Facebook regarding the Reunion Tour, not as many as the other posts, granted, but I think that was down to trying to appeal to certain demographics and how it is perceived that people of certain demographics get their news.

I'm not disagreeing with you that the promotion on Facebook may have been more CQ heavy than Reunion, but consider it from the point of view of marketing and who they were trying to appeal to and who they thought would be using Facebook.

What I am trying to point out is, that you're quick to wash everything else that was promotion away and only fixate on Facebook promotion. When in reality the first tour got a fair bit of coverage and promotion. I will however agree that for the second reunion tour, there was a lot less promotion for that.

I'm saying that in comparison to CQ, the FF were underpromoted.

What is the difference between how CQ and FF are/were promoted? That's right... Facebook. And I've given you the facts.



Again, never denied that this promo happened. Disregarded it yes, but never denied it. Same as you're doing with my posts. Don't like it? Tough.



OK... When tickets for a tour had already been sold and an upcoming product wasn't on sale let alone been announced. Real effective promo...

Again, not denying it happened.



So Bula Quo, Aquostic etc were aimed at a "younger generation" then?

CQ aren't featured in Classic Rock magazine anytime?

No-one under 40 is a subscriber to the Quo Facebook page or interested in the FF?

Is that what you're saying?

Bollocks. Every time Quo post something on Facebook, EVERYONE (no matter what demographic they are part of) sees it.

I consider the marketing angle, but the ratio of FF to CQ posts is so incredibly skewed and unfair given Quo's management have no idea whatsoever when someone likes their Facebook page if it's because they like the old band or the new band, POMM or ITAN.

And when it's free to post on Facebook that makes the decision to limit the number of posts about the FF all the more ludicrous.

Another reason why I think CQ have been given precedence over the FF is because Simon Porter has been very contradictory about the two lineups.

He said there was "no demand for the FF".

Yet he also said the general public couldn't care less about band members, because to them, "Quo is Quo".

If what he says is true, I could just as easily say there is no demand for CQ. But I won't, because I know that's bollocks.

Please keep on topic

My argument all along - since around 2013 - has focused on the comparisons to how CQ are / have been promoted compared to the FF because I believe (and have clearly pointed out) there is an agenda against the FF by Quo and their management.

Forgive me for not repeating what I've already said.

If I wanted to say the FF were underpromoted based on the success they had in their heyday, I would have posted stats relating to that instead. But I didn't, because it wasn't/isn't the point I was/am trying to make.



I'm disregarding FF promotion on TV and in magazines on the basis of CQ having equal or similar promotion.

Whether it has any great effect on sales figures is a different argument altogether but I don't believe it to do so. Which is why I said it was negligible.



I could go into depth how TV ratings figures, programme reaches etc are all calculated, how numbers aren't totally accurate etc. But I won't.



How many of the half a million people who like Quo's Facebook page are "not likely" to use Facebook???

Btw, I know how marketing works, having done a degree level course in media.



I can see your point, but the disparity between CQ and FF promotion is so great and so unthinkable given Quo don't know exactly why someone has liked their Facebook page and the fact that none of CQ's releases achieve great sales unless there is an exceptional form of concentrated marketing campaign going on, i.e. regular ads on TV. Likewise, the FF boxset in 2013 sold more than LNOTE, which could seem to suggest that with more promotion - even applying a fairer (but still considerably less) ratio of posts - it could have sold even more.