Michelle Malkin reports that a representative of the Swifties says the NYT turned down their ad.

Methinks Mr. Sulzburger’s sanctimonious fondness for liberal causes is about to get real expensive.

Can you imagine if all 1000+ advertisers of the NYT demanded a similar (or more with volume) discount, it could drive the company out of business.

Can you imagine if the company you work for gave that sized discount to a single customer and all the other customers found out? Employees would be fired, customers would leave or demand similar treatment, layoffs would occur, and the business would most likely go belly up.

Not too smart for a bunch of east-coast progressive intellectuals.

I get it alright. You obtain your vehicles in a different way than the average Joe. You rationalize that as if you were more deserving or hardworking than the next guy, and taking cheap pot shots at me.
Fact is if you took your hard earned money and went to the car dealership more than likely you would not pay the same price.
You also show contempt to those you deem less succesfull than yourself. A bit of “classism” on your part. Only the haves are worthy of your consideration. The average Joe according to you deserves to pay more for the car so you the “successful” can pay less. The car company that sold the vehicle to “your” company at fleet rates will make up the difference by charging more to the rest of their customers.

There you go attacking Ellinas again. He probably thinks he’s earned his handouts.

I get it alright.

No, you don’t. In our system, everyone is a “capitalist”. The worker’s labor is his capital, and he puts it where it will get the most return, as he should. If one gets a company car as part of his negotiated compensation, so be it.
Your Nineteenth Century Marxist ideas are not only wrong, they are hopelessly out of date. You are still stuck on the class envy meme.

You and the rest did not notice my attempt at sarcasm

When it makes as much sense as the rest of your arguments, you might want to flag it in the future… Like this: /sarcasm

BTW, must feel good that you failed at that, too! /sarcasm

You also show contempt to those you deem less succesfull (sic) than yourself. A bit of “classism” on your part. Only the haves are worthy of your consideration.

The lesson continues…My job in management (having come up through the ranks of working stiffs, thank you very much!), helps to provide gainful employment to those working for me, while allowing for a profit for the owners of the company (THOSE filthy Capitalists are in the process of selling their company to their employees through an ESOP program…Bastards !).
In the meantime, the goods and services my company provides to other companies, helps them to meet their payrolls and employ many more Americans!
Yep! That’s the “contempt” I show to those less successful than myself. I try to help them make more moeny for themselves. Bastard!

Therefore it should come as a surprise to anyone that the NYT gave preferential treatment to MoveOn.org, a like minded organisation/buisiness.Get over it.

e: Your pathetic attempt to make an equivalence between a legitimate form of compensation and an obviously political favor to enable the spread of propaganda is duly noted.

Come to think of it…I get “free” floss and toothbrushes from my dental hygienist! Damn! I wonder if that’s taxable income or if it’s distorting the market? All those Wal-Marts losing out on the floss and toothbrush business! Yikes!
I’ll bet WOOF will stand up for Wal-Mart now?

If the car is compensation is there tax?

There would be if I didn’t pay a nominal usage fee. I didn’t want to get into the nuts and bolts of what I pay and what I don’t pay (like gas, oil, tires and maintenance). That would sound too much like bragging!

The car company that sold the vehicle to “your” company at fleet rates will make up the difference by charging more to the rest of their customers.

The only way that Chrysler would have to charge more to the “rest of their customers” would be if they made the irrational decision to lose money on every car they sold us.
Why would they do that? Because we went in and gave the secret Capitalist handshake and winked so they would sell us a car below their cost? /sarcasm

Really, ellinas, you may be beyond the need for night school. You might want to consider therapy or perhaps medication to control your delusional fantasies!

What part of your salary is “free” to you ellinas? Or do you work for it? (Assuming anyone will employ you!)

Good point Proof, Ellinas has made some false claims of his profession before.

We really don’t know if he’s ever been gainfully employed.

The Real Proof Mobile.

Batman would be envioua.

my point was that you did not pay the same price for your car as everybody else.

No, your first ridiculous point was

Maybe they are trying to lure MoveOn.org to be a repeat customer.
You give a inital (sic) discount, but then you recoup from later transactions.

Your “reasoning” seemed to deteriorate from there! I suppose, according to you, that if I did not pay the same price for my car as everybody, it was because they were trying to lure me to become a repeat customer? (Snort!)

What is up with the Graybar Hotel?

Graybar Hotel = Jail/ Prison

The car company that sold the vehicle to “your” company at fleet rates will make up the difference by charging more to the rest of their customers.

The lesson continues…”make up the difference”. You have absolutely NO concept of what it takes to run a business (apart from government control and regulation!).
Chrysler makes a profit on every vehicle they sell my company. There is no “difference” to be made up on the backs of ignorant slobs like ellinas!
Chrysler makes the calculation that there is more overall profit to be made in selling more vehicles at a reduced profit, than selling fewer vehicles at full price.
Have you ever heard the expression “Half a loaf is better than none”? That is the essence of selling in volume. For the math impaired, ellinas, forty half -loaves would be better (and more) than ten whole loaves!
But continue to spew the class-envy, Marxist rhetoric you love! It’s nonsense, of course, but it will let the rest of us know that you are neither serious nor worthy of meriting our attention.

rationalize

You really should invest in a dictionary, old chap! Unless you are implying that I look at things rationally! (Something you should try for a change!)

I thought Ellinas was a female???

BTW: Car in the Avatar is NOT the Dodge Proofmobile!

Also, many retirement programs are funded from pre-tax earnings.

But not Social Security. Perhaps because it’s not a real retirement program.

Maybe they are trying to lure MoveOn.org to be a repeat customer.
You give a inital (sic) discount, but then you recoup from later transactions.

So, you’re saying lose money on the transaction, but make up for it on the volume? Thank you for illustrating that you know nothing about business! MoveOnThere’sNothingToSeeHere.com will NEVER have the cash to advertise on the scale of a Macy’s or major department store. They have no way of generating that kind of cashflow to run daily or weekly full page ads even at insane discounts. There aren’t that many wackadoo suckers giving them money to sustain that!
Why not a 100% discount? Then they’d advertise a LOT more! /sarcasm
Your rebuttal proved as delusional as your initial assertion, but thanks for playing!

http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=120480

Oops

…got a free vehicle. No wonder you are conservative

School begins again! (Sigh!)
A) My vehicle is not “free”. It is a part of my compensation package. What part of your salary is “free” to you ellinas? Or do you work for it? (Assuming anyone will employ you!)
According to your “reasoning”, my company gives me my salary for free as well. Are you really that dense ellinas?
B) The “average Joe”, as you put it, is free to seek compensation for the work he performs. If you do not get a “free” car ellinas, perhaps your work is substandard, insufficient or lacking in some other quality?

But neither point, or the obfuscation you seek to provide, changes the point that the so called “preferential” treatment in lending is based on sound business practices and not the arbitrary whim of some “fat cat” lender!
Have you ever considered night school?

According to my reasoning a buisiness (sic)is free to give discounts to whomever they please

Yes, and according to your funhouse reasoning, a business is also free to give all their products away for free (no law against it!), but real businesses don’t do that.. that is to say, businesses that want to stay in business! Yet, they ARE “free” to do so!
You reason from a false premise, therefore your conclusions are flawed. Again, it is painfully obvious that you are not a business owner!

A lot of buisiness (sic) give preferential pricing to their various customers.

Yes, but not arbitrary and whimsical pricing. The “various” customers to which you refer are generally sorted by volume and profitability…rational businessmen do not sort their customers according to wackadoo politics!
And then you try to attribute this lunacy to the “Free market”? Delusional anyone?

The car company that sold the vehicle to “your” company at fleet rates will make up the difference
by charging more to the rest of their customers.

More economic ignorance from you. Read up on “economies of scale”.

A legal perk that allows both the employer and employee to avoid taxes.

BTW, I also have dental benefits…does that drive up the price of teeth/fillings/floss through market distortion?
WOOF…you’re such a genius! /sarcasm

If I were an advertiser for ANYTHING in the NYT, I would demand a 66% discount for any size ad placed. If you saw the guy in front of you pay $1.50 for a bigmac and then charge you $4.50 for the same item, I would demand the same price.

All advertisers in the NYT should demand the same pricing structure given to moron.org .

By the way did you pay for your car/truck/van/suv the same as everybody else?

Excellent question! Listen and learn!
I’m driving a beautiful 2006 Dodge Charger (one of the first off the assembly line) until the 2008 Sandstone AWD Charger with leather seats and sunroof I ordered is finished. I bought neither car. As a productive member of a profitable business (Unlike the NYT) my company provides me with a car they obtain from Chrysler at a fleet rate because we buy more than one.
Please approach your local Chrysler dealer and ask him for one car at the fleet rate to entice you to buy more cars!
Let me know how that works for you! /Snort!

BTW, he’s free to sell you a car at whatever price he wants. However, he knows the value of his car and will likely not discount it to you on the empty speculation of increased business.

I always thought that looked hard on the paint.

Easier to repaint the hood if you’re not staying in the Graybar Hotel!

I don’t know what the big mystery is here; the NYT and MoveOn.org are of one political mind, and so they work together. Isn’t that obvious? If the NYT were fiscally competent, their stock wouldn’t now be below $20 a share. Duh.
This is just more leftie hypocrisy. When they can accuse Alberto Gonzales of “playing politics” by firing the people whom he is entitled to fire(by his job description), but look the other way when the NYT obviously plays politics in giving a massive discount to their ideological buddies to smear an General, that’s OK.

A lot of buisiness give preferential pricing to their various customers.

Free market anyone?

Yeah, that freedom stuff sure is messy; let’s just opt for the security of a centrally-controlled market!
/sarcasm

ellinas: In case you didn’t get that, he paid for his vehicle. In our free enterprise system, workers can pick and choose who they work for, and that car was what it took for him to take that job. I know it doesn’t fit into your “oppressed worker” Marxist ideology, but it’s the reality here in the US.

Ellinas….A salary is NOT Welfare in any ………….. hard earned money of the Amercan tax payers.

Zsa Zsa on September 15, 2007 at 09:47 am

No shit!!! Thanks for the info lady.

Proves my point: Preferential pricing.

Proves the opposite, my obstinate friend! The reasoning behind the preference is volume, not some pie in the sky hope that someday somehow my company might do more business if there had been no evidence of that in the past!

Okay Mr Not Phony, which election law was violated?

That’s a fair question. I merely going with the fact that people in that business have said they would file complaints.

The New York Times has to follow the law the same as the rest of us.

On the other hand I think they should be free to say what they want regardless of whether I disagree with it. Of course then I’m free to rake them over the coals for it.

The simple fact this is just one example where the NYT’s flaming liberalism has left the newsroom and gotten over to the advertising.

Ellinas’s ride.

Proof your attempt to bellitle me is not working. Stick with the facts.
The horse is not dead,will not die at your behest, and you cannot will it to go away.
English not being my primary language, I think I am doing a pretty good job debating you.
Anytime you are ready to go a few or many rounds debating in Greek which is my primary language I am ready for you.
By the way thank you for correcting my grammatical (spelling) errors. That is the proper way to master another language. If nobody pointed out my errors how would I know I erred?

I am class bragging! HA!…

A legal perk that allows both the employer and employee to avoid taxes.
WOOF on September 16, 2007 at 05:48 pm

Is the above statement inacurate?
Methinks not.
If it is enlighten us.

You avoided answering the question with this bullshit:
Keep up that class envy, WOOF…It’s all you’ve got!
Now repeat after me,
“Do you want fries with that?”
Proof on September 16, 2007 at 06:25 pm

Like I said before. Bullshit. If you were honest about the whole thing you would have stated the obvious which is you don’t buy a car the conventional Joe Sixpack way, and all these agonizing explanations and countercharges of dishonesty would had been avoided.
You chose the road of ridicule, petty insult, and answer avoidance.
A damn shame.

