Remember this cringe-worthy Superbowl ad about the stereotypical desi salesman who is about to be fired by his cranky white boss? [Update – changed from the Panda ad to the Ramesh ad, thanks VV]
It was written by the CEO of InfoUSA himself, Vin Gupta. The ad was not just offensive, it was a total waste of money:
The panda ad ranked 45th out of 55 ads shown during the Super Bowl. The other Salesgenie ad, with a salesman who thinks he is going to get fired, ranked 50th. [Link]
<
p>Gupta doesn’t seem to mind spending money though, as long as it gets him visibility. Gupta is an FOB, a Friend of Bill that is (although he is also a DBD). Gupta is generous to Bill not just with his own personal money, but also with the company’s resources as well:
Gupta’s Clinton connection came into the spotlight last year, when angry shareholders of InfoUSA filed a lawsuit in a Delaware court; claiming that the CEO had wasted millions of dollars of the publicly-traded company to get into Clinton’s good books.
They seem to have good cause. The plaintiffs have alleged that Gupta misused the company jet to fly the Clintons to vacations. Gupta is believed to have paid Bill Clinton $2 million for vaguely-defined ‘consulting services’. In addition, he is alleged to have spent close to a million dollars to fly Bill Clinton around the world for his Presidential Foundation work; and to fly Hillary to campaign events. [Link]After the Clintons left the White House, Gupta hired Bill Clinton as a consultant. It’s one of two continuing business relationships he has had since leaving office, and it has been worth $3.3 million, in addition to the options on 100,000 shares of stock. [Link]
<
p>But here the story shifts, and becomes stranger.
<
p> The latest twist in the story involves Gupta getting something from the Clintons, for a fraction of its costs. The most important asset of a campaign is its lists of contributors. You normally guard these with your life. So why was the Clinton campaign renting these to Info USA, and for a fraction of their market value?
Political campaigns spend thousands, even millions of dollars to acquire good mailing lists. Last year, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton took the unusual step of renting out some of her lists. Reports from Clinton’s campaign show that on Dec. 3, it collected payment for renting out three mailing lists, the sale of which netted them $8,225.It was an unusual transaction, according to Roger Craver, a liberal guru of the political direct-mail industry. “As a general rule, a campaign will not let its donor list out into the markets until the campaign is over,” he said. “This is the mother’s milk of small-gift fundraising, and they use these lists frequently.”
According to one direct-mail professional, $800,000 would have seemed like a more plausible price for a quality list. [Link]
So what is going on here? Why is such a generous donor to Bill getting gifts, as it were, from Hillary?
It seems like obscure inside baseball, but it’s very strange behavior – no other campaign is lending out its lists, and here the Clinton campaign is not only lending out its list for nothing, but to somebody who is paying Bill millions of dollars. Was this a quid-pro-quo? Or just a sale of an unimportant subset of their main list as a test to gauge the valuation of their donor list?
List service providers provide data management services nd direct marketing services. HRC might be compensated in the services they offer to her campaign amounting to a specific cash value. nothing shady. happens all the town. $800K worth of list paid for in $8K cash and $792K worth of data management, DM services.
People in the industry were surprised by the transaction. This story isn’t coming from the Freepers, it’s coming from NPR, hardly a bunch of rabid Hillary haters. They might be wrong or misled, but I thought it was prima facie interesting.
How is Gupta’s being a DBD relevant?
It’s a pun.
That ad… how could you even start to explain the awfulness?
“When two trains love each other very, very much, sometimes they meet on the same track and… kiss. Grownups call this a ‘train wreck’…”
instead of bashing him.. give our brown brother some props… he a freaking mulit-millionare !!!
I always find that reaction puzzling. I neither hate people because they have money nor love them for the same reason. Why would I?
Ennis, I always love your innocence to Charlotte from Sex and the city. Very classy yet very simplistic.
i have to agree with simran. I dont understand why you need to mention that he is a FOB or a DBD. I despise it, when people throw these terms around to set a sense of superiority.
at second look, forgive my stupidity for not thoroughly reading that sentence.
I’ll cop to simplicity as well as being a simpleton. Growing up I had friends who were very wealthy and poor; friends on welfare and friends who lived in very expensive Manhattan real estate. Right now I have one friend who has retired as a multi-millionaire, and another friend who is too broke to pay tolls on the highway who is hoping that their food stamps application gets approved. I can’t say that either fact affects whether or how much I heart them at all. It’s like having friends who are short and tall, skinny or fat, old or young.
