5 ms·
This reflects one of the greatest dissatisfaction I have with touring the United States, which is the ubiquity of franchises. I can tour cities across the count
by foofoo4u 5y ago
This reflects one of the greatest dissatisfaction I have with touring the United States, which is the ubiquity of franchises. I can tour cities across the country and I always see the same companies: Starbucks, Target, 7Eleven, Panda Express, Petco, etc. It doesn't matter if I go to Salem, Austin, or Los Angeles. I see the same stores with the same shopping centers. There is a lost sense of culture.
The same goes for billboards. It's always the same companies marketing: Ford, McDonalds, etc. Why do we hardly ever see small brands marketing? I'd be inclined to keep billboards if small brands utilized them to help their business, but that is rarely the case. Given this, why do we still tolerate billboards to the same mega-corporations? Everyone already knows they exist and what they sell. How much more exposure do they really need at the expense of the natural beauty of our towns and our own mental state?
- megaman821 5y agoI can't say I have too much trouble going to interesting eateries and coffee shops around cities in America. I agree with you the retail shops are pretty much the same everywhere. I see (and have bought from) small brands online (especially ones that advertise on social networks and podcasts). In my circles a lot of other people have to. I just assume that these advertisements are a lot more effective than billboards, so billboards are left to the larger companies doing more brand marketing.
- passerby1 5y agoMaybe I'm wrong but probably big corps keep buying billboards to keep a status quo (kinda their monopoly) and to prevent some new company to shake the market. Therefore probably they would be the same happy if costs of renting a billboard rise to the sky preventing anyone from advertising. But probably they'd better keep things as they are.