5 ms·

Yup. I worked at a company selling enterprise equipment, and they were absolutely opposed to entering the consumer market precisely because low-information cust

Yup. I worked at a company selling enterprise equipment, and they were absolutely opposed to entering the consumer market precisely because low-information customers push everyone into a race to the bottom.

lostlogin 7y ago
There are notable exception to this in most industries, but it’s got to be a hard path to walk. Somewhat amusingly, most people’s favourite brands tend to be the more quality ones, if my circle is anything to go by (which is a trap). If it’s what they buy is a whole different thing.
- dc_gregory 7y ago
  A step further, it seems most people's favourite brands tend to be ones which were high quality in the past. Its a rare situation where that quality continues as mass market appeal arrives.
  - cannonedhamster 7y ago
    Irwin tools, Klein tools, Blaster Corp products, John Deere stuff, K-Bar, Leatherman, Ogio backpacks, and Patagonia. I'm sure there are others but these brands have held up well for me over time. It's definitely a short list. Lowe's Kobalt brand seems to be good for now but Craftsman is junk now, most major appliances are garbage, every television manufacturer I can think of has garbage QA, aside from Samsung and apple I can't think of a reputable phone brand sold in the US but even Apple quality has lessened a bit and Samsung has the exploding battery issue. It's gotten really hard to find quality that isn't hand made.
- azernik 7y ago
  Yeah, this is kind of the entire point of trademarks - to let non-professionals get enough information about quality to make decisions on some basis other than just price.
- nextos 7y ago
  > A step further, it seems most people's favourite brands tend to be ones which were high quality in the past. Its a rare situation where that quality continues as mass market appeal arrives. Yes, I think this is a typical brand lifecycle. Somewhat niche brand gets famous due to high quality and appealing image. Brand gets bought by big group, with a lot of expertise in distribution and marketing. Quality goes downhill, prices skyrocket. Brand eventually loses appeal. The LVMH Group does this all the time. But arguably, they don't lower quality too much.
  - user5994461 7y ago
    LVMH are mostly luxury brands. They only do high-end and way above that. When the standard price for a tshirt is something like $50, they don't need to worry about manufacturing price or cheaper competition. That's a different business entirely than primark selling $1 or $2 tshirts.
  - MrTonyD 7y ago
    I was just reading the book "The House of Morgan" and it describes how companies are purchased when they don't maximize short term profit. The bankers and executives make sure that they make millions in the transfer, and then the brand is cheapened to get more profit, usually at the expense of the customers and employees, and then the company is sold again to get more millions for the executives and bankers. They don't really care if the company goes under or they destroy society as a side effect - it is all about making more millions for the already rich principals.
    - WalterBright 7y ago
      > it describes how companies are purchased when they don't maximize short term profit But they evidently did maximize short term profit by selling the company.
    - technofiend 7y ago
      I jokingly call this MBA disease as a nod to Dutch Elm disease; the parasite sucks all the nutrients it can out of the host, killing it and then moves on. It’s the reason I don’t expect to enjoy Whataburger for much longer now that it’s been purchased by a Chicago investment house. For instance Whataburger uses fresh eggs and scrambles them on site. That’ll go by the wayside in favor of McDonald’s-style pre-made and pre-packaged eggs generating waste and lowering quality. But it’ll make the food easier to replicate nation wide creating shot term profits from growth until consumers have the predictable “I don’t see what all the hype is about” reaction, damaging or possibly destroying the brand.

lostlogin 7y ago

There are notable exception to this in most industries, but it’s got to be a hard path to walk. Somewhat amusingly, most people’s favourite brands tend to be the more quality ones, if my circle is anything to go by (which is a trap). If it’s what they buy is a whole different thing.

dc_gregory 7y ago
A step further, it seems most people's favourite brands tend to be ones which were high quality in the past. Its a rare situation where that quality continues as mass market appeal arrives.
- cannonedhamster 7y ago
  Irwin tools, Klein tools, Blaster Corp products, John Deere stuff, K-Bar, Leatherman, Ogio backpacks, and Patagonia. I'm sure there are others but these brands have held up well for me over time. It's definitely a short list. Lowe's Kobalt brand seems to be good for now but Craftsman is junk now, most major appliances are garbage, every television manufacturer I can think of has garbage QA, aside from Samsung and apple I can't think of a reputable phone brand sold in the US but even Apple quality has lessened a bit and Samsung has the exploding battery issue. It's gotten really hard to find quality that isn't hand made.
azernik 7y ago
Yeah, this is kind of the entire point of trademarks - to let non-professionals get enough information about quality to make decisions on some basis other than just price.
nextos 7y ago
> A step further, it seems most people's favourite brands tend to be ones which were high quality in the past. Its a rare situation where that quality continues as mass market appeal arrives. Yes, I think this is a typical brand lifecycle. Somewhat niche brand gets famous due to high quality and appealing image. Brand gets bought by big group, with a lot of expertise in distribution and marketing. Quality goes downhill, prices skyrocket. Brand eventually loses appeal. The LVMH Group does this all the time. But arguably, they don't lower quality too much.
- user5994461 7y ago
  LVMH are mostly luxury brands. They only do high-end and way above that. When the standard price for a tshirt is something like $50, they don't need to worry about manufacturing price or cheaper competition. That's a different business entirely than primark selling $1 or $2 tshirts.
- MrTonyD 7y ago
  I was just reading the book "The House of Morgan" and it describes how companies are purchased when they don't maximize short term profit. The bankers and executives make sure that they make millions in the transfer, and then the brand is cheapened to get more profit, usually at the expense of the customers and employees, and then the company is sold again to get more millions for the executives and bankers. They don't really care if the company goes under or they destroy society as a side effect - it is all about making more millions for the already rich principals.
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    > it describes how companies are purchased when they don't maximize short term profit But they evidently did maximize short term profit by selling the company.
  - technofiend 7y ago
    I jokingly call this MBA disease as a nod to Dutch Elm disease; the parasite sucks all the nutrients it can out of the host, killing it and then moves on. It’s the reason I don’t expect to enjoy Whataburger for much longer now that it’s been purchased by a Chicago investment house. For instance Whataburger uses fresh eggs and scrambles them on site. That’ll go by the wayside in favor of McDonald’s-style pre-made and pre-packaged eggs generating waste and lowering quality. But it’ll make the food easier to replicate nation wide creating shot term profits from growth until consumers have the predictable “I don’t see what all the hype is about” reaction, damaging or possibly destroying the brand.