3 ms·

I actually dislike most "branding", by which I mean, I dislike when the name/logo of the brand is on the product itself. I get that puts me in the minority. Fo

I actually dislike most "branding", by which I mean, I dislike when the name/logo of the brand is on the product itself. I get that puts me in the minority. For me, partly because I don't want to be seen as showing off and partly because I feel like if you want me to advertise your brand then you should be paying me, not the me paying you. And, once noticed, it's on so many products I wish it wasn't. The sink in my bathroom says "Sterling" as does my toilet. The saddles (seats) on my two bicycles have their name on them. So do the front forks on one. One that's most silly to me, the tires have huge branding but the actual useful info, what pressure they need, is nearly impossible to read without perfect lighting and then me taking a photo and zooming in. My phone holder, basket holder, rear racks, and pannier are all branded. My toaster oven, rice cooker, electric kettle, stove, refrigerator, even the garbage disposal has it's name stamped into the top visible part. All my casual shoes have a visible exposed tag at a minimum. Fortunately dress shoes don't but I rarely have a chance to wear those. My computer case, my monitor, my hub, my KVM, my laptop holder, my headphones, my mouse, they're all advertising their brand at me. I'd be fine if it's in some hidden area (inside the fridge, under the rice cooker, under the laptop holder, etc...) but ultimately I'd prefer no branding. But, there just aren't any choices. Most people either want to show off the brand they bought or they don't care. Few are like me that would prefer no visible branding. And so you can't get unbranded things (or I can't)

ratmeadow 8mo ago
Yeah I feel completely the same and largely do not understand when people are obsessed with branding. I'm assuming it's some primitive brain social hierarchy stuff where we seek to have everything be stratified by social value. Also I have a related point on consumerism. A lot of things don't really need a brand to begin with because there is little need for so many options. Like if you have to advertise your brand identity to me to have your product be a success, I generally assume your product is a solution in search of a proper problem. (Yes often they do solve problems, but I will argue many modern day problems are bullshit/fake.)
- Swizec 8mo ago
  Good branding is recognizable without the logo, especially to the target audience. For HN, macs are a good example. You can remove all the apples and we’ll recognize the laptop. My Triumph motorcycle has a similar property. You could remove all the logos (there’s just 2 stickers anyway) and even my girlfriend who is not into bikes will recognize it by the engine sound alone. Kitchenaid and Smeg appliances have a similar property. BBC hides all the logos and you can still recognize the standup mixers in their baking shows.
stingrae 8mo ago
I felt this way until I worked at Essential, the now shut down phone maker. One of the core company design principles was to have minimal branding. The phone design had no logo. When you show it to people they are looking for the identifier and it's completely missing. When you are in a market where most of the products look largely the same, branding is very important. It's unfortunate, but absolutely necessary.
- dpb001 8mo ago
  I don't doubt your experience, but out of curiosity, what led you to the conclusion that branding is "absolutely necessary"? It seems to me that the presence of a name on black rectangle wouldn't matter to the average consumer. I get that there's a percentage of the consumer market that wants to advertise that they're rocking an Apple/Samsung/whatever device, but I would think that price/performance would be the major factor. Of course, that's probably why no one has ever put me in charge of marketing strategy.
- tavavex 8mo ago
  Ironically, because phone designs have converged so much and innovation had plateaued, a phone with no branding whatsoever represents a brand in and of itself. Think about it, even the worst, cheapest no-name phones built from old parts in some small Chinese factory have something written on them. The absence of a logo is so unique that it performs the same function, because no one else is doing that. The catch is that it only works if people know this gimmick in advance, but this also applies to brands with textless logos.
aaron695 8mo ago
[dead]
Karrot_Kream 8mo ago
What does this have to do with the article?
- decimalenough 8mo ago
  From the friendly article: > One obvious lesson is to stay away from brand. Indeed it's probably a good idea not just to avoid buying brand, but to avoid selling it too.
  - Atheros 8mo ago
    You misunderstood the article. Paul Graham isn't saying "Don't buy things based on brand", he's saying "Don't buy brand." It's perfectly healthy to use brand as a heuristic to help yourself more easily buy products that work well.
    - socalgal2 8mo ago
      And yet tons of people do buy brand. Specifically to show it off. "Look at me! I'm rich! See, I'm wearing LV pants, Jimmy Choo shoes, I've got tUMI luggage, a Rolex watch, and a Prada bag. Seems related to me. You can buy this Prada keychain, only $525! https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/saffiano-leather-keychain/2PP041_053_F0002 https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/saffiano-leather-keychain/2PP0... Or you can buy some other that will be just as functional https://www.etsy.com/search?q=keychain+leather+black+triangle https://www.etsy.com/search?q=keychain+leather+black+triangl... But not advertise your $$$$. Maybe a better example: Is this $2950 Prada bag https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/re-nylon-and-saffiano-leather-backpack/2VZ048_2DMG_F0002_V_OOO https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/re-nylon-and-saffiano-leather-... Any better than 1000s of < $100 bags? It's not more durable. It's not going to last longer. It's not going to carry more or less stuff. You can find 100s of not 1000s of bags who if you slapped a Prada tag on would be considered just as stylish (meaning if you did a double blind test and either put the logo on both or removed it from both, no one would tell which was which) > It's perfectly healthy to use brand as a heuristic to help yourself more easily buy products that work well. Sure, though I know lots of people that assume expensive = quality and confuse that with expensive brand = quality. It doesn't. The chintziest items I've owned have been expensive "high end" brands. That's not to say all expensive brands are bad. Only that expensive well known brand only means they're good at marketing. It does not mean their product are quality. They might be, they might not.
Gigachad 8mo ago
In the age of infinite aliexpress slop, brand is the fastest way to assess quality. There's a difference between branding on a toilet vs branding on clothing. No one is flexing their wealth with a toilet brand. The brand exists so someone in the market to buy a toilet notices the brand on lots of other toilets they see around which gives it more trust over a no name direct from China toilet. To me, a product with no visible brand at all feels like a drive by operation that shouldn't be taken seriously. You can see this all over, nice cutlery will always have a brand stamped in the metal, while cheap junky stuff will be unbranded since it's sold on price rather than quality and trust.
saghm 8mo ago
> One that's most silly to me, the tires have huge branding but the actual useful info, what pressure they need, is nearly impossible to read without perfect lighting and then me taking a photo and zooming in. Sadly, the writing isn't there for (only) you. Anywhere you go and park your car now has a billboard for the tire company. Far more eyeballs that interest the ones putting the writing on it will be looking at it for reasons other than looking for the pressure than ones who are actually trying to get anything done with them.

ratmeadow 8mo ago

Yeah I feel completely the same and largely do not understand when people are obsessed with branding. I'm assuming it's some primitive brain social hierarchy stuff where we seek to have everything be stratified by social value. Also I have a related point on consumerism. A lot of things don't really need a brand to begin with because there is little need for so many options. Like if you have to advertise your brand identity to me to have your product be a success, I generally assume your product is a solution in search of a proper problem. (Yes often they do solve problems, but I will argue many modern day problems are bullshit/fake.)

Swizec 8mo ago
Good branding is recognizable without the logo, especially to the target audience. For HN, macs are a good example. You can remove all the apples and we’ll recognize the laptop. My Triumph motorcycle has a similar property. You could remove all the logos (there’s just 2 stickers anyway) and even my girlfriend who is not into bikes will recognize it by the engine sound alone. Kitchenaid and Smeg appliances have a similar property. BBC hides all the logos and you can still recognize the standup mixers in their baking shows.

stingrae 8mo ago

I felt this way until I worked at Essential, the now shut down phone maker. One of the core company design principles was to have minimal branding. The phone design had no logo. When you show it to people they are looking for the identifier and it's completely missing. When you are in a market where most of the products look largely the same, branding is very important. It's unfortunate, but absolutely necessary.

