Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

If any of you were watching the WSOP television event last Tuesday night, you'll have noted that one of the guys who got busted by Bellande (77 vs. AK) noted that he built his entire tournament game on the Harrington books.

This inadvertent advertisement had to help 2+2 in some way. In this case (and in future similar situations), should 2+2 publishing have some kind of obligation to give this player some kind of gift for his shout out? After all, the player did likely boost sales of the Harrington on Hold'em series with the televised event being aired across the world on ESPN.

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

If I wear a NY Yankees hat at the table during a WSOP event are the Yankees indebted to me for helping advertise their brand-name on TV?


What if I say "Let me take a sip of my DELICIOUS AND REFRESHING ICE-COLD DIET COCA-COLA before I decide whether to call your all-in or not."

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

I think we both know those examples are ludicrous and exagerrated, unlike the WSOP player's seemingly genuine claim.

Are you inciting that the reference to the HOH series belongs with the Diet Coke reference, or that the HOH series reference will somehow lead to the Diet Coke reference?

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

What a dumb post! And they tried to ban me.

Vince

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

you mean Coke with Lime....it's refreshing and has that extra zing... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

I don't think i'm 'inciting' anything.
But i do think the two are analagous and that is indeed my implication.

I didn't see the 2+2 reference though as I only watched the first few minutes of that episode.

I've seen many mini-segments on the WPT or WSOP coverage where someone mentions super-system or something and I don't think there is any more obligation from them (or 2+2) then the diet-coke stuff.


Honestly, at first I couldn't tell whether you were joking in your original post or not because I think the idea that 2+2 is somehow indebted to them for the reference is kind of silly (and not really that much more silly than my comparisons).

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

I didn't watch the tournament you're referring to. So you're saying some poker noob buys two books for $50 or whatever, then goes deep into a tournament and makes a ton of money all because of the books, and 2+2 owes HIM something?

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

I agree that 2+2 owes him nothing, but it is common practice for companies to send feebies to talk show hosts, celebrities, public personalities, in gratitude for mentioning their product in the public eye and in hopes that they will continue to mention their product.

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that 2+2 owes him nothing, but it is common practice for companies to send feebies to talk show hosts, celebrities, public personalities, in gratitude for mentioning their product in the public eye and in hopes that they will continue to mention their product.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but buying a can of Coke doesn't allow you to get TV shows. Buying poker books however, will allow you to win money at poker and get on televised poker tournaments.

Re: Does 2+2 publishing have this kind of obligation?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that 2+2 owes him nothing, but it is common practice for companies to send feebies to talk show hosts, celebrities, public personalities, in gratitude for mentioning their product in the public eye and in hopes that they will continue to mention their product.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but buying a can of Coke doesn't allow you to get TV shows. Buying poker books however, will allow you to win money at poker and get on televised poker tournaments.

[/ QUOTE ]
So we're in agreement, since in my first post I said 2+2 owed him nothing.

I was just saying that what the OP suggested isn't as outrageous as many posters would have you think. And lets not forget that 2+2 is a business out to make money, they write great books and have a provided a great forum for us, but the bottom line is that they are a business. They provide a service/product just like Pepsi, McDonalds and Heinz, it just happens that 2+2's products are books and not hamburgers. They were probably very happy that they got free advertising for one of their books and wouldn't be suprised if they saw a small bump in figures for HOH this month.