So Long Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 1000 I win. Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 1000 I win. I dunno dude, You had the 1000th reply, but I had the 1000th POST Link to post Share on other sites
So Long Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 good point, you win Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Given the nature of this thread, this quote actually seems the most accurate: Link to post Share on other sites
aricandover Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 yet another comic book to movie adaptation, that they totally screwed up. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 The following links may be interesting for environmentally minded car shoppers out there Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Tonight on TV a Volkswagon commercial came on, and they are using a Wilco song to advertise. Sigh. It used to be, back in the day, rock and roll was considered sacred music. Not only was it not heard in ads, but the artists themselves would have NEVER, EVER consented to their songs being used to sell, say, Chicken Bowls at KFC. The first band I remember bowing to the God of Advertising was The Who. Everyone was shocked, but not too mad because deep down inside you kind of knew that The Who had blown all their millions on primo-grade cocaine and probably needed the cash. But that opened the floodgates. I'm hard pressed to name a band now that HASN'T had a song in an ad. And every time a new one comes out, I cringe. And then something whispers inside me, "Get with the times, old biddy!" Am I old fashioned to feel that way? How do you feel about classic songs (not just rock) being used as advertising? Does it diminish the artistic integrity? Is it something you don't even think about? Does it even really matter? from a blog Link to post Share on other sites
Guest ChooChooCharlie Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 The Who had blown all their millions on primo-grade cocaine and probably needed the cash.This is probably an accurate statement as my dad worked for the band for a number of years in the 70's and acquiring the blow was usually delegated to him.. I wish the band had used a better accountant back in the day, as I can handle hearing most Who tunes being used to sell a handful of products..but when I heard the overture from Tommy used to endorse allergy medication, it left me hoping that Pete Townshend had perhaps developed some serious hayfever over the years, as that one left me laughing and crying at the same time.. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I doubt that is the reason - Pete was bankrupt in the early 80s + they have always stayed in the UK - which was/is equal to paying high taxes. Link to post Share on other sites
LouieB Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I finally saw my first Wilco/VW ad yesterday....Sky Blue Sky..pretty cool. LouieB Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 The following links may be interesting for environmentally minded car shoppers out there Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Volkswagen didn't score lowest of the low, one model of the Volkswagen Touareg scored very badly on that organization's list - a list which lists no criteria for inclusion. The Touareg is hardly a typical Volkswagen, and I would imagine, is probably the company's lowest-volume model. Most of VW's other models are consistently at or near 30 mpg. Here is a link that shows that, yes, that particular model of the Touareg has a very poor EPA air pollution score, but the other two Touareg models both score above average. All of the other VW models are listed at that site, and not a single one scores below average. You're reaching. Top "Greenest" Vehicles: HONDA CIVIC GX 1.8L 4, auto [CNG] c Tier 2 bin 2 / PZEV 28 39 57 TOYOTA PRIUS 1.5L 4, auto CVT Tier 2 bin 3 / PZEV 60 51 55 HONDA CIVIC HYBRID 1.3L 4, auto CVT Tier 2 bin 2 / PZEV 49 51 53 NISSAN ALTIMA HYBRID 2.5L 4, auto CVT PZEV 42 36 48 TOYOTA YARIS 1.5L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 34 40 47 TOYOTA COROLLA 1.8L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 32 41 46 TOYOTA CAMRY HYBRID 2.4L 4, auto CVT Tier 2 bin 3 / PZEV 40 38 46 HONDA FIT 1.5L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / LEV II 33 38 45 KIA RIO / RIO 5 1.6L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 32 35 45 HYUNDAI ACCENT 1.6L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 32 35 45 HYUNDAI ELANTRA 2.0L 4, auto PZEV 28 36 45 HONDA CIVIC 1.8L 4, auto Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 30 40 44 Not a Volkswagen to be found. Again, they flaunt an earthy crunchy image, when in fact, it is simply not true. Source: http://www.greenercars.com/12green.html Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Top "Greenest" Vehicles: HONDA CIVIC GX 1.8L 4, auto [CNG] c Tier 2 bin 2 / PZEV 28 39 57 TOYOTA PRIUS 1.5L 4, auto CVT Tier 2 bin 3 / PZEV 60 51 55 HONDA CIVIC HYBRID 1.3L 4, auto CVT Tier 2 bin 2 / PZEV 49 51 53 NISSAN ALTIMA HYBRID 2.5L 4, auto CVT PZEV 42 36 48 TOYOTA YARIS 1.5L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 34 40 47 TOYOTA COROLLA 1.8L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 32 41 46 TOYOTA CAMRY HYBRID 2.4L 4, auto CVT Tier 2 bin 3 / PZEV 40 38 46 HONDA FIT 1.5L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / LEV II 33 38 45 KIA RIO / RIO 5 1.6L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 32 35 45 HYUNDAI ACCENT 1.6L 4, manual Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 32 35 45 HYUNDAI ELANTRA 2.0L 4, auto PZEV 28 36 45 HONDA CIVIC 1.8L 4, auto Tier 2 bin 5 / ULEV II 30 40 44 Not a Volkswagen to be found. Again, they flaunt an earthy crunchy image, when in fact, it is simply not true. Source: http://www.greenercars.com/12green.htmlYes, those are twelve vehicles that are not Volkswagens. I'm not sure what this has to do with anything, and I don't care much about Volkswagen's image, but they are generally well-made cars that get good gas mileage. That they don't crack the top dozen models doesn't faze me in the slightest. Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 One of The Who's comeback tours was dubbed something like "The Getting Boris Out of Bankruptcy Tour" by Pete. Link to post Share on other sites
