Day 037 - 14 Oct 94 - Page 48
1 relations. One is the outlook of the begrudger who treats
2 ever cent paid for ad programs or publicity campaigns as
3 if they were strictly expenditures. My own viewpoint is
4 that o the promoter; I never hesitate to spend money in
5 this area, because I can see it coming with interest. Of
6 course, it comes back in different forms, and that may be
7 the reason a begrudger can't appreciate it. He has narrow
8 vision that allows him to see income only in terms of cash
9 in his register. Income for me can appear in other ways;
10 one of the nicest of them is a satisfied smile on the face
11 of a customer. That is worth of a lot, because it means
12 that he is coming back, and he'll probably bring a
13 friend. A child who loves our TV commercials and brings
14 her grandparents to a McDonald's gives us two more
15 customers. This is a direct benefit generated by
16 advertising dollars. But the begrudger has a hard time
17 appreciating this - he wants to have his cake and eat it
18 too". That is the end of the paragraph.
19
20 Q. If he said that -- it is in his autobiography I do not
21 think there is any doubt he did say that -- would that be
22 evidence to your conclusion that they are or at that time
23 they were, or whatever, using what can be termed "pester
24 power"?
25 A. Quite.
26
27 Q. OK. If we move on from that page to your supplementary
28 statement -- I am trying to get through quickly -- I think
29 that is all about cravings which may be we can leave?
30 A. There is a correction I would like to make to this
31 statement on page 8. It is a silly of mine actually.
32
33 Q. I thought we had covered them.
34 A. Page 8, paragraph (b), I do not know if I may make
35 this but I would like to, where it says: "The list of
36 additives, preservatives and other chemicals presented by
37 the plaintiffs in their booklet 'McDonald's Food: The
38 Facts' clearly shows that the defendants are indeed major
39 users of these chemicals". That is not very sensible;
40 that should be the "Plaintiffs".
41
42 Q. Yes, rather than "Defendants"?
43 A. Quite.
44
45 Q. That is a typographical error. I think the supplementary
46 statement we can leave aside. On page 6 -- I do not know
47 if I put it to you; I think you have dealt with it but
48 just for the sake of the record -- would you like to read
49 out the last sentence in the first paragraph on page 6?
50 This was about promoting their food as -----
51 A. Yes.
52
53 Q. The effect of promoting their food as good and nutritious?
54 A. "The effect is to debase the concept of 'healthy
55 eating' to more than a cynical sales promotional ploy".
56
57 Q. Would you say that sums up your basic case in your
58 statement?
59 A. Yes.
60
