<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>And Shakers &#187; Automotive</title>
	<atom:link href="http://andshakers.com/tag/automotive/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://andshakers.com</link>
	<description>many veteran creatives, one domain</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 14:50:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Americans love a bargain</title>
		<link>http://andshakers.com/products/americans-love-a-bargain</link>
		<comments>http://andshakers.com/products/americans-love-a-bargain#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 14:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TJBennett</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Products; Brands]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Automotive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bargains]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Toyota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andshakers.com/?p=1193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So Toyota is profitable again!
After 2 years of recession-battered sales, they are back in the black.
Nothing like a major safety-related recall to jumpstart the business. Lots of publicity. An opportunity for sharp discounting. And voila! Vehicles are flying out of the showroom.
Fear for my family’s safety? Nonsense. I’m saving 3 grand on this Prius. Plus, I’m helping the environment! I’m budget conscious and eco!
Thank you, Toyota, for reenergizing the American Dream.
- TJ Bennett
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://andshakers.com/products/americans-love-a-bargain/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Here&#8217;s a Thought</title>
		<link>http://andshakers.com/work/heres-a-thought</link>
		<comments>http://andshakers.com/work/heres-a-thought#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:00:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>CraigCooper</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Products; Brands]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Automotive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volkswagen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andshakers.com/?p=625</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let&#8217;s say I gave you a brief for an advertising campaign.
And let&#8217;s say that the product you were to advertise was already 30 years out of date.
And let&#8217;s say that the person who was ultimately responsible for that product had a bad reputation.
A really, really bad reputation.
Like Adolf Hitler bad.
What would you do?
Throw up your hands in despair?
Ask why you always had to work on the crappy assignments and never got chance to work on the great brands?
Or would you simply turn your product&#8217;s disadvantages into advantages?
Turn out-of-date into proven ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://andshakers.com/work/heres-a-thought/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Was it good for you?</title>
		<link>http://andshakers.com/work/was-it-good-for-you</link>
		<comments>http://andshakers.com/work/was-it-good-for-you#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:51:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>JamesBrown</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Automotive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Volkswagen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andshakers.com/?p=563</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We are told that advertising should be entertaining. That, aside from absorbing whatever tactical point the client is asking us to make, the audience should feel good about the experience. Fair enough. But the truth is that most attempts fall, like cheesy pickup lines, far short of entertaining anyone but the advertiser.
This is mostly because the point being hammered home gets in the way of any real entertainment value. But often it’s because the point being advertised doesn’t really need to be so dressed up. I mean I really don’t ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://andshakers.com/work/was-it-good-for-you/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>VW Deserves A Better Agency Than CPB.</title>
		<link>http://andshakers.com/work/vw-deserves-a-better-agency-than-cpb</link>
		<comments>http://andshakers.com/work/vw-deserves-a-better-agency-than-cpb#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:19:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>CraigCrawford</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Agencies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Automotive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crispin Porter + Bogusky]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andshakers.com/?p=550</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What I am about to write is probably advertising heresy, so here goes nothing.
First, let me say that I think Crispin is a very good agency. They do very good work, occasionally great. They employ many hard-working, talented people. And in a lot of ways, they set the standard for what every agency should aspire to be. In short: they get it.
However, I do not believe the work they did for VW furthered that brand in any way. In fact, I actually think some of their stuff hurt the brand—and ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://andshakers.com/work/vw-deserves-a-better-agency-than-cpb/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>There Can Be Only One</title>
		<link>http://andshakers.com/work/there-can-be-only-one</link>
		<comments>http://andshakers.com/work/there-can-be-only-one#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 22:12:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>CraigCooper</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Automotive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BBDO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Branding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chrysler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creative]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://andshakers.com/?p=428</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Retail. Brand. Direct Response. Digital. Traditional.
Oh, how people in the biz love to parse advertising into different types.
Trouble is, it’s all bullshit.
Because to consumers, an ad is an ad is an ad is an ad.
They don’t differentiate.
To them, there is only one kind of advertising and that is brand advertising.
Why brand?
I say brand simply because every piece of communication you put out there says something about your brand.
Every ad – indeed, every point of contact with the public – positions your brand in the marketplace.
By way of illustration, when I ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://andshakers.com/work/there-can-be-only-one/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

