James: So what do you see as the most effective means of advertising? TV, radio, or print?
你認為最有效的廣告媒體是什么？電視，廣播還是印刷品？

Steve: That all depends on what you mean by “effective”. Do you mean reach the widest audience, or cost the least, or what?
這取決于你說的“有效”的含義。你的意思是獲得最大的觀眾群還是投入最少，還是其他的意思？

James: I mean what gives us the most bang for the buck. Obviously TV will show our capabilities the best, but it is also expensive. I am concerned that if we use print media they can’t really see the quality. What do you think?
我的意思是什么途徑我們所得的回報最多。顯然，電視最能表現我們的實力，但很昂貴。我擔心用印刷品，人們無法看見產品的質量。你認為呢？

Steve: Well, first let’s both agree to ignore radio. Paul thinks we should use radio, as there is a large listening audience. But I say that in order to see the quality of our product, you really have to see it. Do you agree?
首先讓我們都明確我們都排出廣播。Paul 認為我們應該用廣播，因為有很多聽眾。但我認為為了展示我們產品的質量，必須讓人們看見它。你同意嗎？

James: Agreed. So where do we go from here? TV ?
是的。那我們要在哪做廣告？電視上？

Steve: Actually, I think TV is good, but simply too expensive. Too much of our budget would be drained and not all that much sales revenue would be generated.
事實上，我認為電視很好，但是太昂貴了。我們的預算很快就會花光，而且不一定能帶來好的銷售量。

James：Ok，so do you have a better option? Like I said, print media won’t really show off our best digital features.
你有更好的主意嗎？我說了，印刷產品不能展示產品最好的數碼功能。

Steve: Ah, that’s where we disagree. I think we could reduce our print media focus to glossy magazines only. The cost would be lower than TV by far, but our features could still be seen.
這是我們兩個意見不同的地方。我認為我們可以集中在印刷精美的高級雜志上作廣告。投入比電視廣告少的多，產品的特色還能被展現出來。

James: How many males 35 to 40 years old could we expect to reach?
預計能讓多少35歲到40歲之間的男性消費者看到廣告？

Steve: Surprisingly, our marketing surveys show about 53 million.
令人吃驚，市場調查表明有五千三百萬。