3 ms·

> The only winners are those who didn't advertise at all and only competed only on value. I keep seeing this sentiment here on HN. What fantasy world do people

by mbesto 5y ago

> The only winners are those who didn't advertise at all and only competed only on value. I keep seeing this sentiment here on HN. What fantasy world do people live in where advertising can't exist and people can still find products/services?! It's existed for centuries, the medium just changes over time. The digital advertising world is far from perfect, but suggesting it should outright not exist because we have perfect information about goods and services is laughable.

beagle3 5y ago
I don’t know if there’s some objective measure of “percentage of sensory perception occupied by ads” but I guess if there were it would be about 90% lower 50 years ago - and still people found things. It’s not binary ads/no-ads, and not all are equal (e.g. product placement is often subtle and not in-your-face). It is not unthinkable that 95% of ad budget is wasted. (I am sure the majority of ad budget 50 years ago was too, even if it was just 70%)
- pmontra 5y ago
  > 50 years ago - still people found things. Going back even more in time, we had word of mouth and domain experts to ask for advice. That works still now but it's pretty slow for somebody aiming at establishing a large scale business. Advertising money makes time run faster. I can understand why they want ads. On the other side I'm blocking all I can block and very rarely see an ad (not every month) and yet I find what I want to buy.
chmod775 5y ago
That's not a sentiment, it's a logical conclusion when applying basic mathematics as outlined in my comment. In the remainder of your comment you are attacking a straw man. I'll leave you to it.
- FredPret 5y ago
  Your original comment ignores the fact that with perfect ad targeting, there will be way more niche spending in your budget since small companies can create and market tightly targeted products cheaply. You’ll be happier with this outcome. With totally untargeted advertising, the whole population will get an ad mix that reflects aggregate spending patterns. The niches will disappear. Only through massive upfront investment into a major marketing campaign will consumer spending shift to a new product. Only the blandest, most mainstream, least interesting among us will be happy with this outcome.

by mbesto 5y ago

beagle3 5y ago

I don’t know if there’s some objective measure of “percentage of sensory perception occupied by ads” but I guess if there were it would be about 90% lower 50 years ago - and still people found things. It’s not binary ads/no-ads, and not all are equal (e.g. product placement is often subtle and not in-your-face). It is not unthinkable that 95% of ad budget is wasted. (I am sure the majority of ad budget 50 years ago was too, even if it was just 70%)

pmontra 5y ago
> 50 years ago - still people found things. Going back even more in time, we had word of mouth and domain experts to ask for advice. That works still now but it's pretty slow for somebody aiming at establishing a large scale business. Advertising money makes time run faster. I can understand why they want ads. On the other side I'm blocking all I can block and very rarely see an ad (not every month) and yet I find what I want to buy.

chmod775 5y ago

That's not a sentiment, it's a logical conclusion when applying basic mathematics as outlined in my comment. In the remainder of your comment you are attacking a straw man. I'll leave you to it.

FredPret 5y ago
Your original comment ignores the fact that with perfect ad targeting, there will be way more niche spending in your budget since small companies can create and market tightly targeted products cheaply. You’ll be happier with this outcome. With totally untargeted advertising, the whole population will get an ad mix that reflects aggregate spending patterns. The niches will disappear. Only through massive upfront investment into a major marketing campaign will consumer spending shift to a new product. Only the blandest, most mainstream, least interesting among us will be happy with this outcome.