|
|
Posted by Invid Fan on 10/04/60 11:33
In article <BM5kf.50$KT6.15@fe07.lga>, Derek Janssen
<djanss@nospam.charter.net> wrote:
> Jay G. wrote:
> > On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 01:39:44 -0500, Derek Janssen wrote:
> >
> >>To
> >>A) look more dynamic on the store shelf, and
> >>B) fill the jacket copy with a lot more point-of-sale promotional
> >>material that probably wouldn't have been as useful on the real case
> >>cover once you'd actually *bought* it.
> >
> > Those points would make sense if the slipcovers were actually different in
> > *any* way from the cover art on the keepcase inside it.
>
> Such as the velcro'ed Disney "fold-out" slipcovers (with enough room to
> illustrate all the bells-and-whistles), for example.
>
There are times when it's used well, and times when they seem to do it
just because.
> > However, in 99% of
> > the cases, the slipcover and keepcase design are *exactly* the same.
>
> Well, it was probably all they had--
> You're still allowed to throw it out, though.
>
> Derek Janssen (is there some basic issue that keep us from grasping this?)
It's just that it often seems stupid. They seem to see some advantage
over putting a thin loose page with the extra info covering the back of
the case, as is often done with box sets. Maybe it's just a way to make
the cases stack better (not as slippery, square corners, etc).
--
Chris Mack "Refugee, total shit. That's how I've always seen us.
'Invid Fan' Not a help, you'll admit, to agreement between us."
-'Deal/No Deal', CHESS
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|