Return-Path: 
 <ooo-marketing-return-167-apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D74A0944A
	for <apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive@minotaur.apache.org>;
 Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:11:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 68050 invoked by uid 500); 12 Dec 2011 14:11:13 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-marketing-archive@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 68016 invoked by uid 500); 12 Dec 2011 14:11:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ooo-marketing-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:ooo-marketing-help@incubator.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ooo-marketing-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id: <ooo-marketing.incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
Received: (qmail 68008 invoked by uid 99); 12 Dec 2011 14:11:13 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:11:13 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0
	tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [205.178.146.67] (HELO omr17.networksolutionsemail.com)
 (205.178.146.67)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 14:11:03 +0000
Received: from cm-omr3 (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50])
	by omr17.networksolutionsemail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id
 pBCEAfhc020084
	for <ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org>; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:10:42 -0500
Authentication-Results: cm-omr3 smtp.user=drew@baseanswers.com;
 auth=pass (LOGIN)
X-Authenticated-UID: drew@baseanswers.com
Received: from [207.255.217.93] ([207.255.217.93:60311] helo=[192.168.1.4])
	by cm-omr3 (envelope-from <drew@baseanswers.com>)
	(ecelerity 2.2.2.41 r(31179/31189)) with ESMTPA
	id E4/F7-18338-16B06EE4; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 09:10:41 -0500
Subject: Re: Aoo logo draft
From: drew <drew@baseanswers.com>
To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <1323689060.3504.2.camel@sybil-gnome>
References: <201112031650.43812.g.a.lauder@gmail.com>
	 <1322924694.4241.19.camel@sybil-gnome> <4EE3EBA8.5010402@openoffice.org>
	 <201112120150.51873.g.a.lauder@gmail.com>
	 <CAP-ksoj3WzpfDaLH7tu4c_54NTooCfj_j_8TgoqrzDdepKBKJw@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1323640848.28012.YahooMailNeo@web161705.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	 <1323689060.3504.2.camel@sybil-gnome>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 15:10:42 +0100
Message-ID: <1323699042.5011.30.camel@sybil-gnome>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 12:24 +0100, drew wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-12-11 at 14:00 -0800, Terry wrote:
> > Question below quoted text.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>
> > > To: ooo-marketing@incubator.apache.org
> > > Cc: 
> > > Sent: Monday, 12 December 2011 12:43 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Aoo logo draft
> > > 
> > > On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Graham Lauder <g.a.lauder@gmail.com> 
> > > wrote:
> > >> <snip>
> > >>
> > >>  LibreOffice is a good example, they chose the name originally as a 
> > >> temporary standin in the hope that the TDF would be given the OOo brand, but they
> > >>  created the new brand and marketed it anyway.  Now they wouldn't want 
> > >> the OOo brand even if it was offered.  True, they were dragged kicking and 
> > >> screaming to it when they eventually accepted such a gift was not going to happen and
> > >>  thus their new brand was forced to become permanent, but it has worked for
> > >>  them.
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > That shows that rebranding is possible, with effort.  But I think they
> > > would have even more traffic, more downloads and more users if they
> > > had the OpenOffice name.
> > > 
> > > Think of it this way, we get more hits today than LO, even though we
> > > have not had a release in nearly a year.
> > > 
> > 
> > Hits where?
> 
> 
> yesterday I noted an email that discussed a question regarding CNet
> downloads. So I took a look:
> LibreOffice had 847 downloads at their site last week (Windows only)
[edit - just to be clear]

> LibreOffice Portal had less then 100
LibreOffice Windows Portable had less then 100 downloads

> 
> OpenOffice.org 3.3 hasd 15,700 Plus Change.. IIRC

in the last week.

//drew