[quote name=\'JasonA1\' post=\'211001\' date=\'Mar 22 2009, 09:35 PM\']
When I saw the headphones, they were named by brand and everything, but without an on-screen logo, it was not a sponsored prize. Another example of how the current regime doesn't get the idea of the business model - you don't give out the plug if it's not paid for! Granted, it makes it near impossible to bid on the designer stuff when instead of saying "Gucci bag" you say "this designer handbag is a great addition to your wardrobe." Know the solution? Don't use the unsponsored designer stuff! Don't give the brand unless it's paid for!
-Jason
[/quote]Well, they're in a bind. They obviously want to offer the designer prizes to attract young females, but there's no way they're going to get the designer companies to pay for placement on a show that play at a time when their customers are (presumably, even in the downturn) at work. So they either TPIR doesn't get the designer stuff and continues to struggle with the demo, or they take a chance and buy the swag themselves and eat the cost. After doing that, there's no point in not mentioning the name, because the name holds all the appeal.
What I don't understand is 1) the high frequency and 2) the way they go about it. Sometimes they give each designer name it's own spot, which is fine by me. But other times (especially when they started) they just throw them all in together as one IUFB or prize in a multi-prize game. Now, when it was a fashion package for Bullseye, it made more sense. But if you have $1200 worth of Jimmy Choo shoes, $1000 from Vera Wang, and $1500 from Dani Black, why not use them separately and mention three names at three times instead three names at one time? Sure, you get the shock value of Drew saying they're worth "THREE THOUSAND seven hundred dollars", but you could have put a couple pairs in a game, which might be lost. Then you could keep mentioning the name until someone wins it.