oceanman Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I just got an email from Wilco HQ saying that all proceeds from west coast poster sales go to all local charities.They are also setting up can food drives! Good job guys! Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Yes, those are twelve vehicles that are not Volkswagens. I'm not sure what this has to do with anything, and I don't care much about Volkswagen's image, but they are generally well-made cars that get good gas mileage. That they don't crack the top dozen models doesn't faze me in the slightest. Well, my point, is that the reality does not match the image. If it means nothing to you, well, that Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Well, my point, is that the reality does not match the image. If it means nothing to you, well, that's just fine to.No, the reality doesn't match the image, according to the constraints you place on it. If Volkswagen made claims that they produce the cars that make the very least environmental impact (based on criteria from greenercars.com) out of all the cars produced today, then they would absolutely be making false claims. Seems to me, they claim to produce well-made cars that generally get good gas mileage, and that people who are environmentally conscious can feel good about driving. That is not a false claim, IMO. You really need to prove that Volkswagen is doing something nefarious, don't you? Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 No, the reality doesn't match the image, according to the constraints you place on it. If Volkswagen made claims that they produce the cars that make the very least environmental impact (based on criteria from greenercars.com) out of all the cars produced today, then they would absolutely be making false claims. Seems to me, they claim to produce well-made cars that generally get good gas mileage, and that people who are environmentally conscious can feel good about driving. That is not a false claim, IMO. You really need to prove that Volkswagen is doing something nefarious, don't you? Well, indeed Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Okay, man. That is one seriously high horse you've got there. I find it funny that you would call for moral relativism with regard to the Nazis and the Japanese and the murders of millions of people committed by each before and during WWII, but can't seem to apply the same relativism to automobile companies and their vehicles' emissions standards. As far as VW and gas mileage standards, I would guess that VW has always been somewhat ahead of the curve, since they have historically produced smaller cars than American auto manufacturers. I know that my 78 Super Beetle got about 35 mpg in 1992, which would be pretty damn good by today's standards and was miles ahead of what most other Western auto companies were producing in the 70s. I'm sure you can find me a link to some Datsun hatchback that got 40 mpg in 1978, and I look forward to seeing that, but I'm pretty much done here. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Okay, man. That is one seriously high horse you've got there. I find it funny that you would call for moral relativism with regard to the Nazis and the Japanese and the murders of millions of people committed by each before and during WWII, but can't seem to apply the same relativism to automobile companies and their vehicles' emissions standards. As far as VW and gas mileage standards, I would guess that VW has always been somewhat ahead of the curve, since they have historically produced smaller cars than American auto manufacturers. I know that my 78 Super Beetle got about 35 mpg in 1992, which would be pretty damn good by today's standards and was miles ahead of what most other Western auto companies were producing in the 70s. I'm sure you can find me a link to some Datsun hatchback that got 40 mpg in 1978, and I look forward to seeing that, but I'm pretty much done here. Not a high horse at all Link to post Share on other sites
j4lackey Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Not a high horse at all Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Not a high horse at all Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 So I didn't own a car that still got 35 mpg 15 years after it was manufactured? VWs still don't get better than average gas mileage as a whole? And yes, you're on a horse so high you should have a parachute. Companies would conduct business in a manner that maximizes their profits? Really? Yes, all car companies could do a better job of maximizing mileage over horsepower, but VW still does better than most, IMO. Why is calling for corporate responsibility equivalent to riding a high horse? Or, is it maybe that our standards have become so low, we are so accustomed to tolerating the lowest common denominator, that any suggestion to the contrary makes one look like a fucking giant, or maybe like they are perched atop a horse? Link to post Share on other sites
boywiththorninside Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 I finally saw my first Wilco/VW ad yesterday....Sky Blue Sky..pretty cool. LouieB YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS! That ad is terrible. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts