<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What the Heck is That?   Part 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/what-the-heck-is-that-part-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/what-the-heck-is-that-part-2/</link>
	<description>Stephen Brooks opines about (usually) marketing and specifically bar marketing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:53:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: What the Heck is That? Part 4 &#171; About Bars &#38; Marketing &#8211; by Stephen Brooks</title>
		<link>http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/what-the-heck-is-that-part-2/#comment-638</link>
		<dc:creator>What the Heck is That? Part 4 &#171; About Bars &#38; Marketing &#8211; by Stephen Brooks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 15:08:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/?p=1063#comment-638</guid>
		<description>[...] the Heck is That? Part&#160;4 May 13, 2009 &#8212; Stephen Brooks   Continuing in the series (1, 2, 3) of inexplicable marketing images, here we have a variation: an inexplicable marketing [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the Heck is That? Part&nbsp;4 May 13, 2009 &#8212; Stephen Brooks   Continuing in the series (1, 2, 3) of inexplicable marketing images, here we have a variation: an inexplicable marketing [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: netdud</title>
		<link>http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/what-the-heck-is-that-part-2/#comment-532</link>
		<dc:creator>netdud</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:33:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/?p=1063#comment-532</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m pretty sure that the pointy thing sticking out of the creature&#039;s belly is supposed to be the nose of a little joey in the &#039;roo&#039;s pouch, which doesn&#039;t resemble either parents&#039;, but they&#039;ve both decided to put that behind them--though not literally, obviously, because the joey has to face forward or it would suffocate-- and move on with their relationship without blaming each other, and loving the joey for himself, not blaming him at all for the problems they have, because after all, he&#039;s just a child.

It won&#039;t work perfectly though, and he&#039;ll act out in school, and then fall in briefly with a bad crowd right after high school.  He&#039;ll end up on the right track eventually, but that possession charge will be a part of every job interview that he won&#039;t look forward too, and there&#039;s still a scar on his neck where he had the tattoo.

So on the right side of the first image, it breaks down like this:

 - Snout that belongs on an ant-eater
 - Neck
 - A pair of badly-drawn forepaws that don&#039;t work as a sillouette
 - Chest
 - Joey&#039;s bastard snout
 - Belly
 - Legs
 - Feet

Which makes a lot of sense, if your motto is &quot;We&#039;ll Take Care Of You So Darn Good That You&#039;ll Feel As If You Were In The Pouch Of A Kangaroo With A Big Lobster Claw Sticking Out The Back Of Its Head.&quot;(tm)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m pretty sure that the pointy thing sticking out of the creature&#8217;s belly is supposed to be the nose of a little joey in the &#8216;roo&#8217;s pouch, which doesn&#8217;t resemble either parents&#8217;, but they&#8217;ve both decided to put that behind them&#8211;though not literally, obviously, because the joey has to face forward or it would suffocate&#8211; and move on with their relationship without blaming each other, and loving the joey for himself, not blaming him at all for the problems they have, because after all, he&#8217;s just a child.</p>
<p>It won&#8217;t work perfectly though, and he&#8217;ll act out in school, and then fall in briefly with a bad crowd right after high school.  He&#8217;ll end up on the right track eventually, but that possession charge will be a part of every job interview that he won&#8217;t look forward too, and there&#8217;s still a scar on his neck where he had the tattoo.</p>
<p>So on the right side of the first image, it breaks down like this:</p>
<p> &#8211; Snout that belongs on an ant-eater<br />
 &#8211; Neck<br />
 &#8211; A pair of badly-drawn forepaws that don&#8217;t work as a sillouette<br />
 &#8211; Chest<br />
 &#8211; Joey&#8217;s bastard snout<br />
 &#8211; Belly<br />
 &#8211; Legs<br />
 &#8211; Feet</p>
<p>Which makes a lot of sense, if your motto is &#8220;We&#8217;ll Take Care Of You So Darn Good That You&#8217;ll Feel As If You Were In The Pouch Of A Kangaroo With A Big Lobster Claw Sticking Out The Back Of Its Head.&#8221;(tm)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton</title>
		<link>http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/what-the-heck-is-that-part-2/#comment-531</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:28:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/?p=1063#comment-531</guid>
		<description>I seriously think it&#039;s at least a 10 or 20 year old campaign image, so maybe the designer died and they&#039;re too cheap to have it redone.

It does have an early eighties look to it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I seriously think it&#8217;s at least a 10 or 20 year old campaign image, so maybe the designer died and they&#8217;re too cheap to have it redone.</p>
<p>It does have an early eighties look to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Brooks</title>
		<link>http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/what-the-heck-is-that-part-2/#comment-529</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Brooks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:24:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/?p=1063#comment-529</guid>
		<description>OK, so they have a (bad) reason for using the kangaroo.  But why draw it so terribly?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, so they have a (bad) reason for using the kangaroo.  But why draw it so terribly?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Clayton</title>
		<link>http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/2009/01/16/what-the-heck-is-that-part-2/#comment-528</link>
		<dc:creator>Clayton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 20:00:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://barmarbybroox.wordpress.com/?p=1063#comment-528</guid>
		<description>I seem to remember that many many years ago their slogan and tv advertising were indeed something to the effect of &quot;Hop On down to MacDonald Pontiac...&quot;

So it appears that they believe that they have some huge following and brand recognition with the &#039;Roo and they don&#039;t want to change like Electrasol. 

In both cases, they are dumbasses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I seem to remember that many many years ago their slogan and tv advertising were indeed something to the effect of &#8220;Hop On down to MacDonald Pontiac&#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>So it appears that they believe that they have some huge following and brand recognition with the &#8216;Roo and they don&#8217;t want to change like Electrasol. </p>
<p>In both cases, they are dumbasses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
