Stogie Guys Free Newsletter

Subscribe today for a chance to win great cigar prizes:


Presented by:

Stogie News: Ad Strikes Out at Anti-Smoking Zealots

16 Sep 2010

La Flor Dominicana president and founder Litto Gomez has an ad in the latest issue of Cigar Aficionado that passionately makes the case against anti-cigar legislation.

LGad

The two-page ad features a message and pictures of unhealthy foods, wine, whiskey, coffee, and cigars surrounding a photo of Litto Gomez smoking. The message reads:

It’s Time to Speak Up

Every single one of the foods or substances you see here may end up killing you…if you abuse them. But if we take them with moderation, they are harmless and make our lives really enjoyable. For some draconian reasons, our law makers have singled out cigars. Why? I remember the reason was secondhand smoking. But, in parks? in the open air?…what is this!! If we let them get away with it, they will continue to take away pleasures of our life. As adults, we have the right to choose our lifestyle. As I recall, it was called freedom, and that’s what makes America the best country in the world. If you don’t smoke and think that this does not concern you…think again, because one day, after they are done with cigars, a fat congressman while munching on his french fries will write a bill taxing your favorite food. We should not let them legislate our lifestyle. It’s Time To Stop Them.

I am Litto Gomez.

This is my personal opinion. I am a concerned citizen that believes in freedom of choice. I teach this to my children.

Ads like this cost well over $10,000, so it speaks volumes that Litto chose to run the ad. And demonstrating that the message is what’s most important, he didn’t even identify his company in the ad.

Patrick S

photo credit: Stogie Guys

10 Responses to “Stogie News: Ad Strikes Out at Anti-Smoking Zealots”

  1. Timothy Thursday, September 16, 2010 at 5:51 am #

    Not even close. A full page ad in CA is $27,900. A two page ad would be double that. That's according to the media kit. It would be less with a multiple issue agreement.

  2. Aaron Thursday, September 16, 2010 at 10:21 am #

    Yes, but isn't running this ad in CA just preaching to the choir?

  3. alex Thursday, September 16, 2010 at 12:20 pm #

    It depends does he mean 10,000 or 100,000 cause there is either an extra zero or missplaced comma

  4. Patrick S Thursday, September 16, 2010 at 3:10 pm #

    @ Alex: That should read $10,000. (It was inadvertently changed during editing.)

    @ Timothy: Yes, I imagine ads are quite a bit more than $10,000, but published ad rates are not always reliable and also don't take into account volume discounts (as I'm sure Litto/LFD take advantage of).

  5. Scott Friday, September 17, 2010 at 1:23 pm #

    Ok. but if you're spending that money…why spend it to preach to the already converted? The readers of CA aren't just gonna say "Right On" and then read on.

    You want some impact? Try running this in "Food and Wine" or "Saveur". That would better make Litto's case that cigars are as much of a singular pleasure as fois gras or cheesebuergers to an audience that might listen.

  6. Timothy Sunday, September 19, 2010 at 12:16 pm #

    Right. That's what I said: it would be less over a multiple issue agreement.

    Just as an example, the rate card for a full page B/W in CA is about $23K. Pete Johnson told me he pays "only" $17K for his 1 page B/W ads. And I would guess this is for multi-issue discounts.

    Color and a double page would put the retail at about $56K for LFD's ad. If Litto gets the same 25% discount as Pete, he would be paying about $42K for his ads–a pretty long way from $10K.

  7. njstone Sunday, September 19, 2010 at 8:17 pm #

    I LOVE this idea, but I've got to say–posting the add in CA? Can't really see the point. Put it in GQ or some other men's mag.

    Even so, maybe it's a good next step. Major props to Don Gomez for this initiative!

  8. Joe Dunham Monday, September 20, 2010 at 1:16 pm #

    Seems the comments above focused too much on the published cost!!

    At any rate itcost $$$, and perhaps putting ib CA is preaching to the choir, but it is the Choir that is NOT STANDING UP to our Representatives and allowing the regulations just hapen!

    CUDOS to him for speaking out and using his own money to do so!

  9. Timothy Tuesday, September 21, 2010 at 3:15 am #

    I agree. It is a brilliant ad and I was only trying to point out that Litto shelled out some serious cash to get his message out, even if it's just to the choir.

    And if you think CA is expensive, GQ is going to be much, much more to advertise in as it has a much higher circulation rate.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks

  1. Pro-Tobacco PSA? « iSpy-ration - Friday, September 17, 2010

    […] You can see the PSA here: http://www.stogieguys.com/2010/09/09162010-stogie-news-ad-strikes-back-at-anti-smokers.html […]