3 ms·
> There's explicit discussion of new vs existing defaulted Discover cards in her request for data... which would not be meaningful if theydid not consider any f
by abalone 12y ago
> There's explicit discussion of new vs existing defaulted Discover cards in her request for data... which would not be meaningful if theydid not consider any funds misallocated.
That's not really true. Cards run promotions like that all the time where the benefit is offered to all cardholders. One goal may be to drive adoption, but it also drives other goals like retention and brand value. It's false to assume that the only reason they'd be pissed about lack of data on campaign performance is that they had only the one specific campaign goal in mind.
- anigbrowl 12y agoSelectively editing my quote so as to exclude the primary point (about Discover's insistence on being made whole) forces me to doubt either your reading comprehension or your honesty. Whichever is to blame, I see no point to continuing this conversation.
- abalone 12y agoRe: reading comprehension, being "made good" was specifically in reference to the distribution of Fire vs e-reader impressions -- which was in fact made good by subsequently restricting the campaign to Fire (see BI story). That's 100% consistent with Amazon's SVP statement on the matter. There is absolutely nothing in there that states that by "made whole" Discover meant the campaign should solely target 1-click conversions. That is pure speculation and runs counter to all the email evidence.