User talk:Zhinz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Katherine isn;t Kate
Katherine Kane as Batwoman is NOT the same as Kate Kane, in fact they go out of their way to call her Katherine the younger. It's an entirely new character with a new concept and shouldn't be confused with Kathy. I know it's annoying, but there you are. My guess would be Katherine the Elder is (or was) the original Batwoman, but no, they're not the same. -- Ipstenu (talk • contribs) 02:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Budvar
Hello, I am missing time to edit the topic carefully, so I only want to mention on your talk page, that your reasoning according the merging is not well-founded. (Not talking about merging itself - just the reasoning)
Your statement: "but I can't find a single country (other than the Czech Republic itself) that recognizes Budějovický Budvar's right to that name ... at this point, as they are members of the EU, which, has recognized Anheuser-Busch as the rightful owner of the Budweiser name." seems to me to be litlle uninformed or unmature in qulification and I do not mean it in any wrong light, ... just really, that not so difficult to google it out... exactly about the usage of that brand there exist so long disputes between Anheuser and Budvar and they are not resolved in favor of Anheuser, at least not generally.
That situation is simply unfortunate for both brewerys, as both of them established their brands in a time, when they had no anticipation that they could meet and compeet in any single market. Each of them started independently on the "market success" of the other. For both of them is the second holder no help in marketing, as the drinkers their produkts feel the produkt of the second mostly as imitator with perversion in taste and no help no good advertisement, such situation is not usible for stealing of the seconds market or brand, it is only obtacle in P.R.
You surprised me by statement that:"...has recognized Anheuser-Busch as the rightful owner of the Budweiser name" - that is very far from the truth, no germen speaking country is recognising Anheuser-Busch's Budweiser, while some are recognising Budvar for dozens of years. In absolutely each of the remaining European countries except five (from fifty), the situation is not resolved in favor of Anheuser-Busch, some did closed in favor of Budvar, some are still not finished.
The trademark is recognised for Budvar for example, in Great Britain, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Greece, Portugal, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, New Zealand... (that mean that not only in EU Budvar won). When I traveled through Austria, what do you think what people think, when I am talking about Budweiser? (Budvar as for centuries ... Budweiser was imported into Vienna from Budvar directly, centuries before the compeny Budvar was oficially founded ... And when I was on summer job In Scotland 8 years ago, I was surprised to find that musicians in pub was drinking Budweiser Budvar ... as was I then. ... That brand is well build in Europe for Budvar, to the similar extent as unchallenged in most of uneuropean countries of the World is for Anheuser-Busch.
- http://www.budvar.cz/en/web/Znacka-Budvar/Znamka-Budvar.html
- And This the most interesting review I have found about the dispute and division of trademarks in brandchannel.com. Simply, it is not as simple as You state.
Have good time Reo ON | +++ 14:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] World Beer Cup
You've done lots of work on that article.
You deserve a pat on the back.
Some people put these awards on their user page. Would look nice there.
Keep up the good work. SilkTork *SilkyTalk 14:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] media markets and their images
If you wish, i can get to work on creating mini-images to go with each DMA template. :) RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 04:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- About Image:TvDMAmap.gif; could you possibly create an SVG version of this map with state lines? Also the map should include Alaska and Hawaii. -- Denelson83 04:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Double redirects
Hi there. Just thought I should let you know that when you turned For Your Eyes Only into a redirect to For Your Eyes Only (disambiguation) on February 18, you accidentally created some double redirects. I've corrected these, but you should make use of the 'what links here' button to avoid creating them in future. Thanks for reading. Terraxos (talk) 23:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
