4 ms·
Harbingers of failed products
- mkj 11y agoThe obvious solution is a database of these failing customers and preventing them from buying the product, right?
- xivzgrev 11y agoNo the article was careful to note they don't cause the decline. Rather youd want to involve them in early early tests of products. If they like it change something quick!
- thescribe 11y agoI had never considered this. I keep a 'graveyard of products' shelf, because my appreciation appears to kill products. Maybe I am a bad omen for a product?
- mkj 11y agoI guess that could be it. Somewhat related to the category of failed companies - there a few people who always seem to work for startups doomed to failure, but then a few years later a similar company goes really well doing the same thing. Must be ahead of their time.
- BraveNewCurency 11y agoI don't understand why the article is written as if there was a conclusion. It seems like there are more questions than answers at this point. Maybe the products were just too expensive and those "harbingers" are all just rich people? Or maybe those people were early adopters who saw potential value in the product, but the product was just too shitty for mainstream consumers? So if your product fails, just blame the people with low standards who initially bought it!
- bitwize 11y agoConclusion: If you want to make money, design products that appeal to (male and female) basic bitches.
- Animats 11y agoThe article doesn't tell you much, but the actual paper [1] is fascinating. This isn't about tech. The data is for 27 million sales of packaged goods in convenience stores. "For example, customers who purchased Diet Crystal Pepsi are more likely to have purchased Frito Lay Lemonade (both of which failed). A consumer who repeatedly purchases Diet Crystal Pepsi is even more likely to have unusual preferences, and is more likely than other customers to choose other new products that will fail in the future. ... These customers who systematically buy products that fail are also customers who are more likely to buy niche products that few other customers purchase." The authors of the paper don't attempt to attach an explanation to the results; they just look at its statistical significance for use in making marketing decisions. The effect is only seen in some product categories. If you read more into it than that, you're going beyond what the data says. [1] https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/mktg/assets/File/Anderson-Eric%202015_02_05_Harbingers.pdf https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/mktg/assets/File/Anderso...
- ams6110 11y agoSome prior discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9839344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9839344
- DrScump 11y agoThe title is clickbait-y (the harbingers are never identified) and the Ars author's conclusions have little to do with the conclusions of the researchers. Example: "If something appeals to them, it’s unlikely that it will appeal to the mainstream." No, it doesn't say that about the general cases -- that's like saying "if a (harbinger) likes Star Wars, it's unlikely that Star Wars will appeal to the mainstream." The only universe of products that is relevant to harbinger behavior is failed products.