You have a choice between two products. Both are within your budget. One has a prestigious brand; the other has good value, that is, quality for the price. Which would you choose?
@evan Your inclusion of "prestigious" brand swayed my answer (in the opposite direction). I've never fallen for the notion that you'll gain a jot of prestige by using, or wearing, something that someone has told you is what all the cool people use, or wear. I hate that herd mentality. My disdain was reinforced years ago when a friend bought a Rolex Oyster for £20,000 only to discover it lost almost 2 minutes a day . She took it back to complain, and was told that level of accuracy was "well within our expected tolerance". Sorry, but if I'm buying a watch I expect it to tell the time. If I'm paying 20 grand for it, I'd expect it to be accurate to two seconds a day never mind two minutes. I absolutely do not care whether anyone is gonna stare wide eyed at me and go "ohhhhhhh, you've got an oyyyyyyyster!!!!!!"
@evan so generally I'd say I'm not for luxury brands, but I do appreciate a company that wants to build something for a particular product space. "Put their name on it" as one might say.
The idea that I'd have a positive view of their brand because I bought this product I think works towards some accountability.
@evan Put that way the question assumes perfect knowledge but with many generic products (not a major brand) it’s difficult to determine quality, particularly if shopping online.
@evan Poignant question. My mom just fell prey of this issue.
She lost some data she had copied to some "256 GB memory card". First I thought she had bought some unreliable cheap unbranded flash drive. (I previously tested a number of flash drives she had. I destroyed and threw away half of them as irredeemable. One even lied to the OS about its size and more.)
But no, she had done the opposite. She searched a reliable brand and found a "Lenovo" MicroSD. (do these even exist? seems a fraud).
@evan I took value to mean exactly what you defined it as, and yet I answered Value Usually.
That's because I've learned that sometimes in an organizational context it actually makes sense to accept an inferior product if you've accidentally paid for it already.
That's how Microsoft made most of their money.
Other reasons to accept an inferior product are that you think the vendor of the superior product has less than a 70% chance of surviving long enough to make it to complete the term.
@evan I said "value usually", because there are often situations where you can't consider the product in isolation.
One situation where the brand may matter more is if you need people to help you repair/maintain the product. The prestigious brand may be easier to find parts and knowledgeable repair people for, even if considered in isolation the value product is better.
@evan Need to qualify: There's a huge "it depends" here where if I've never heard of the brand or if the brand sounds hinky then I'll find something else. Like the latest air duster for my computer. I went through several iterations before settling on the one I have (though it was also because it had 'sin' in the name. As one does.)
@evan I somehow glossed over the "prestigious" part. Also I'm remembering so many brands that once were prestigious and now are just nameplates for the same no-brand junk (e.g.: General Electric, RCA, etc.)
@evan A prestigious brand is supposed to be a mental shortcut for quality (and apparently in this case the price is similar). So that you can even ask this question un-ironically and worse that the results are not a resounding "value always" makes me a little dead inside :blobcatnotlike:
Does anyone really believe that a $590 Gucci t-shirt is of markedly higher quality than a $90 Ibex or Handvaerk, or even a $42 Mac Weldon or a $30 Hanes?
I don't think a lot of people really think the brand is better. The brand provides another kind of advantage to a certain kind of customer.
It's a Veblen good. The high price is the point. You're paying for the proof that you can buy unnecessary things for a high price without caring.
@evan at a similar price-point it does (which was implied by the framing of your question as both being "in budget"). The idea is that if a brand is well know, it is likely because it offers good quality and you don't need to look into the details of how and why the quality is good.
I am aware that there is also the (unrelated) higher price argument of it as a status symbol, but that's IMHO even worse.
@evan@kris all bodies are different. Once I find a brand that fits mine I’ll pay a premium for it because it saves me the trouble of having to return it or deal with something that doesn’t fit as well. $590 is obviously beyond what I’d pay for any t-shirt but if I had that kind of money and I knew it was a great fit I could see the logic.
Hanes shirts are fine if I only have $30 to spend and need to cover myself but they are either tight in the shoulders and neck or too loose everywhere else depending on if it’s a medium or large. I’ll pay $60 for something that I love wearing.
@skotchygut@evan That seems totally unrelated to the prestigious brand question and is just a matter of choosing the same maker each time, no?
If the $30 t-shirt from no-name company A happens to fit you perfectly you could buy it just the same.
Granted, higher quality t-shirts usually also fit better, because more care was given to how they fit and variability is lower, but that is purely a quality argument again (i.e. good value).
@kris@evan prestigious brands can afford to take risks for certain body types. They do shorter runs and the economies of scale are not as effective. This is why the unit costs are higher.
No-name brands, for the most part, must cast a wider net and try to be good enough for most instead of a perfect match for a few.
