3 ms·

I disagree and don’t think of cheap as being bad. If used honestly, I think it’s a good way of using accurate language to describe a brand. Sometimes a cheap b

I disagree and don’t think of cheap as being bad. If used honestly, I think it’s a good way of using accurate language to describe a brand. Sometimes a cheap burger or a cheap taco is the best. For signatures, I think this works. I don’t think I would skimp on important, non-commodity things. I think it’s funny and off putting when brands try to overestimate their importance. I don’t want a “signature experience” just like I don’t want to “invest” in a $5 domain name. Just be honest instead of pretending like everything is part of my identity.

jacobr1 5y ago
> For signatures, I think this works. I don’t think I would skimp on important, non-commodity things. But it doesn't really work for signatures. If I'm signing things related to my mortgage, or VC financing, or an affidavit or something, it isn't equivalent to "cheap taco," but rather something like "fancy fine dining." I'd be willing to pay a premium to ensure nothing goes wrong with the documents that will delay a closing process. And if I were a lawyer or similar professional, I think I'd also want to convey that premium image. I'm not buying a "signature experience," but I might be a buying house, where a want a "trusted transaction." Which is why I'm hiring a professional and not going DIY.