[spaghettiToy]

Every time I read more about marketing (for my business) it enrages me more.

I basically don't use twitter, but I find myself on the platform in rants about how exploitive and manipulative some people are willing to be.

There is one company that targets vunerable people with their relatively affordable Veblen goods to make them feel socially insecure if they buy an Android instead. It's so obvious when you read about it, but it's masked in edgy advertising.

Reading about a company's marketing strategy is probably not good for my health.

[PopAlongKid]

TIL what a Veblen good is.

"Apple products are classified as Veblen products, because most often users choose them, guided by the big name of the brand and believing that the possession of this technology will increase their status in society."

https://lkrvk.com/the-veblen-effect-how-price-increases-affe...

[lotsofpulp]

This nonsensical trope is trotted out on HN all the time with no data to support it. Just the fact that Apple products are objectively not expensive enough to convey any information about status should be enough to prevent it from being posted.

I employ people that earn $15 to $20 per hour with no benefits that use Apple products like iPhones, MacBook airs, and air pods.

[spaghettiToy]

This is because you are upper middle class. Among the working class and teenage population, it is a status symbol.

We have our own in the upper middle class and we are similarly exploited. Luxury cars + a honorable cause is one that comes to mind.

Marketing can target insecurities but it doesn't need to be insecurity based. I just find that most egregious. Advertising "new, better, faster,tech" seems like the opposite end of this.

[lotsofpulp]

The claim I am responding to is very strong:

> "Apple products are classified as Veblen products, because most often users choose them, guided by the big name of the brand and believing that the possession of this technology will increase their status in society."

As if people might not be choosing Apple products like iPhones because of their proven track record of lasting much longer and being more desirable for the qualities of the product in and of themselves.

When people buy a Patek Phillipe watch, that might have the claim of being bought with the intent to signal status. A Patek Philippe watch tells time no better than any $15 watch.

But the implication that Apple products are mainly bought due to vanity needs to be supported by data. They have a reputation of being more durable, lasting longer, having more consistent user interfaces, better battery life, real life support from Apple employees in Apple stores, integrated software, primarily non ad supported business model, less known for malware, etc.

If I were poorer, it would be kind of insulting to think I would not value any of that and I am paying $200 to $500 for an Apple product than the cheapest alternative product simply to signal status.

Edit: as an illustration, Toyotas usually cost more than some other brands, but I do not see anyone claiming people are buying Toyotas in order to status signal. Or a Leatherman tool versus a Harborfreight tool.

I understand that at the very poor end, not buying the cheapest anything could signal status, but that is very different than buying something to signal status, which is what Veblen goods are about.

[pwpw]

I'm in upper middle class and switched away from an iPhone to an Android last year and felt like I dropped classes based on verbal reactions from my peers. I thought it was much more prominent as a status symbol in lower classes, but many of my peers also indirectly conveyed that my status had dropped. Some outright said it. I find it pretty bizarre and unfortunate, but now I'm back to getting the new iPhone because it's exhausting to be treated lesser based on a phone choice.

[lotsofpulp]

I find it bizarre that people talked to you about their perceived change in your status to you directly, much less simply due to a phone.

[pwpw]

Only one person said it directly who I’m close with and is always candid. I also almost always received a short comment about having an Android when initially connecting with a woman both in real life and on dating apps.

The bigger ramifications were ones I noticed myself. I wasn’t included in group texts organizing things where I usually would have before. I was still invited to things. Just no longer part of the organization messages. It was very subtle things like that where you notice people are treating you slightly different than they used to. Nothing major or dealbreaking but enough to make you realize there’s something there if you’re observant.

It’s tough to explain but the circles I’m in are so used to iPhones, that deviating from normality causes people to perceive you as no longer part of the collective group.

[spaghettiToy]

That's too bad bud. I make enough money that it's obvious that I just buy whatever I want.

[maest]

The other way I think about Veblen goods is that when you're purchasing an e.g. Balenciaga shirt, you're paying for 2 things:

1. the shirt

2. you're giving money to Balenciaga to go out there and tell people how great owners of Balenciaga shirts are. You're paying them to do some marketing on your behalf, in a way.

[lotsofpulp]

A logo’d shirt is a poor example of a Veblen good.

Per wiki

>A Veblen good would be something where the demand increases as the price increases.

Shirts with logos are actually priced lower than shirts with logos. They might signal that someone can ship at an outlet mall rather than Walmart, but not much more. All the high end clothing will not have conspicuous logos.

[mikkergp]

I think it heavily depends on the logo. Lots of luxury brands are very conspicuous with their logos. Louis Vuitton comes to mind but specifically with shirts:

https://www.saksfifthavenue.com/product/balenciaga-large-fit...

I wonder if there’s a dip with mid/high end products, but the “very high end” “designer” brands are very logo centric.