|
Just wanted to chime in on marketing discussion. The only marketing I'm exposed to is word of mouth and maybe steam reviews. They can have all my data, but they've yet to figure out a product to market to me let alone how to get through all my adblocks and viewing habits. Marketing today is way harder, or at least very different. You can't just pay for X commercials targeted at Y demographic and expect to drum up demand for your trash anymore. Absolutely none of the things I buy have ads that reach me. Contrast that to my boomer parents and co-workers who will come up to me and ask if I've seen that funny commercial. Commercials they see on TV are a thing they talk to each other about. That doesn't mean I'm foolish to think "marketing doesn't work on me". I've bought games based on the carefully crafted hype and PR and favorable curated pre-release "previews" . I've pre-ordered games because I've trusted companies track records and fell for the "exclusive" DLC for pre-ordering. But now marketing people are called "community relations" people and post on forums to help build hype. You have the game devs them selves out on the internet visiting fan-sites answering questions and filling people with confidence that the game is going to be great, or the flaws will be addressed. It's much harder than just buying ads, they need to actually engage their customers. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Aug 27, 2017 |
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
GEMorris posted:My story: my wife and I bought a mirror less digital camera (Panasonic G85) and for months we were bombarded with ads for other digital cameras, which of course didn't work. If instead we had been bombarded with ads for lenses and accessories that fit our camera we might have made a purchase. Facebook has been a little better about this for me lately. I would buy a particular lens, and then get ads for that same lens for the next month. I can't remember when it started, but they have gotten better about serving ads for more variety of camera gear instead of the exact thing I just bought. You would think the people writing these algorithms would be more savvy about it. If some one buys a durable good, advertise accessories and not that same exact item that is designed to last years and like has a warranty. Like, someone buys a couch, advertise throw pillows and upholstery cleaner.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 18:17
|
|
|
Internet marketing is certainly not as effective as what was dreamt about 10-20 years ago. It's not mysterious why ad-prices keep collapsing, companies are noticing that they're not delivering and therefore bargaining down prices. GEMorris posted:Yeah, I used to work on software marketers would use to create decision matrices about what ads to show to a user based on their browsing and purchase history. The problem is that while it's very simple to gather mass amounts of data it is very difficult to meaningfully compare and understand that data. Facebook especially is guilty of what you describe above.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
It is interesting to see how advertising evolves based on technology and the demographic that they are pandering to. I have twin 5 year olds and they are largely unexposed to commercial television, but when they do have "screen time" they sometimes watch YouTube channels of kids playing with toys that they enjoy -- and all of the shows include recently released Mattel toys targeted at young girls. The shows are less overt than GI Joe or Transformers was about selling toys, but whenever we are at stores my kids recognize things that are played with on the channels and talk about wanting to own them one day. Capitalism!
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
Children is currently Youtube's most valuable demographic. Today you can do on Youtube what most states outlawed you doing on TV towards children 20-40 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Just wanted to chime in on marketing discussion. The only marketing I'm exposed to is word of mouth and maybe steam reviews. They can have all my data, but they've yet to figure out a product to market to me let alone how to get through all my adblocks and viewing habits. Marketing today is way harder, or at least very different. You can't just pay for X commercials targeted at Y demographic and expect to drum up demand for your trash anymore. I never buy new games anymore, I add them to my steam wishlist, then if they go on sale a year later for at least 50% off, i still check user reviews before buying. FilthyImp posted:The rise of event music festivals? Man i hate those. You spend 100 bucks and see maybe four bands, it's wasteful and stupid to have five stages operating simultaneously got any sevens fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Aug 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Children is currently Youtube's most valuable demographic. Today you can do on Youtube what most states outlawed you doing on TV towards children 20-40 years ago. It's only a matter of time before 'influencers' and 'youtubers' start having advertising rules applied to them. I know that its currently being looked at by OFCOM in the UK.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Yo the reason you get ads for the same thing you bought is that costs money for companies to not do that to you. Burn Pixels which are the ad tags that say "if bought, exclude this user" requires both setting up the rules regularly and for an ever changing group of ads as well as paying to in house store and match data. Most companies do the second part now, poorly, but the first ahhahaha.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Children is currently Youtube's most valuable demographic. Today you can do on Youtube what most states outlawed you doing on TV towards children 20-40 years ago. Well yeah, but I don't see how ranting about how Hitler was right or whatever is necessarily valuable to youtube.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Millenials spend money on 'experiences'. Holidays, hobbies etc. Boomers spend money on 'status'. Experiences have been status signifiers for a while now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Experiences have been status signifiers for a while now. Fyre festival was sold as an experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
exploded mummy posted:Fyre festival was sold as an experience. So is Burning Man.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Experiences have been status signifiers for a while now. Traveling in all forms has definitely become more fashionable than ever. I have former classmates from college who despite working service or entry-level office positions spend the entire summer flying around the globe for seemingly no other reason than to fill up their Facebook feeds. gently caress the environment I guess. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Just wanted to chime in on marketing discussion. The only marketing I'm exposed to is word of mouth and maybe steam reviews. They can have all my data, but they've yet to figure out a product to market to me let alone how to get through all my adblocks and viewing habits. Marketing today is way harder, or at least very different. You can't just pay for X commercials targeted at Y demographic and expect to drum up demand for your trash anymore. Same. I'm not immune to marketing, nobody is not matter what they think, I just see very, very little of it. Between adblockers, cutting the cord, and listening to my ancient iPod in the car I just don't get exposed to it, my biggest purchasing influence is word of mouth, which necessitates having a quality product/service. When I watch TV for a social engagement (eg the Super Bowl) the frequency of ads is jarring. After the clusterfucks that were Gears of War 3 and Mass Effect 3 I didn't preorder a game until Fallout 4 and I doubt I'll preorder another one ever again. I avoided spending $60 on Mass Effect Andromeda just by waiting a week to hear "holy poo poo this game sucks."
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Experiences have been status signifiers for a while now. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Eh? Who really has a stupidly overpriced phone plan anymore and isn't aware of what they're paying? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
and people with disabilities, too. there's a lot of self-supporting independent or semi-independent adults out there who pay for their own phone and are competent to earn enough money to be a profitable scam market but don't have the comprehension skills needed to really assess and compare the different plans on offer - and telcomm companies know it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Xaris posted:
You want this one. https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00Z...w_1503912406481
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 10:28
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Traveling in all forms has definitely become more fashionable than ever. I have former classmates from college who despite working service or entry-level office positions spend the entire summer flying around the globe for seemingly no other reason than to fill up their Facebook feeds. gently caress the environment I guess. I mean, they might do it because they enjoy travel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Yeah to me that's a sign of having too much money if you don't notice that a chunk of it is missing every month. It's the same type of mentality failure that makes debt so dangerous (and why every salesman negotiating financing tries to frame things in terms of monthly payments). But the bigger point is that there's a lot of cumulative expense from mundane expenses that adds up, and a lot of business models are shifting towards making purchase more mundane and more frequent so the cost is less obvious. OneEightHundred fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Aug 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Right. There's a huge amount of people that would balk at forking over $800 for a new phone but won't give a minutes thought to tack on an extra $30 a month ( for two years) on their cell phone bill for the same thing. I've noticed a lot of subscription services try to get into the $10-$20 range per month since at that point the cost just fades into the background with all of the little random purchases you make a month. It's real easy when you're scanning your bank/cc transactions to skim over the two digit ones and only focus on $100+ purchases.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Yeah, marketing has figured out people are much more likely to agree to monthly payments than lump sums. People dont' even seem to care about the price of a good or service, only how it will affect their monthly flow of money. If they think that $100 a month is a cost they can absorb it doesn't matter how much it adds up to in the end. They'd rather pay $100 a month for years than pay $2000 right now. You see this on a massive scale in housing. No one cares that that lovely 1br condo is $400k and after interest and other soft costs they are paying closer to $600k, that doesn't matter, all that matters is the monthly payment. When people yell at the government that things are unaffordable or prices are too high, they mean the monthly costs are too high. They don't want prices to go down, they want their payments to go down. They're fine paying 700k on a 400k condo so long as their monthly payments are smaller, who cares what the final price is. I can't stand monthly payments, I like to buy things once, lump sum. So it drives me nuts that so many things are turning into "services" and "subscriptions". You don't buy a piece of software for $800, you pay $100 a month to subscribe to a service that includes access to that software and now there's yearly new versions and everything is designed to keep you paying that $100 a month forever because the moment you stop your piece of software stops working or is rendered obsolete in a year. It's turning into the same with music and movies too. You pay a monthly subscription to access a library of content, but its never yours, they can take it away any time, and if you ever stop paying its gone.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
CFox posted:Right. There's a huge amount of people that would balk at forking over $800 for a new phone but won't give a minutes thought to tack on an extra $30 a month ( for two years) on their cell phone bill for the same thing. I've noticed a lot of subscription services try to get into the $10-$20 range per month since at that point the cost just fades into the background with all of the little random purchases you make a month. It's real easy when you're scanning your bank/cc transactions to skim over the two digit ones and only focus on $100+ purchases. I ended up doing monthly payments for my phone because it is interest free and there are better things to do with my $800 than drop it all at once on a phone. Once finance charges actually get involved then it becomes a less obviously good deal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
As I recall you also get a discount on insurance for the monthly payments? So it is (or was?) actually cheaper to do the monthly payments than buy outright if you wanted to get applecare/equivalent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Yeah, marketing has figured out people are much more likely to agree to monthly payments than lump sums. People dont' even seem to care about the price of a good or service, only how it will affect their monthly flow of money. If they think that $100 a month is a cost they can absorb it doesn't matter how much it adds up to in the end. They'd rather pay $100 a month for years than pay $2000 right now. You see this on a massive scale in housing. No one cares that that lovely 1br condo is $400k and after interest and other soft costs they are paying closer to $600k, that doesn't matter, all that matters is the monthly payment. When people yell at the government that things are unaffordable or prices are too high, they mean the monthly costs are too high. They don't want prices to go down, they want their payments to go down. They're fine paying 700k on a 400k condo so long as their monthly payments are smaller, who cares what the final price is. Please recall that, as far as housing is concerned, this is the result of prices being so high that your average consumer can never in their life buy a home outright. They don't care what the overall price is because they will never in a month of leap days pay off that overall price anyway. They just want to know how much of a hit their budget is going to take to keep a roof over their heads.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Please recall that, as far as housing is concerned, this is the result of prices being so high that your average consumer can never in their life buy a home outright. Right, no one's going to buy a house cash (well very few people). The problem is that our society being so obsessed only with monthly payments is totally fine with housing prices turning into a huge bubble so long as they can continue to afford the monthly payments. Prices get too high? Just allow longer terms. Don't make enough money to reasonably qualify for such a huge mortgage? Don't worry, the government will swoop in and guarantee your debts. Wow prices keep going up? Clearly more and easier credit is the answer, anything that actually lowered or stabilized prices is off the table since all this easy debt has made everyone over-leveraged and they're banking their lives on their house price always going up. Also make this all tax deductible and make renting super unattractive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I can't stand monthly payments, I like to buy things once, lump sum. So it drives me nuts that so many things are turning into "services" and "subscriptions". You don't buy a piece of software for $800, you pay $100 a month to subscribe to a service that includes access to that software and now there's yearly new versions and everything is designed to keep you paying that $100 a month forever because the moment you stop your piece of software stops working or is rendered obsolete in a year. It's turning into the same with music and movies too. You pay a monthly subscription to access a library of content, but its never yours, they can take it away any time, and if you ever stop paying its gone. Well, software's always been on a license structure due to the IP issue, so it's never been that far from it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Right, no one's going to buy a house cash (well very few people). The problem is that our society being so obsessed only with monthly payments is totally fine with housing prices turning into a huge bubble so long as they can continue to afford the monthly payments. Prices get too high? Just allow longer terms. Don't make enough money to reasonably qualify for such a huge mortgage? Don't worry, the government will swoop in and guarantee your debts. Wow prices keep going up? Clearly more and easier credit is the answer, anything that actually lowered or stabilized prices is off the table since all this easy debt has made everyone over-leveraged and they're banking their lives on their house price always going up. Also make this all tax deductible and make renting super unattractive. See also: Education, college/university fees, student loans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2017 05:23
