3 ms·
It's because it was 100% their choice. It doesn't matter if they drew funds from the ad budget or the CEO's couch cushions, they could have spent the ad dollars
by arcticfox 4y ago
It's because it was 100% their choice. It doesn't matter if they drew funds from the ad budget or the CEO's couch cushions, they could have spent the ad dollars on it even if they didn't.
They spent $50.5M on an ad campaign about charity, of which $0.1M was the charity itself. It's embarrassing. 50/50 might be an appropriate ratio. Even 90/10 might be defensible. 99.8/0.2 is "are you joking" territory.