4 ms·
I would agree with you that SpaceX is more meaningful than advertising but advertising is not always a zero-sum game. In the Pepsi vs Coke case or Ford vs Toyot
by Veelox 10y ago
I would agree with you that SpaceX is more meaningful than advertising but advertising is not always a zero-sum game. In the Pepsi vs Coke case or Ford vs Toyota then yes it is a zero-sum game (unless you consider the increased competition a benefit). But in different cases online advertising allows some services to exist that would otherwise be impossible.
One example is that you can be a self-employed bookbinder in a remote town by advertising your services online. This allows you to find customers who want your services that you would not otherwise be able to find. Those customers are able to find more bookbinders than would be possible without online advertising which drives down price.*
So, online advertising is not always zero-sum, it allows some business that would not be able exist without it. The existence of more businesses reduces price for customers.
* I got this idea from an article I read previously and am not able to find.
- inimino 10y agoYes. I agree, and in a better society there would still be some room for advertising. If a product or service benefits consumers, then it benefits them to know that it exists. However, I would also say that we have several orders of magnitude more advertising than we need, and that the majority if it is zero-sum, or if you consider products like Pepsi and Coke (high margin addictive death syrup that would scarcely have a market if not advertised to the saturation point) decidedly negative-sum.