3 ms·
I don't think an explanation involving 'YMMV' and 'sounds like' is a sufficient support for your opening statement that it is 'an awful example'. They have sim
by Confusion 15y ago
I don't think an explanation involving 'YMMV' and 'sounds like' is a sufficient support for your opening statement that it is 'an awful example'.
They have simply entered a market with a competing product. Unless you have evidence that their product is inferior to competing solutions and that they know it, but intend to overcome that problem by outmarketing the competition, then you really don't have any support for your position. Nestle has nothing to do with it until then.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- waitwhat 15y agoYou're being ridiculous. I don't have access to Unilever's internal marketing materials, and I doubt that you do either.
- Confusion 15y agoYou're the one accusing them of immoral behavior. I'm only relaying what I've heard an employee tell and I assume good faith: they changed their product such that it would be suitable for a new market and a nice side effect is that the product becomes available at all (which is nice because it improves matters). I have no stake in this and will readily revise my ideas, but not based on an unsupported accusation.
- waitwhat 15y ago(They're amoral, if anything.) which is nice because it improves matters But you haven't actually demonstrated that it improves anything, you simply asserted it without proof. And this is not something that can just be assumed to be true, because the pre-existing solution really is very good.