[PvT]

I'm willing to bet its because of the keypad. Celebrities tend to know a lot of people, therefore they shoot out about a half billion texts per day. The Bold's keypad allows them to type faster. I mean, has anyone tried out the Storm's keypad? If so, I guarantee you didn't type anything quickly on it.

That makes complete sense to me

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[username0022]

Damn, got to love AG for saying what all of us (well, most of us) are thinking. He's really putting all those "lemmings" in their place. I base my purchase decisions on 1) how will this positively affect my current 'day to day' and 2) what's the quality to dollar ratio? I would never buy something just because some overpaid drama queen (man, woman) was seen on some tropical island (an island I will never see in person) using/wearing/eating it. I'm much more than a sheep.

[username0022]

And by the way, Bold FTW. Not because I saw Leo DiCaprio in Santa Monica talking on one, but because it works. And looks totally sexy. Whoops, too superficial, huh?

[Robii]

Some of the replies in this thread are funny. I would have to agree with some of the replies, I don't think an adult would get a phone just because a "celebrity" had it (that would be pathetic)....now a teen, that's another story. As for "celebrities" having a Bold over the Storm; I think it has more to do with what they're given (c'mon, you don't think they're actually buying these phones, they are gifted with them in order to promote them). It could be possible Verizon doesn't "gift" out their products like AT&T does.

[BergerKing]

Hey, ya'll need to remember that those folks have "handlers" that are getting nice little goodies themselves to make sure their charge has the latest 'sexy' toy.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Branta]

You mean the knuckledraggers get the cast-offs from the previous round of freebies?

[Tlynnsmith]

Because celebrities are busy people, and they're not as fascinated with "touch screen" phones.

They want quick, efficient and functional. The Bold is a great choice!

That's just a guess.

[coachcurtisbusse]

Cuz he wants to know damn you mad at the world huh! Were you an alter boi?

For every celeb you see with a particular phone there are 10
others with something else that you don't see.

My question is and always has been, why does anyone care what
phone a celebrity uses. I'll lay you odds to seven they don't give
a damn what any of us use.

I can't imagine Britney calling Paris and having this conversation.

Britney: Girl, I was at that burger place and there was this
insurance agent that had a Curve. It made him soooooo sexy.

Paris: OMG! I know what you mean, I saw a construction
worker with a Storm. I knew he was smart and hot just by
his phone. I wanted to do him right there on the scaffold.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[coachcurtisbusse]

Man AG if people didn't care what other people used or wear drink or eat! We all have only one kind damn have an open view

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Curve63049]

Man AG if people didn't care what other people used or wear drink or eat!

Too true. I live in St. Louis . . . which, until recently, was the world headquarters for Anheuser-Busch . . . which has been known to spend a dime or two on advertising.

Anyone who can find a *rational* connection between Clydesdales, or hot chicks in bikinis, or Spuds McKenzie, or talking frogs (or lizards) and beer drinking is doing much better than me. In short, A-B has sold a LOT of beer based on the simple notion that doing so is "cool."

And, trust me, A-B wouldn't do such advertising if it wasn't effective. It may not be effective on *you,* but it is sure effective on a LOT of people.

Ronald Coase (he of the Coase Theorem in economics) has stated that he doesn't believe rationality is strongly enforced in consumer behavior. I agree. Companies behave rationally because they *compete* in concrete terms (i.e., dollars) . . . but how do consumers "compete" with one another? And, if consumers don't compete over the same things (i.e., they compete for status - whatever that is - rather than dollars), then rationality isn't particularly strong in the consumer segment.

Hellllooo people!! Ever hear of pet rocks!!

By the way, I've done some work for a friend of mind in the Events Management business. I've also put together SWAG bags for celebrities (well, rock bands and their entourages). These are people who could AFFORD to buy anything they wanted . . . but they will FIGHT tooth and nail for the free goodie bag.

And, oh yeah, companies GIVE us the stuff to put in these bags BECAUSE they want the celebrities to be seen using there stuff.

Now, go back to Coase (above) . . . if a company is willing to GIVE a celebrity free stuff, there's usually a pretty *rational* reason behind it. Translation: a LOT of goofy consumers will (in fact) buy things based on emotional factors such as [insert favorite celebrity name] has it.

Oh, they might not ADMIT they're doing it because [celebrity] uses it, but it does form part of the decisionmaking process.

[Yankez]

admit it or not, celebrities have a BIG impact on how we as regular consumers buy things.

Not with me they don't . I grew out of the "parroting" stage when I left high school and was able to form my own opinion .

AG nailed it with this comment

I am essentially shallow and a lemming without a mind of my own.
What you are saying is if your broke a$$ next door neighbor had the most
reliable phone ever you woud not consider it because he's broke so you would dismiss it.
I mean really, broke people don't have the "finer things".

[coachcurtisbusse]

I still want to know who/ what others like in the world. hence forums. I don't just buy stuff cuz someone else has it or premotes but it could sway me. But we live in a comercial world. The guy was just asking a Q? But some ppl in here were touched in private area as kids and are oh so angry

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[Yankez]

But some ppl in here were touched in private area as kids and are oh so angry

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Wow.....seriously.....that was called for how?????

Real rich , coach...you should be proud!!!!!.....GROW UP , MAN!!!!!

[coachcurtisbusse]

Your right I won't comment on these fools who always bring up negative stuff in some ones post. Sorry to all! Ill just sit back watch people talk like they so much above everyone else. If I can help in anyway I will but I won't bash no one sorry again

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[arickinreallife]

Translation: I am essentially shallow and a lemming without a mind of my own.
What you are saying is if your broke a$$ next door neighbor had the most
reliable phone ever you woud not consider it because he's broke so you would dismiss it.
I mean really, broke people don't have the "finer things".

You are taking what i said out of context and reading too much into it.
I'm not filthy rich, but i could use a bath. i am far from broke and what you said might be a true statement about broke people not having the finer things but i don't know i only live my life.
Like someone else said, we live in a commercial world and i just love when people are quick to say that nothing but their own mind persuades them to buy certain things.
i mean, yeah sometimes i see things that others have and i want it. i can admit that. and i can also admit that when i want something, no matter what it is, i get it.
if my next door neighbor has something great and cool and it works for me, then i am going to get it. it doesnt have to be a celebrity endorsement for me to want something in life. but usually, what celebrities have is nice stuff and i like nice stuff so of course i am going to pay attention to where they shop, what kinds of toys they play with and what kinda day spas they go to. please don't mistake me for trying to be something i'm not. i am just doing what i like and if it happens to be something a celebrity likes too oh well.

i think sometimes people need to just get off their high horse and remember they are human and subject to human emotions and feelings and fall for gimmicks and tricks and the media and commercials just like everyone else.

females can't tell me they have never looked through a magazine and saw some celebrity wearing something they thought was hot be it shoes or a dress or a bag or whatever. they might not go out and buy it, but because so and so looked so good with it, it makes them think they will as well.

70 percent americans are superficial and shallow, not all but most. the percent of those who choose to admit it is a different story.

and now that i think about it, i think verizon isn't as popular with the tanorexics because they don't have a lot of world phones. the storm is different so i thought maybe they would push that but i guess not

[LuvMyBB]

There are few thigs in life I care less about than what anyone in Hollywood is saying, doing, or using. When I see all of the mindless sycophants panting over the latest gossip or garb from so-called trendy people, I literally want to yak. It is the most shallow, meaningless existence I can imagine.

Was that too subtle?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[amazinglygraceless]

dappervirgo

You have completely missed my point. I recognize there are
people that are driven by materialism, celebrity culture and are
easily swayed by advertising. I get that.

My point is that regardless of what some airhead Hollywood
starlet, marginal singer, actor, athlete etc... uses or promotes
there are two overwhelmingly obvious realities.

1) They don't care that we use what they use, sell, or promote
beyond the paycheck they receive for said promotion.

2) At a certain point people grow up and make their own
decisions based on their own research, analysis and best
judgment. This will always be independent of what a star,
coworker, neighbor, church member, etc... uses.

And lastly, I think it is kind of cool that YOU & I can discuss
our varied opinions on this without being insulted by the
differences. I never said your opinion was invalid, and I am
happy you were not insulted by my not agreeing with it.

I vowed to not respond to this thread until you as the OP did.
I am glad I waited.

[arickinreallife]

dappervirgo

You have completely missed my point. I recognize there are
people that are driven by materialism, celebrity culture and are
easily swayed by advertising. I get that.

My point is that regardless of what some airhead Hollywood
starlet, marginal singer, actor, athlete etc... uses or promotes
there are two overwhelmingly obvious realities.

1) They don't care that we use what they use, sell, or promote
beyond the paycheck they receive for said promotion.

2) At a certain point people grow up and make their own
decisions based on their own research, analysis and best
judgment. This will always be independent of what a star,
coworker, neighbor, church member, etc... uses.

And lastly, I think it is kind of cool that YOU & I can discuss
our varied opinions on this without being insulted by the
differences. I never said your opinion was invalid, and I am
happy you were not insulted by my not agreeing with it.

I vowed to not respond to this thread until you as the OP did.
I am glad I waited.

Well i appreciate your opinion and input and respect your thoughts. I do agree with you that people do reach a certain point in their life when they not stop, but just stop caring as much about what other people have. just not in the areas i hang out in lol

i can't really bash celebrities for pushing products on the public because as long as it wasn't crap, and someone paid me, i'de do it too. i dont think that blackberrys are in that same situation though.

also, like i don't know where you live, but in Manhattan, lots of things are driven by the media, be it celebrities or commercials or advertisements on the subway. in my mind, celebrities are just another outlet used for marketing techniques. i mean clearly i hope that if someone wants something they see a celebrity with that, that they would try it out before they bought it you know? thats something i've never done. i have saw stuff that a celebrity has and wanted it but i will always make sure i really want it for the right reasons. i've never bought anything to make myself look cool or just stand out.... well maybe, i do have an Nokia 8800 Sirocco Gold, but that was more or less because i can't stand to see millions of people with the same phone as me regardless of how much i like it or not so i do fall victim to that

[amazinglygraceless]

You and I are more on the same page than you think. And I think
the primary difference may be age. I suspect I am older than you
by more than a few years.

I am also not bashing celebrities for being billboards, I just could
not care less. But we are different people with different thoughts
so it's all good.

I happen to live in Connecticut so we don't have the same
media and advertisement exposure as you city folk . I did
however grow up in Newark and spent FAR too many school
days in NYC so I know what you mean. It is virtually
impossible to escape advertising where you are.

[Duvi]

I've actually noticed more celebs with GSM phones in general. The have the money, so they probably have lots of devices. It is much easier to put a sim card into another gsm phone and keep it moving. They are always on the go and I'm sure a lot of them aren't smart enough to know how to turn a doorknob and open a door so they need something simple. On CDMA carriers, you either have to go online, call customer service or take a trip to the store.

I not only see Bolds, but t-mobile curves and sidekicks, iPhones and other gsm models.

[amazinglygraceless]

I still want to know who/ what others like in the world. hence forums. I don't just buy stuff cuz someone else has it or premotes but it could sway me. But we live in a comercial world. The guy was just asking a Q? But some ppl in here were touched in private area as kids and are oh so angry

I ignored everyone single one of your idiotic posts and here is why.

The OP and I came together on this and did so without argument
or name calling, or any residual animosity toward each other,
despite your attempts to foment a fight where one DID NOT
exist. Seems to me the only angry person in this whole thing was YOU.
Now about being touched as a child.... Hey Pot, Kettle is on the phone

[ninja please]

some people are couture wh0res whether it's clothes, accessories or even phones, but what it all comes down to is celebrities get free stuff all the time, I'm sure none of them ever actually paid for those sexy phones they have, and can get 10 more for every kitty shot they give to the media.

yeah, that kind of kitty.

[amazinglygraceless]

Ninja, Ninja, Ninja. What is it you have against me drinking tea.
Now I got to go find a ShamWow or something

[Curve63049]

AG wrote:

2) At a certain point people grow up and make their own
decisions based on their own research, analysis and best
judgment. This will always be independent of what a star,
coworker, neighbor, church member, etc... uses.

The problem I have with this statement, AG, is that it so black/white. You make it appear that individuals make decisions that are either (a) purely (and consciously) logical or (b) purely based on emotion.

In my experience (nearing age 50), individual decisions are *rarely* so (a) or (b). In my experience, individual decisions are a COMBINATION of both. Furthermore, that is the way it is for most (all?) consumers - regardless of age.

Indeed, that you seem to denigrate "emotions" when it comes to consumer purchases (i.e., it's something "young" people tend to do until they get smarter) is . . . ironic or. perhaps, odd?

Put it this way, if your son or daughter came to you and said they were considering marriage - the ultimate "consumer" choice - would your ONLY thought/advice to him or her be: "is this other person the "best" provider (e.g., money maker) for you?" Or would you advise your son or daughter to have that nebulous emotional feeling we call "love" for their prospective partner?

At the same time, how many people do YOU know that have married "flawed" partners because they were "blinded" to those flaws BY the emotion we call "love."?

Emotions are tricky like that. They "disguise" themselves . . . we *subconsciously* make what is non-logical (i.e., emotions) into "logic." And we have a word for that mental process: rationalization. The core of "rationalization" is finding "logical" reasons for illogical actions, thoughts, or behavior.

I submit this as a fundamental human truth: if the process of rationalization wasn't so prevalent in human actions, thoughts, and behavious would we have ever bothered to define the term?

I think you *believe* that your own consumer decisions are made on a *conscious* level and are purely logical . . . and, indeed, *some* of your decisions maybe MORE "logical" than others. But, I also assert that you are ignoring,or overlooking, or are not aware of how much *sub-conscious* mental processing (e.g. emotions) effects your OWN decisions.

Furthermore, I find it . . . well, odd that you deem such *sub-conscious* mental processing a BAD thing (i.e., a thing to grow out of as you get older) when it comes to buying a product . . .

But, I suspect, that when it comes (say) getting married you consider such *sub-conscious* mental processing to be a KEY ingredient (i.e., don't marry UNLESS you have a certain EMOTIONAL feeling).

As for my part, I don't make such judgments. I merely recognize (and note) that if *emotions* can play a key part in deciding who you choose to spend your life with (e.g., getting married), then *emotions* can also play a role in what you have for dinner, what phone you buy, what car you drive, etc.

In MY world, emotions aren't a *bad* thing . . . they're just A thing.

[rootbeersoup]

Psh, you all know you only buy the Blackberries that Kevin likes