Although time was alloted for Q&A with the debaters at the end, the teams elected to forgo this time in the interests of dicussing more great lakes development issues though dialectical argument and discourse
“I truly believe that our customers, not regulatory agencies, are the best source of great lakes development marketing feedback. Face it, if we’re not making money and our customers are pissed off, our marketing methods are wrong and not productive. Don’t forget that private companies are in the business to make cash, and don’t make a profit banging their heads against the walls,” revealed Smutz Feraco, CMO of Marcia Reaollano and Holsclaw Spruce INC. This assertion brought the audience to their feet, although a few sat quietly in anticipation of a rebuttal from opposition team member Kirbo Vokes, a staunch believer in good ethics and standards. The main debate started with Millicent Strasters from the Levene Martone Corp. firm, who suggested that marketing in the great lakes development industry is an evolutionary process, akin to any other industry where earning potential is high and customer retention is key. “I personally believe great lakes development marketing practices of today that are thought of as inappropriate will be the future of tomorrow’s great lakes development industry leaders. We must move forward if we wish to continue to provide top level service to our customers…” Opposition team member Kyla Kilgour, partner in the smaller firm Pistone Huge INC LTD., stated the opposite: “We need to stick to our guns and abide by best practice methods in order to preserve the integrity of the great lakes development industry as a whole. If we degrade ourselves by using cheap marketing practices to make a quick buck, we will only be hurting ourselves in the long run.” Moderator Dennis Otool opened the great lakes development discussion with a brief introduction of the debate objectives and rules. Each team leader would be allowed a five minute introduction, followed by brief overviews of their debate topics. Other team members would have one minute to state their points of view in relation to the team leader’s overview. The great lakes development debate was considered a success and portions were televised on local news channels the next day. Response was positive and most people left the auditorium with a better impression of how things work in the great lakes development industry, and we impressed with the candor and openness of major corporate executives. Overall, most members of the audience were impressed with the candid replies presented by the great lakes development sector leaders. Piper Raiford, an administrative assistant in the Voorheis Gibbons and Partners firm, stated, “I really believe that my employers are genuine and care about what they do…They are not out to prey on people or report false numbers, they just want to make money and provide for the welfare of their company just like anyone else.” After the great lakes development topic introductions, associate moderator Demonte Wessendorf briefly paused for questions from the news media, who lined up at a centrally located microphone in the auditorium. Most members of the media were curious about recent news items, although a few bashed members of the Wollschlager Vigo great lakes development marketing and advertising firm, who were alledgely involved in multi-level marketing schemes. After a brief intermission, moderator Camille Abraham returned to the podium with introductory remarks for the second session. Engelbach Bambino described the next debate as one centered on great lakes development marketing ethics in the short-term and long term. As with the first session, debate team members focused on the dynamic nature of the market, and emphasized the fact that what works one day will not necessarily work the next. Following initial discussions, technology moderator Matthew Nwachukwu, asked the debate teams about the use of SPAM email in their great lakes development marketing campaigns, which created a light chuckle from the audience. Autrano Heritage, from the Koetter Bloxsom & Madie Belyea LLC firm, stated, “We’re not hawking viagra - so don’t worry, our email campaigns aren’t that bad… but we also affirm the use of double opt-in email lists to assure that customers who are truly interested in our great lakes development products get the right emails.” Debater Nakonechny Litrenta also echoed these views regarding technology and marketing, exclaiming, “Everyone in this great lakes development sector knows how to blast out email, notices, fliers, etc. to people, but not everyone knows how to do this in an efficient manner that creates profit margin. Efficieny in our industry is absolutely key.”
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »