Proves Nothing

This last point has been covered so I shall pass on to the other three. The fact that Extrav. never made a profit until a similar sum (£400) had been spent on advertising proves nothing. The sudden financial success of the show in the last year or so could be attributed to many other factors.

It appears that in the past bad advertising has been used and has been substituted for a "big push" in the Extrav. advertising campaigns.

On the second point I would submit that regardless of the fact that Extrav. will almost surely make a profit of well over £400 this year, there is no justification for wasting student money. By spending less, but on the right media, Extrav. can make a greater profit.

Finally, the fact that a student from an advertising agency has assisted is surely an unfavourable sign, for it is well-known that N.Z. advertising agencies are 20 years behind the times in their practise and outlook and are generally pretty useless.

The logical question is: "How should the advertising be done?" As many people who attend Extrav. as spectators are regulars, it seems most important to use informative advertising, i.e., classified columns in the newspapers showing the time and dates of the show.

The next requirement appears to be the one most lacking: namely, Original Thinking. (This, please note, is not only effective but free.) If Cappicade can run a publicity stunt by having 20 students pull an old cart through the main streets of Wellington during the lunch-hour or issue blue parking stickers as they did in '58, Why Can't Extrav. Do Something Similar?

The whole issue points to the necessity for establishing a permanent publicity committee to fulfil all student advertising needs, with an emphasis on unusual and cheap media.

—R. E. Jones.