5 ms·

I'm not disagreeing with you. Marketing is needed because every one of your competitor is doing marketing. It is an arm race. But if you removed ALL the market

I'm not disagreeing with you. Marketing is needed because every one of your competitor is doing marketing. It is an arm race. But if you removed ALL the marketers from the surface of the planet, people would still have needs and they would find product for those needs without the help of marketers. The end product would not change for a thing. Let's take one of the most advertised product on the market: cars. Cars are highly utilitarian and are needed by people. Today every brand maker has to advertise in order to remind people that their model exist. If you remove all the ads for cars, people would still need cars and they would buy based on what they think is best suited for them, not based on the most flashy ads.

kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
Even North Korea has ads for it's domestic products.
themacguffinman 8y ago
> they would find product for those needs without the help of marketers Not very well. All you achieve by getting rid of marketers is ceding control of marketing to random natural factors like geography or chance.
- chrisbennet 8y ago
  Would that be worse than people actively trying to influence us, often in a dishonest way? I’m not against companies having their own web sites to “sell” their product, just don’t put your ads in front of me to convince me I need something. If I need it, I’ll go look for it.
  - speedplane 8y ago
    What are you saying here exactly? It seems pretty obvious that buying products by random chance is worse than by competition or an "arms race" in the market. It's precisely a well functioning market that allows the best to rise to the top.
    - AstralStorm 8y ago
      By best you mean richest with best marketing. Not actually best as in most useful.
    - chrisbennet 8y ago
      I’ll grant you that a well functioning market is a good thing. In the absence of ads that create desire, I would use various magazine reviews (Consumer Reports, etc), articles and forums to make buying decisions when I needed to buy something.
clay_the_ripper 8y ago
I see your point, but I think that this ignores that people make emotional decisions about money and buying things. Maybe that's not you, but I think any marketer or economist would agree with that statement. The things we buy are inherently irrational and based on feelings, not features. So a world that is purely driven by facts and figures and not feelings is a sort of "what if" scenario and not something that will ever actually happen (as long as humans continue to be human).

kevin_thibedeau 8y ago

Even North Korea has ads for it's domestic products.

themacguffinman 8y ago

> they would find product for those needs without the help of marketers Not very well. All you achieve by getting rid of marketers is ceding control of marketing to random natural factors like geography or chance.

chrisbennet 8y ago
Would that be worse than people actively trying to influence us, often in a dishonest way? I’m not against companies having their own web sites to “sell” their product, just don’t put your ads in front of me to convince me I need something. If I need it, I’ll go look for it.
- speedplane 8y ago
  What are you saying here exactly? It seems pretty obvious that buying products by random chance is worse than by competition or an "arms race" in the market. It's precisely a well functioning market that allows the best to rise to the top.
  - AstralStorm 8y ago
    By best you mean richest with best marketing. Not actually best as in most useful.
  - chrisbennet 8y ago
    I’ll grant you that a well functioning market is a good thing. In the absence of ads that create desire, I would use various magazine reviews (Consumer Reports, etc), articles and forums to make buying decisions when I needed to buy something.

clay_the_ripper 8y ago

I see your point, but I think that this ignores that people make emotional decisions about money and buying things. Maybe that's not you, but I think any marketer or economist would agree with that statement. The things we buy are inherently irrational and based on feelings, not features. So a world that is purely driven by facts and figures and not feelings is a sort of "what if" scenario and not something that will ever actually happen (as long as humans continue to be human).