Are Campaigns The Cause of McDonald’s Coming Clean?

weird man

Most of you heard about the McDonald’s Twitter Campaign that went wrong a couple weeks ago.  According to MSNBC McDonald’s has done away with the use of ammonia hydroxide, claims to have not used the chemical since August of last year and that their decision had nothing to do with Chef Jamie Oliver’s campaign.

 

I personally believe that Chef Jamie Oliver had a lot to do with their decision. There’s a lot to be said about the word “Expose”. Seeing as though they claim to have not used the chemical since last year, there’s no doubt that the #TwitterFail possibly challenged them to state it to the public. Will they ever tell us that? I doubt it. With that being said, I wonder why would they wait to come forward now, when they could have informed their customers when the change first took place.

Nonetheless, the Chef Jamie Campaign and the failed Twitter Campaign were because people were looking for change and/or wanted a platform to voice their opinion. No matter what the “Reason” is for changing, acknowledging that the voices were heard and you’re willing to make changes because of them, are never a bad thing.

My Corporation (App)

20120129-225205.jpg

20120129-225205.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Looking to start a Corporation? There’s an App for that. My Corporation is a free iPad App that I found to be very helpful with loads of information for those considering Incorporating their business. With topics from Why should you incorporate to explaining the different types of corporations. To download the app click here

Christian Louboutin Fight to Protect Their Red Sole Trademark

Christian Louboutin

“The Real McCoy”

 

 

 

 

 

Imagine creating an upscale fashion line and your competitor imitates one key element that sets your line apart from the rest.  That’s the dilemma with Christian Louboutin vs. YSL in the case of the Red Soles.

Louboutin filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against YSL because they were incorporating red soles on their shoes.

according to International Business Times Louboutin was quoted:

“For YSL and PPR Group, this might just be a legal matter, but that’s not the case for me. On the contrary, to me it is very personal: after all, this is an intrinsic part of my life and my company, which bears my name – and which I have built over the past 20 years and still independently own. This is why I had to be there in person,” Vogue quoted Louboutin saying.

Christian Louboutin was denied the order against YSL.  Which led Louboutin to file an appeal.

If Christian Louboutin are denied the right to trademark the red soles they believe that it will water down their brand.  On the other hand, there are many brands that have knock-offs however, faithful consumers could careless about a knock-off!  They want and are willing to pay for “They Real McCoy”.

On another note, considering the brand YSL has built, yet, they are willing to copy a significant trademark of another company, sounds a bit raunchy.  The time that they’re spending in court could have been spent on developing a exclusive trademark of their own.  Now, that’s what I consider watered down.

photo courtesy: Neiman Marcus

Copyright © 2009 - 2012 ·SPLITCYBERNALITY.COM® is a registered trademark of Splitcybernality, Inc. All Rights Reserved