Yes, but not arbitrary and whimsical pricing. The “various” customers to which you refer are generally sorted by volume and profitability…rational businessmen do not sort their customers according to wackadoo politics!
Proof on September 14, 2007

Maybe they are trying to lure MoveOn.org to be a repeat customer.
You give a inital discount, but then you recoup from later transactions.

If the car is compensation is there tax?

Silly puppy! There is govt confiscation at every level of supply and production involved in making, marketing and delivering an automobile.

And I have stated: “According to my reasoning a buisiness is free to give discounts to whomever they please as long as they are not breaking the law.”ellinas on September 14, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Find anything wrong with this?
How is it different from your:
“The New York Times has to follow the law the same as the rest of us.”

If the NYT is following unsound buisiness practices, and go out of buisiness, then the hell with them. Let them contend with their shareholders and creditors. I personaly dont give a flying fuck.
And thank you for the bus. Looks like the chasis of a Hummer with a bus superstracture. But being the enviromentaly conscious person that I am I prefer my donkey.

e: The company bought his car, and he uses it as part of his overall compensation; what part of that doesn’t your Marxist class-envy addled brain not understand?

Is the above statement inacurate?

Yes. A company car is part of the total compensation given to the employee in exchange for his services. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?
Employers are free to offer their compensation in any way they wish, and employees are free to negotiate for what they wish to receive; the deal has to work for both parties. Where did you get the idea you had anything to say about this?

Social Insecurity. Pay more and get less!

Not that there’s anything illegal about it. It’s just that if the Times is going to pull that kind of crap they shouldn’t be allowed to promote themselves as an unbiased, objective news outlet.

freedom of the press but unbiased, no way!

I would imagine this would only apply to campaign ads because federal election law only applies to elections.

Hawk,

You could be correct. I haven’t checked and don’t really much care. The federal complaint was filed which will likely be still on appeal long after next year’s election.

In the meantime, like the Democrats that did NOT refute the ad, and like MoveOn.org itself, the NYT has managed to further diminish its reputation among both conservatives and moderates by pandering once more to the far Left fringe. And though the publisher and editors are oblivious, the fact is the damage they do to the paper’s credibility the more they lessen its influence. And that’s a good thing.

I’m waiting until Rob can afford to provide company cars to those of us who devote so much time to blogging for him.

But it’s always next year, next year. Meanwhile he’s spending money like there’s no tomorrow.

Who’s that riding on you?

That’s him? I couldn’t recognize him from that angle.

Drives up the price of cars/gas/tires through market distortion.

Only in a Marxist economy.

“I bought neither car.”
He said he bought neither car.
He admitted he bought neither car

Geez, beat that dead horse a little more, ellinas!
If you weren’t so fixated with my car, maybe you could concentrate on bettering yourself! Maybe an reading comprehension class… elementary logic… Debating for Dummies…

Ellinas’s ride

The short bus! LOL!

e: The man is proud of what he has earned. Only you(a diehard class envy card player) would try to turn that into a negative.

Key word there: preferential.

Thanks for the admittal*.

*not a real word, but it should be.

likwidshoe on September 14, 2007 at 09:50 pm

I never denied it was preferential pricing.

There is no class envy here. There is a lot of class braggging (sic)though:

Feeble attempt to change the subject, as befits your mind, ellinas!

Fleet sales are also advertising. Having more cars on the street makes them appear popular, resulting in more sales

Two years ago, when Dodge reintroduced the Charger, I got one of the first ones built. I often felt like a one-man car show, whenever I would stop for gas or go to the store, people would repeatedly stop me in the parking lot and ask,

“Is that your car? That’s a nice car!”

Happened again just last month in front of the local Kohl’s…

If the car is compensation
is there tax?

A legal perk that allows both the employer and employee to avoid taxes.

Drives up the price of cars/gas/tires through market distortion.