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:As I recall you also get a discount on insurance for the monthly payments? So it is (or was?) actually cheaper to do the monthly payments than buy outright if you wanted to get applecare/equivalent. There are two other subtle but important aspects to things switching to services: People don't like to give up stuff that they're used to, and a service guarantees that the only way to avoid that disruption is to keep the money flowing. The other is that it completely kills second-hand markets, so none of the costs can be recouped and none of the cost can be avoided by buying older product. Sometimes it makes sense, it's probably for the better that a bunch of stuff is popping up to rent stuff for one-time use rather than buy it, use it once, and have it sit in storage forever, but it's not going to be good if Millennials turn out to be the generation that hits 65 and has no assets. OneEightHundred fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Aug 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2017 05:29
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Extended warranties are a ripoff anyway (and so are iPhones). My Dell extended warranty was great, covered repairing everything you could imagine and they'd have to a service call to the house with parts inside of 48 hours. Dropped it? Spilled water? Look so long as you didn't intentionally take a hammer to it it would all be covered.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
fishmech posted:My Dell extended warranty was great, covered repairing everything you could imagine and they'd have to a service call to the house with parts inside of 48 hours. Dropped it? Spilled water? Look so long as you didn't intentionally take a hammer to it it would all be covered. There's a reason they don't do that anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
HEY NONG MAN posted:There's a reason they don't do that anymore. No, they do, at least for the US/Canada. The service is called "Premium Support Plus" for consumers now, and "Dell ProSupport Plus" for business purchases. Given the pricing structure, it doesn't make sense if you're going to get some $300 laptop, but it's very suitable for higher end devices.
|
|
#
?
Aug 29, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:*For the men in the audience, women's pants are notorious for lovely shallow pockets that can barely hold a small wallet, assuming they have real pockets at all and not just a line of stiching to trick you into thinking it has pockets. It gets worse as the pants get fancier, since it's just assumed you'll be carrying a purse around. My infant has functional pockets on his onesies. My wife does not even have fake pockets in her jeans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Also the one time I bought really expensive (over $100) jeans, they were all super long (like, too long for 99% of people to wear) and it was completely assumed you'd have them hemmed. I see the point, as it's a cheap fix and easier than stocking a bunch of jeans with the same waist and different inseams, for something of a niche market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Apparently there's a totally weird community of jeans nerds who are all about buying too-long jeans so they can either roll them up or let them "stack" on one of their pairs of limited edition collectible sneakers. Oh no, that's not even the worst of it. Have you ever heard about the nightmare that is "raw denim"
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:Oh no, that's not even the worst of it. Have you ever heard about the nightmare that is "raw denim" I have not, please share.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Raw denim is just untreated, so you have to soak it once inside out in a hot bath before you wear it. It's really nothing special, but just like everything else people get obsessed about it trying to get good fade on their jeans & eventually you get a tweet about $500 jeans that were ruined by chipotle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
You Philistines wear non-selvedge denim?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
personally i just strip couches and easy chairs that I find on the side of the road and make crude loincloths from their fabric
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:56 |
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:personally i just strip couches and easy chairs that I find on the side of the road and make crude loincloths from their fabric Lookit this sellout who uses processed, commercial scraps. If I can't craft something wearable with whatever bark, leaves and vines I can forage locally, I just go naked In totally unrelated news, I'm banned from all the local parks
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2017 22:44
|
|