I guess that shapes my outlook towards strangers with money. I don’t think of it as being either intrinsically good or bad.
I, for one, found the FOB (Friend of Bill)-DBD line rather droll.
this is a great commercial. The man’s a genius.
My ad agency has been a steady client of infoUSA’s since the 80’s. In the olden days, I used to talk to Vin directly. Nice guy. Then he started playing golf with presidents and had no time for clients like me. I have been awed by his company’s incredible growth. In the list business, they are almost a monopoly.
Vin’s highly targeted and qualified lists have made my clients and, in turn, me a lot of money over the years but I guess not as much as we have made him.
11 Ennis: “I guess that shapes my outlook towards strangers with money. I don’t think of it as being either intrinsically good or bad.”
Thanks for saying that. I find suspicion of wealth to be nothing but the flip side of the wholesome goodness often associated with poverty. Both opinions are affectations, both espoused by people who are neither rich, nor poor.
And oh, Vin’s Superbowl ad was asinine. He should have hired my firm to do the ad, considering what a loyal customer I have been.
If they want everyone to know they have money or influence, they tend to be insufferable.
I like Bill Clinton, but he needs to stop pimping himself out.
Hollywood may have Vin Diesel, but we’ve got our very own Vin Weasel.
How I wish such a big desi-tinged story did not feature someone called , simply, Vin. Chance lost.
Stop pimping himself out ? Why ? The pimping thing has been raking it in for Bubba:
If there is one talent Bill has, it is being a pimp for the right amount of money.
i don’t see why the ad is cringe-worthy.. is it the Chinese accent? But then, pandas are native to china
The following is from the Wikipaedia entry of Vinod Gupta: In 1992, Vinod Gupta gave $2 million to IIT Kharagpur for setting up the Vinod Gupta School of Management, and later $1 million for Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law Kharagpur.
While the amounts may not be eye-catching from the US philanthropic point of view, Vinod was a pioneer. If I am not mistaken, Vinod’s gift was the first such gift to any of the IITs, and after his gifts many others gave similar gifts to other IITs and other specialized schools came up in the other IITs. (Example: http://www.it.iitb.ac.in/about/; http://www.som.iitb.ac.in/ etc.) My guess is prior to Vinod, no on else had donated such a large amount to any of the IITs.
Also, Vinod’s gift enabled the creation of a school of management in the IITs for the first time and led to other IITs creating their own business schools. Same is true about “law” as a discipline entering the IITs.
ps: I am in no way connected to Vinod; just someone grateful to him fori starngt, in India, the trend of donating big to ones alma mater.
FYI: The Wikipedia entry is linked from his name in the post above.
Side note: See Times story about the terrible ads. Choice quote:
Thanks Sugi, changing the ad. I actually missed the Superbowl this year, so I missed both of these.
Mr. Gupta looks like yet another “go-getting entrepreneur” who “does it all”. One day his work will achieve sophistication of used car dealership ads. Thank god I quit advertising many years ago.
Just read V V Ganeshnathan’s NYT link. ‘What offended me was Bud Light… Very stereotyped,’ sprach Vin Gupta. He’s right. Why spend “millions of dollars” for a crappy ad when you can make one yourself?
Eeeeeps. ‘Scuse please. The whole end of my last comment is a block quote from the Times.
I showed both ads to my ESL News class (most are upper college level from Brazil) and they were vocally shocked. The Koreans just sat there stunned. Most agreed both ads were racists with all of them agreeing that both ads left them very uncomfortable.
Is it racist because the students were personally insulted or because the siren call of communal virtuosity was too hard to resist?
I’ve commented on this elsewhere.
I dont think these are racist [though they are tacky]. If it doesnt work for you, dont buy the lists – but I actually thought they did a good job positioning 1st gens. their target market is the entrepreneur*, not welfare recipients or social scientists. all this is saying that info-usa levels the playing field.
*point of note – i didnt hear floridian say he’s going to be canceling his list listsubs anytime soon.
I don’t like Bill, I don’t like Hillary, and Vin Gupta seems a smarmy type to me.
But the ad itself? I watched it twice. It does exploit the Indian sterotype, rather along the lines of Apu in the The Simpsons. But offensive? I think if you are thin-skinned you may feel that way, but I feel there are many lurking who think this is overblown.
Do you think Apu is offensive? What about Peter Sellers in The Party ? Tastes differ…
Anyone else feel we are are over-reacting ?
i find apu to be hilarious– but the simpsons are equal opportunity! they spare no one, dominant culture, sub culture, etc.
these ads were dumb, ineffective, and insensitive what was up with ramesh having 8 children?
As a marketer I’ve been on the receiving end of all manner of awful advertising from InfoUSA, much of it seemingly written by or definitely featuring the smug mug of Mr. Gupta. I don’t remember any of it being particularly offensive to any particular groups, except perhaps advertisers, copywriters, graphic designers and photographers. In fact, I did buy the company’s services once or twice. The results? Unexceptional. Maybe I should try them again now that they’ve acquired a wifeload of juicy new democratic money names.
The discussion of the ugliness (racial, aesthetic or otherwise) of the ads is obscuring what I take to be Ennis’ real issue — is the mutual back-scratching of Gupta and the Clintons no big deal, illegal, improper or just icky, and is it the small visible tip of an iceberg of fishy activity? I imagine that if InfoUSA had sold a campaign $800k worth of lists for only $8k, the campaign finance people would be interested in the $792k gift, but what’s the deal the other way around? Does anybody regulate political campaigns’ gifts back to donors? If a future Clinton administration were to pursue a legislative agenda that benefits the direct marketing industry, that would be more or less the way the game is played, wouldn’t it?
When you’re done burnishing the brown off this story, I think you’ll find its mostly about green.
Remember this cringe-worthy Superbowl ad
No the only thing I remember from that night is…….Giants 17 Pats 14!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
34 Suki Dillon: “No the only thing I remember from that night is…….Giants 17 Pats 14”
Amazing, wasn’t it? Tom Brady shut down by a defense? As they say in football, “Any given Sunday…”
32 Limeduck: “Ennis’ real issue — is the mutual back-scratching of Gupta and the Clintons no big deal, illegal, improper or just icky, and is it the small visible tip of an iceberg of fishy activity?”
Hey, fellow marketer!
My views on the impropriety aspect of the story: 1. Mutual back scratching is built into and duly sanctioned by our democratic process, like it or not. Whether it is one-on-one, as in the Clinton-Gupta case, or institutionalized as in the case of such powerful lobbies as the Teamsters, realtors, gun owners, even teachers, the giving of campaign contributions, votes and other support in return for some concessions is exactly how our democratic system works. In other words, if you don’t like something in our country, you can change it. But it will cost you. Fair enough? Oh, you don’t have the money? Perhaps you belong to some union or association. Don’t worry, a portion of your annual dues is already earmarked for lobbying and buying the politicians who will work on your behalf. What, no money and no association? Then, my friend, you are outta luck.
Is activism good for the common people? The corporate raiders and funds that take huge positions in certain stocks don’t exactly do it for you and me, but nobody can deny that they bring arrogant, irresponsible and financially wasteful boards and CEO’s in line with their activism.
Perhaps none of Gupta’s fiscal philandering at his company’s expense significantly depressed the stock. But the average Joe that invests in stocks to make a little extra money to send his son to college or buy braces for his little girl deserves a lot better than this.
Equity markets in today’s economy are no longer the playground of the rich. With almost 60% of the households today vested in the markets (from a mere 19% in the early 80’s), the equity markets or, in other words, the public corporations, now belong to the common people. Therefore, there has to be zero tolerance for the likes of Gupta if we are going to keep the game clean and safe for us common folks. He doesn’t need to be thrown in jail for this. He and his board cronies simply have to reimburse the company for their Clinton related expenditures.
And the point is….?
And besides, one Desi’s cringeworthy ad is another’s creative genius at work.
The most shocking part of this story is that there were worse ads – which ones?
Great piece! We’ve also run a story on Vin Gupta and his troubling ads (http://www.aaa-fund.com/?p=185), and will continue to be on the lookout.
Gautam Dutta Executive Editor Asian American Action Fund
Amazing, wasn’t it? Tom Brady shut down by a defense? As they say in football, “Any given Sunday…”
I think the fact that the Pats were unable to videotape the Giants from the 1st meeting on Dec 28, meant they could not have the advantage that they had in there other super bowls. I guess they are not the same team with out the illegal videotape advantage.