It’s true that this is how most consumers act. It’s dumb, but iirc it’s factually correct.
If you take a brand name shirt, remove the logo in a way that is visually perfect, and sell them side-by-side, then the logo shirt will outsell the non-logo shirt. Or so I’ve heard.
Absolutely. There are definitely people like OP who prefer products without branding, but for the majority (average) of consumers in many markets, the branding actually adds value.
“SuPrEmE” somehow did this and created a rabid following over some of the most basic stuff I’ve ever seen. It’s a meme now to just stick their logo on like, a literal brick so it’s suddenly more “desirable.”
That is an extreme example of this, yes. Other examples of branding can be much more subtle and deft, e.g. Apple’s product design. It’s not in-your-face but nevertheless it’s present and adds to the consumer experience and perception of value.
ironically technically not true
one principle of marketing is the knowledge that the brand actually adds (perceived) value for many consumers, and so they are willing to pay more
It’s true that this is how most consumers act. It’s dumb, but iirc it’s factually correct.
If you take a brand name shirt, remove the logo in a way that is visually perfect, and sell them side-by-side, then the logo shirt will outsell the non-logo shirt. Or so I’ve heard.
Absolutely. There are definitely people like OP who prefer products without branding, but for the majority (average) of consumers in many markets, the branding actually adds value.
“SuPrEmE” somehow did this and created a rabid following over some of the most basic stuff I’ve ever seen. It’s a meme now to just stick their logo on like, a literal brick so it’s suddenly more “desirable.”
Truly boggles the mind.
That is an extreme example of this, yes. Other examples of branding can be much more subtle and deft, e.g. Apple’s product design. It’s not in-your-face but nevertheless it’s present and adds to the consumer experience and perception of value.