4 ms·

Counterpoint: This might be what increasing access to luxury goods looks like. A lower quality sells for a low(er) price point, which enables more people to buy

Counterpoint: This might be what increasing access to luxury goods looks like. A lower quality sells for a low(er) price point, which enables more people to buy what was once a luxury good. Perhaps this is what people give up for society to move to a more equitable place. Forcing a level of quality would force a higher price point, which would price people out of access to the good. And no, "but the prices are still high" doesn't get you out of this jam. For as high as they are now, they would be even higher with quality guarantees. So, if you want the "high quality" you're used to, that may mean spending more because you can afford to. And if you can't, then take solace in knowing that the product that's shitty to you is a new luxury to someone else.

noodlesUK 3y ago
That is a fair counterpoint. I think then the issue is potentially misleading marketing, where a good is being marketed as robust and high-quality when it is not in fact either of those things.
- milesvp 3y ago
  Oh yeah. Marketing drives a lot of shit. Also I think the trend towards “marketplaces” makes things worse. Used to be if it was in a store, it meant there was a buyer whose job was to vet products the store sells. Cheap products would get returned, then pulled from shelves. Now if you buy online? store tanks. new store with same product with new random 6-8 character name. It’s one if the reasons I still like buying at costco, you can be pretty sure the product will be good for its price point.
- redcobra762 3y ago
  Is that “in fact”? I would argue that quality is relative, and when your comparison point is, “no access” you may consider access in any form to be of “superior” quality. Overall I reject the negative attitude towards brands who have seemingly “gotten worse” over time in the same way I accept newcomers to the gym. Goods becoming more available (people using the gym) is a good thing, even if my personal experience gets marginally worse (access to equipment decreases).

noodlesUK 3y ago

That is a fair counterpoint. I think then the issue is potentially misleading marketing, where a good is being marketed as robust and high-quality when it is not in fact either of those things.

milesvp 3y ago
Oh yeah. Marketing drives a lot of shit. Also I think the trend towards “marketplaces” makes things worse. Used to be if it was in a store, it meant there was a buyer whose job was to vet products the store sells. Cheap products would get returned, then pulled from shelves. Now if you buy online? store tanks. new store with same product with new random 6-8 character name. It’s one if the reasons I still like buying at costco, you can be pretty sure the product will be good for its price point.
redcobra762 3y ago
Is that “in fact”? I would argue that quality is relative, and when your comparison point is, “no access” you may consider access in any form to be of “superior” quality. Overall I reject the negative attitude towards brands who have seemingly “gotten worse” over time in the same way I accept newcomers to the gym. Goods becoming more available (people using the gym) is a good thing, even if my personal experience gets marginally worse (access to equipment decreases).