Sunday, August 2, 2009
╠ Success in Failure ╣
Often we can find ourselves turning our noses up at ads or simply deeming them ineffective and a waste however even in these cases there is still value to be attributed.
For us to choose to purchase something first there has to be a need, second a product that satisfies that need must be able to quash all risks involved in the purchase of the product. Now, when I say risk I'm not saying someones going to come and shoot you for buying the wrong pair of glasses, the risks I refer to are more various. For example a main one is financial risk, aka can you afford it, another important risk is breakage or lemon risk which refers to the durability of the product.
When it comes to an individual product individuals can have varying risks, some may have the financial risk as top priority, in this case they'll usually opt for the cheapest product. Other people however, especially in the case of technology are more afraid of faulty products, and will pay that bit extra for a brand that they know.
The way this links back is that whilst you may hate an ad, the brand will usually stick in your mind. Take the case where the faulty risk is of the highest importance to you, where choice is limited. Would you choose the brand you know, a brand that is successful enough to advertise, albeit poorly, but advertise none the less, or a complete no name brand?
In the end what matters to a consumer is justify the product, to satisfy the level of risk they are happy with. So I would assume in a case where quality is of priority you would choose the brand you know. This is simply because there is one thing that every television ad shouts loud and clear. 'Look at us, we can afford to be on TV!' If your original message doesn't get through, this one always will.