Hello LiS. This release, despite its brevity, features three - THREE! - uses of the most teeth-gratingly overused word in PR, 'iconic'. Seemingly everything in marketing is iconic - from a brand of marzipan to Sue bloody Pollard and it does my nut. I was also wondering how this customer "up-roar" manifested itself, only I never recall seeing, or hearing, or reading, or picking up on any of it, anywhere, at anytime, ever? They wouldn't be lying to us, would they? Did I fall asleep and miss all the enraged sales reps pulling their knackered Sierras into Little Chef car parks and dancing around a flaming pyre of black cherry pancakes? Hang on, is that horseshit I can smell?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sabina Miller [firstname.lastname@example.org]
Subject: LITTLE CHEF 'FAT CHARLIE' LOGO TO LOOK LIKE HESTON BLUMENTHAL - CHEFS COAT, GLASSES ADDED
Goodafternoon SHE MEANS "GOOD AFTERNOON",
Little Chef’s Fat Chef is being altered to look like Celebrity Chef Heston Blumenthal. Please see info below.
LITTLE CHEF ’FAT CHARLIE’ LOGO TO LOOK LIKE HESTON BLUMENTHAL - CHEFS COAT, GLASSES ADDED
Little Chef’s iconic ’Fat Chef’ is to be given a makeover making him look identical to Celebrity Chef Heston Blumenthal. IDENTICAL? REALLY? IN EVERY WAY?
The chubby chef is being given a proper ’Chef’s jacket’ YOU SAID IT WAS A "CHEFS COAT" A MINUTE AGO, MAKE YOUR MIND UP and will be given glasses. BRILLIANT.
Next week the Heston Blumenthal menu is being rolled out to Little Chef’s SHE MEANS "LITTLE CHEFS" in York and Kettering.
As Little Chef pins it’s SHE MEANS "ITS" future of SHE MEANS "ON" Heston’s new menu, the iconic ’Fat Chef’ will reflect that.
The iconic chef will remain chubby however, after customers revolted IT'S TRUE, LITTLE CHEF'S CUSTOMERS ARE REVOLTING when plans to slim down ’Fat Charlie’ caused up-roar DOES THIS MEAN THEY REVOLTED BECAUSE OF THE UP-ROAR?
For further information, please reply to Sabina Miller
Wednesday, 29 July 2009
All Day Shit-Fest
I know Little Chef is on the bones of its arse, but surely they can do better than the following poorly-written twaddle? Thanks to the LiS operative who sent me this: