Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Curious, how does your behavior around perfectly elastic goods play out? Two products, same price, arguably indistinguishable (eg. Coke and Pepsi).

I like to think I fall into the same category, where ads don't prompt me to spend money I wasn't going to spend before, but I think all else being equal I stick to brands I've heard of (via ads).




Out of my head, these kinds of products appealed to me as a kid, and I sticked to those I liked more. Pepsi lacked something. I can't be sure how psychological this is (branding, logo, color .. amount of marketing in my country versus the US). I still think I could probably distinguish them blind.

Early on I was fond of both brands, but later, if you offered pepsi half the price I'd still pick out a can of coke.

Now I don't drink anything but water so ..


Sure, that was just an example though. Where do you buy gas? Which lightbulbs do you buy? Which batteries do you buy? Etc.


Yeah sorry, I got caught in my own head. I think more than brand, it's shelves that drive the decision for such commodities. Whatever is close and in good supply I'll take without too much attention paid to the brand. Or brand reputation when I'm feel picky. But never advertising itself.


You cannot escape the influence of advertising. To think otherwise is self-deception bordering on ignorance.


My consumerism seems to be restricted to a few kind of products for which I feel about for very specific reasons.

I'm still subject to influence, because I have eyes, but it's mostly negatively, advertising is a cheap trick void of information to me. I can't buy something because a handsome male pretended to use it in a video.

Even those with informations are often lying to put a spin on their product. Health products with a new molecule. Green vehicles. etc

Plus if you know a bit about production you know brands are often using the same materials with a few superficially differenciating details; so in the end.. same product.

I still have a technical mind, and it's my main mode of functionning. Influence can still be there but I'd bet 10$ it's barely significant.


I would bet the influence is not significant to you — you would get the same product for the same cost either way in most cases, but it is significant for the brand you end up arbitrarily choosing.


You mean that investing in marketing branding and advertising is still the best ROI for most companies ?

I don't really understand your point but I'm not educated in the subject either so ..


I simply mean that it makes no difference to you whether you buy your gas at Shell or Chevron because it costs the same and you get the same product. But it makes a difference to Shell if you buy your gas at Shell.

Since it is inconsequential to you, you don't care or notice the impact.


Trying to find someone who'll say "off course ads work on me" is about as difficult as finding s/o admitting to be a bad driver.


How do other people respond when watching ads ?

Do they think

  - "meh it's all bs ..."
  
  - "hmm I'd like that! can't wait to go to the mall and get one"
 
  - "oh I didn't know this, it could help me <there>"
?

I recall feeling 3) once in my life, it surprised me because that was my first deep positive reaction to an ad. Even though I've seen similar products all my life.

Does marketing count on negative bias in their theory ? "he may dislike the add but we have a foot in the door now, he'll buy our shit later"


They respond with a vague feeling of familiarity to a brand or product.


But all sorts of brands have commercials..


This is one of the big problems. It's an arms race, with the costs being passed directly on to the consumer in the form of higher prices.


Indeed. I wonder if there are regulations or theory on what's appropriate or not... otherwise it's like ebay auction gambling.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: