5 ms·

I think the other question is do you really think you’re able to outsmart an industry that has had decades and billions of dollars to develop its marketing stra

by Dwolb 6y ago

I think the other question is do you really think you’re able to outsmart an industry that has had decades and billions of dollars to develop its marketing strategy? Maybe if you’re Elon Musk, who’s top 0.001% of human business talent, but even he’s had over a decade at it and isn’t yet churning out cash.

ethanwillis 6y ago
I don't even know where to begin here; The Elon Musk worship or the stockholm syndrome your corporate overlords have instilled in you :). But, I guess I'll go with the latter. I'm not Elon Musk, but I don't need to be and neither does anyone else. There's absolutely no reason to believe that any person (not specifically me) ,who is not in BMW, could in fact have a good insight to something they're doing wrong. People commenting here on HN could be working in marketing or marketing adjacent industries and notice problems that are very hard to see from within the organization itself. In fact I'd argue that nearly every organization has some sort of blindspot and bias that informs their work due to the company's history and structure. And it's not necessarily true that those biases materialize in ways that are beneficial. BMW is no exception.
- Dwolb 6y ago
  We’re approaching the same thing from opposite sides. My only point is to consider here: is BMW default wrong or is BMW default correct? My default is to understand why a system behaves how it does before using my own value system to say why it’s wrong. Part of this progression of thought is there’s usually very good reasons as to why things are how they are. It’s really hard to outsmart lots of time, money, and people. It’s my belief that until we understand the thought, theory, and progression of events that led the system’s current state, we’ll probably make similar path-dependent mistakes when we propose solutions so I assume the system is default correct until it’s fully understood. My point about Elon (who’s considered a success to some :)) has had industry marketing success but it took him over a decade and billions to do it.
  - ethanwillis 6y ago
    You're right that we're coming to the same thing from different sides. I would definitely not argue that BMW is default wrong, but I also would not argue that they are default correct. I think our difference of opinion here is rooted in our different understandings of the power of money, time, and people. All three of those are very important and are definitely a multiplier on the ability of an organization to both advance and implement some solution. However, my opinion is that those things aren't the only factor that lead to a successful solution. Your root ideas that you're using those three things for must be based on a core idea that's correct. I'm saying that, that core idea could be completely wrong or misguided. Especially in this case where BMW seems to be targeting a new demographic, with a new product. Right now they're in a learning phase in my opinion. And yes they can use some of their institutional knowledge from similar marketing pushes in the past to make sure the message for this EV is polished. But that past knowledge only goes so far. Drawing analogies and parallels between the two (historical marketing efforts and this modern one) fall flat in key ways. They are not and cannot ever line up 1:1 where the knowledge transfer just gives them a working cookie cutter recipe that works 100% of the time. So going back to approaching the same thing from opposite sides, I think I'm really getting at this same thing you said "It’s my belief that until we understand the thought, theory, and progression of events that led the system’s current state". However, I'd take a different fork and say that while understanding all of those things is important, it doesn't mean that the theory and the process of implementation are necessarily fault free. I'd say that there's actually 3 options here: BMW is default wrong, BMW is default correct, or BMW is somewhere in between default wrong and default correct. I think it's the latter where no organization is ever on the extreme ends. So really I think our disagreement is base around how various factors unique to them play into which way they "lean" on this continuum leading to the likelihood that they're correct. Marketing gaffes and the need to readjust after getting feedback while launching a new campaign are common in my experience. (Yes, I know, my experience haha). But the best way I can judge a situation without having first hand details... which many of us here don't and we're just all talking for fun. Is to use my experiences, value system, etc. to voice an opinion that is definitely up for debate. But I definitely don't think this specific situation is as black or white as "you're not their target"

by Dwolb 6y ago

ethanwillis 6y ago

I don't even know where to begin here; The Elon Musk worship or the stockholm syndrome your corporate overlords have instilled in you :). But, I guess I'll go with the latter. I'm not Elon Musk, but I don't need to be and neither does anyone else. There's absolutely no reason to believe that any person (not specifically me) ,who is not in BMW, could in fact have a good insight to something they're doing wrong. People commenting here on HN could be working in marketing or marketing adjacent industries and notice problems that are very hard to see from within the organization itself. In fact I'd argue that nearly every organization has some sort of blindspot and bias that informs their work due to the company's history and structure. And it's not necessarily true that those biases materialize in ways that are beneficial. BMW is no exception.

Dwolb 6y ago
We’re approaching the same thing from opposite sides. My only point is to consider here: is BMW default wrong or is BMW default correct? My default is to understand why a system behaves how it does before using my own value system to say why it’s wrong. Part of this progression of thought is there’s usually very good reasons as to why things are how they are. It’s really hard to outsmart lots of time, money, and people. It’s my belief that until we understand the thought, theory, and progression of events that led the system’s current state, we’ll probably make similar path-dependent mistakes when we propose solutions so I assume the system is default correct until it’s fully understood. My point about Elon (who’s considered a success to some :)) has had industry marketing success but it took him over a decade and billions to do it.
- ethanwillis 6y ago
  You're right that we're coming to the same thing from different sides. I would definitely not argue that BMW is default wrong, but I also would not argue that they are default correct. I think our difference of opinion here is rooted in our different understandings of the power of money, time, and people. All three of those are very important and are definitely a multiplier on the ability of an organization to both advance and implement some solution. However, my opinion is that those things aren't the only factor that lead to a successful solution. Your root ideas that you're using those three things for must be based on a core idea that's correct. I'm saying that, that core idea could be completely wrong or misguided. Especially in this case where BMW seems to be targeting a new demographic, with a new product. Right now they're in a learning phase in my opinion. And yes they can use some of their institutional knowledge from similar marketing pushes in the past to make sure the message for this EV is polished. But that past knowledge only goes so far. Drawing analogies and parallels between the two (historical marketing efforts and this modern one) fall flat in key ways. They are not and cannot ever line up 1:1 where the knowledge transfer just gives them a working cookie cutter recipe that works 100% of the time. So going back to approaching the same thing from opposite sides, I think I'm really getting at this same thing you said "It’s my belief that until we understand the thought, theory, and progression of events that led the system’s current state". However, I'd take a different fork and say that while understanding all of those things is important, it doesn't mean that the theory and the process of implementation are necessarily fault free. I'd say that there's actually 3 options here: BMW is default wrong, BMW is default correct, or BMW is somewhere in between default wrong and default correct. I think it's the latter where no organization is ever on the extreme ends. So really I think our disagreement is base around how various factors unique to them play into which way they "lean" on this continuum leading to the likelihood that they're correct. Marketing gaffes and the need to readjust after getting feedback while launching a new campaign are common in my experience. (Yes, I know, my experience haha). But the best way I can judge a situation without having first hand details... which many of us here don't and we're just all talking for fun. Is to use my experiences, value system, etc. to voice an opinion that is definitely up for debate. But I definitely don't think this specific situation is as black or white as "you're not their target"