@skotchygut@evan Sorry, but again that is a matter of quality, not brand. Sure... quality is usually somewhat more expensive (within reason) and as by my original argument, a prestigious brand is commonly taken as a mental short-cut for exactly such reasons you mention, but the brand itself and how prestigious it is has nothing do do with quality by itself.
You can find no-name companies offering the same quality and options you are looking for, it just takes longer to find as you can't just quickly grab the well-known brand you can expect to have these features.
If you have two offers at a similar price-points as stipulated by the original poll and you still chose the prestigious brand over the (in this case) higher quality no-name maker, your are being scammed or purely buy it for status reasons.
@evan Count another VU. There are a few cases where I buy or have bought based on brand, but in most such cases, it's been because I can reasonably expect brand to be a good proxy for quality and thus for a part of what goes into value. Some companies have earned themselves a rather unflattering place on my "avoid buying from these" list simply because of ethical considerations, even as their products are both decent and reasonably priced.
It really depends on the type of product, but in general I put very little stock in brand prestige.
The only time I'd select a "prestigious" brand over a better value alternative would be in a situation where long-term support, replacements, parts, and that type of thing were a concern.
That said, if the smaller brand is more right-to-repair friendly and/or uses standard parts those are things that might mitigate the above.
@evan Brands are spells advertisers weave to convince you a product is more than it is. Lies, in every sense. Worse than meaningless; hostile to the actual qualities of a product.
If I could kill any Marketing practice today it would be this one.
@torgo The tortoise lays on its back, its belly baking in the hot sun, beating its legs trying to turn itself over, but it can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping.
@evan respectfully Evan, that sounds just a tiny bit disingenuous 🙂. The price of tea or the war are completely orthogonal to the subject of this poll, but another dimension that affects how people consume, sometimes trumping the binary offered, does sound relevant. At least a worthwhile topic for the comments? I was saying this less to criticise the poll and more to explain why some of us would not be able to answer it.
@evan I am amazed that the word advertising has not shown up in this thread. Most if not all the extra cost in brand name goods is in advertising costs.
@evan I don’t buy brands for prestige, but sometimes do for consistency and service. I most often buy brands for cases where I most need quality - shoes, luggage, electronics. I go for value most for less expensive items like food and small ticket hardware store items.
@evan I guess it depends what "quality for the price means", as if the brand still has a significant quality increase even if more expensive I would go for it if in my budget.
@evan VU: On the basis that I "don't care about brands" but, frankly, all things being equal, there are undoubtedly products whose quality I'm not (yet) kitted out to gauge, so I may factor in my perception of the brand's reputation when choosing.
@evan I think with a lot of things now we're buying online and it's impossible to tell what the quality will be like through pictures - and reviews are generally suspect on websites now too.
If I can truly tell I'm getting good value, then yes I'll always go for that.
But I chose 'value usually' for those times I can't figure out quality, and/or for items where cheaping out on materials or build quality would be bad or even dangerous.
@evan I’d say 80% of the time I don’t care. Stuff like cheese, yogurt and other dairy products, whatever is on sale is good enough. Stuff like cereal that’s so many brands I just pickup what’s on sale, though a lot of the time I’ll opt for brand over store label. Canned goods I don’t care, whatever is cheapest.
@evan funny, I took this poll (brand usually) and then had to buy a foldable handcart. I bought the brand over the supposed value of the slightly cheaper competitors. Checks out!
@evan This one is tricky as "Value Always" would imply getting something bad for free over something great even at a good price. That said, there are so many fly by night products that look fine but suck I'd lean to Brand.
@evan The question explicitly defined value as the quality to price ratio. When I think about my purchasing there's often a process of trying to determine that and it's common that I'll have a better idea of the quality of a known brand vs generic products that appear to be a better value. So when there's a conflict there I'll lean brand.
I can see how that may not have been the intent of the question but on the face of it it's where the question led me. :)
Key in your question for me is "quality for the price".
Shopping would be exhausting if we had to evaluate quality on every product every time, so brand can be a proxy for quality based on experience. If I can reliably and easily assess quality for another, cheaper, product then I will choose that.
@virtuous_sloth@evan This. Also, the phrase “I’m too poor to buy cheap things” resonates here - part of the poverty trap of having to re-buy cheap things that wear out quickly or break easily.
All things being equal, of course we prefer a lower price, but we’ve seen how the race to the bottom ends up.
@evan@virtuous_sloth OK, there is some nuance here. Like, there are brands that do high quality (All-Clad), or new brands that grow by doing decent quality at low prices (Anker). And other brands that grow by knowingly underpricing the competition to starve them out (Amazon Basics). So all three could offer "good quality for the price," if your definition of quality doesn't include tradeoffs and externalities.
Add comment