dpb001 8mo ago
I don't doubt your experience, but out of curiosity, what led you to the conclusion that branding is "absolutely necessary"? It seems to me that the presence of a name on black rectangle wouldn't matter to the average consumer. I get that there's a percentage of the consumer market that wants to advertise that they're rocking an Apple/Samsung/whatever device, but I would think that price/performance would be the major factor. Of course, that's probably why no one has ever put me in charge of marketing strategy.
tavavex 8mo ago
Ironically, because phone designs have converged so much and innovation had plateaued, a phone with no branding whatsoever represents a brand in and of itself. Think about it, even the worst, cheapest no-name phones built from old parts in some small Chinese factory have something written on them. The absence of a logo is so unique that it performs the same function, because no one else is doing that. The catch is that it only works if people know this gimmick in advance, but this also applies to brands with textless logos.

aaron695 8mo ago

[dead]

Karrot_Kream 8mo ago

What does this have to do with the article?

decimalenough 8mo ago
From the friendly article: > One obvious lesson is to stay away from brand. Indeed it's probably a good idea not just to avoid buying brand, but to avoid selling it too.
- Atheros 8mo ago
  You misunderstood the article. Paul Graham isn't saying "Don't buy things based on brand", he's saying "Don't buy brand." It's perfectly healthy to use brand as a heuristic to help yourself more easily buy products that work well.
  - socalgal2 8mo ago
    And yet tons of people do buy brand. Specifically to show it off. "Look at me! I'm rich! See, I'm wearing LV pants, Jimmy Choo shoes, I've got tUMI luggage, a Rolex watch, and a Prada bag. Seems related to me. You can buy this Prada keychain, only $525! https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/saffiano-leather-keychain/2PP041_053_F0002 https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/saffiano-leather-keychain/2PP0... Or you can buy some other that will be just as functional https://www.etsy.com/search?q=keychain+leather+black+triangle https://www.etsy.com/search?q=keychain+leather+black+triangl... But not advertise your $$$$. Maybe a better example: Is this $2950 Prada bag https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/re-nylon-and-saffiano-leather-backpack/2VZ048_2DMG_F0002_V_OOO https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/re-nylon-and-saffiano-leather-... Any better than 1000s of < $100 bags? It's not more durable. It's not going to last longer. It's not going to carry more or less stuff. You can find 100s of not 1000s of bags who if you slapped a Prada tag on would be considered just as stylish (meaning if you did a double blind test and either put the logo on both or removed it from both, no one would tell which was which) > It's perfectly healthy to use brand as a heuristic to help yourself more easily buy products that work well. Sure, though I know lots of people that assume expensive = quality and confuse that with expensive brand = quality. It doesn't. The chintziest items I've owned have been expensive "high end" brands. That's not to say all expensive brands are bad. Only that expensive well known brand only means they're good at marketing. It does not mean their product are quality. They might be, they might not.

Gigachad 8mo ago

In the age of infinite aliexpress slop, brand is the fastest way to assess quality. There's a difference between branding on a toilet vs branding on clothing. No one is flexing their wealth with a toilet brand. The brand exists so someone in the market to buy a toilet notices the brand on lots of other toilets they see around which gives it more trust over a no name direct from China toilet. To me, a product with no visible brand at all feels like a drive by operation that shouldn't be taken seriously. You can see this all over, nice cutlery will always have a brand stamped in the metal, while cheap junky stuff will be unbranded since it's sold on price rather than quality and trust.

saghm 8mo ago

> One that's most silly to me, the tires have huge branding but the actual useful info, what pressure they need, is nearly impossible to read without perfect lighting and then me taking a photo and zooming in. Sadly, the writing isn't there for (only) you. Anywhere you go and park your car now has a billboard for the tire company. Far more eyeballs that interest the ones putting the writing on it will be looking at it for reasons other than looking for the pressure than ones who are actually trying to get anything done with them.