[Linux-aus] Marketing Linux

Sun Apr 22 21:16:56 UTC 2007

I'm forwarding this response to Glen Turner from helios (Ken Stark) at lobby4linux.com


On Sun, 2007-04-22 at 08:54 -0500, helios at lobby4linux.com wrote:
> Tracy wrote:  
> > I got this today
> >   
> > 
> > 
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Subject: Re: [Linux-aus] Marketing Linux
> > -last one!-)
> > From: "Glen Turner - glen.turner at aarnet.edu.au" <+linuxaus+tracyanne
> > +978f0b378f.glen.turner#aarnet.edu.au at spamgourmet.com>
> > Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 12:04:11 +0930
> > To: linuxaus.1.tracyanne at spamgourmet.com
> > To: linuxaus.1.tracyanne at spamgourmet.com
> > CC: linux-aus at lists.linux.org.au
> > 
> > linuxaus.1.tracyanne at spamgourmet.com wrote:
> > 
> >   
> > > I'm involved in a project that is attempting to raise funds to begin a
> > > marketing campaign to market Linux to a wider audience. This project is
> > > mainly the work of two men Ken Stark (who Blogs as Helios
> > > http://blog.lobby4linux.com/) and and Bob Moore a Linux Admin and prime
> > > mover of this project. They have engaged the services of Acceleration
> > > Marketing ( http://www.accelerationmarketing.net/ ) a marketing company
> > > that works with the US Motorsport industry. They have a car and a
> > > driver, all they need now is the help of the Linux community to raise
> > > $US350,000 to race an Indy car in this years Indy 500
> > > ( http://www.tux500.com/index.php )
> > >     
> > 
> > 1)
> > Value for money. That sort of money could put a full time lobbyist
> > in Canberra arguing our cause -- not just for Linux, but related
> > issues like copyright and patents.
> > 
> > 2)
> > Tracking the cash.
> > 
> > We give money to Tux500 who gives it to Acceleration Marketing who
> > gives it to a Indy 500 race team.  But we are not a party to any of the
> > contracts.  That is simply too high a level of risk. Not necessarily
> > of fraud, but of paying for unneeded services and of paying people
> > who do not have our interests at heart.
> > 
> > For example, why not deal directly with a team? If that is complex,
> > then take on Acceleration Marketing (or one of their competitors)
> > as *our* contractor.  As it stands, Acceleration Marketing have no
> > responsibility other than to themselves.
> > 
> > Because of the lack of track record, contracts are needed. There
> > simply isn't enough demonstrated trust for a donation.
> > 
> > 3)
> > Transaction costs will be high.
> > 
> > You are asking Australians to fund a US race team via a US marketing
> > firm.  You have already quoted in US$, so presumably contracts are
> > going to be written, interpreted and enforced in the USA.
> > 
> > I do such contracts all the time, and they are well beyond the scope
> > of Linux Australia and the costs are much higher than is appropriate
> > for a small not-for-profit organisation.
> > 
> > 4)
> > Effectivness.
> > 
> > This proposal is for a one year deal. But that doesn't seem to be
> > the norm for successful marketing in the Indy 500. Why are we
> > being presented with a one-off proposal rather than a multi-year
> > marketing plan?
> > 
> > Why are the sums of money so small compared to the cost of car
> > racing?  I'm assuming we are not paying a high price and thus
> > do not get much visibility.  The terms of the marketing need
> > to be much more clearly described -- are we paying for a decal
> > on the driver's arm or are we paying to have Tux on the bonnet?
> > 
> > How does Acceleration Marketing propose to measure the effectiveness
> > of our marketing spend?
> > 
> > 
> > Sorry to sound so negative, but even if race car sponsorship is
> > an effective means of promoting the use of Linux, the mechanism
> > you propose to do this isn't suitable.
> > 
> > Regards, Glen
> >   
> Tracy, 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's becoming obvious that people are not bothering to click links or
> read 
> any of the information being supplied to them.  On the surface it
> appears
> that many are just going to let their old ways of thinking rule here
> and nudge their 
> "comfort-partner" Apathy every now and then for some sign of approval.
> Let me address 
> some of the "arguments" so as you may better understand the grand idea
> here and not
> get lost in the minutia
> 
> We give money to Tux500 who gives it to Acceleration Marketing who
> gives it to a Indy 500 race team.  But we are not a party to any of the
> contracts.  That is simply too high a level of risk. Not necessarily
> of fraud, but of paying for unneeded services and of paying people
> who do not have our interests at heart.
> 
> The terms of the marketing need
> to be much more clearly described -- are we paying for a decal
> on the driver's arm or are we paying to have Tux on the bonnet?
> 
> This is clear evidence the poster didn't bother to read one link you sent him.
> and HE is not qualified to make the statements that follows them?  Here.  this is 
> the case that should be made.
> 
> 
> 
> It would appear that the poster has not taken into consideration that Acceleration Marketing
> is a FOSS-only business and was chosen for this task primarily because of their expertise in
> this particular marketing area AND the fact that they have a stake in seeing Linux grow.  They
> Run nothing BUT Linux and FOSS software on their end of the business.  As far as not having ANY input, 
> I ask if they have any input in any third party decisions in this sort of thing. What this post asks is that 40 million linux
> users be allowed to debate any and all decisions made in the advertising realm?  
> 
> Am I understanding this 
> correctly?  Well that seems to have worked out well for Debian.  As far as funding accountability, 
> they have neglected to discover that two prominent members of the Linux Community, one of them a
> noted minister and Pastor, have been appointed by the community to oversee and report back to the Community any and all 
> transactions originating from this account.  What we have here are arguments based on a BUSINESS model.
> This isn't a business.  It's an attempt to get one percent of the world-wide Linux user base to donate less 
> than the cost of a cup of coffee to this effort.  The largest one day sporting event in the world.
> Win, lose or draw, this can only provide exposure for the community.  Exposure this community seems
> loathe to have.  Let's begin taking a look at this organizations efforts to proliferate Linux.  It 
> may be interesting to see who walks the walk and who likes to talk.  Time for talking is far past.
> Swapping the latest distro releases between linux users then holding meetings to discuss their merits
> and shortcomings is not a means of proliferation.
> 
> What I am reading here are objections to an idea that could greatly benefit the community and for
> the donation of one dollar and thirty four cents per community member.  Not multiple digit 
> amounts, less than a couple of bucks to see Linux participate in a grand and wonderful experiment.
> There really isn't much negative potential here Tracy.  What you are witnessing first-hand is 
> the method by which Linux will eventully be choked to death.  The saddest part of all?  It 
> will be by the hands that built it.  It took this poster many paragraphs to simply say:
> 
> I love inertia.
> 

Regards

Tracyanne