Live data from Hacker News

When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

eyeondesign.aiga.org

81–90 of 148 posts

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#81

I'm fairly sure (not an economist or insider etc) that the generic / own brand products actually have the highest profit margins for the shop, because there's not a big external brand like Unilever that wants their share of things.

I have heard the opposite: that the higher price of name brand goods means more profit for everyone. It would be good to know what the truth is.

Where I work, store brand gives us a huge margin, even at a low sale price. There’s not a single middleman trying to extract a profit.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#82
post #16

Unrelated to actual content: if you visit the site with ad-blocker on, it does not load. Instead, you just have this icon of the eye looking at you and blinking. And the eye will just blink until you turn ad-blocker off. I know the site is called "eye on design", but the associations of user tracking via ads and this blinking eye were amusing to me. Imagine having a blinking eye in the corner of each website for each…

That's odd.. may I ask which ad-blocker you were using? I visited it with both Privacy Badger & uBlock Origin running (on FF) and it loaded for me.

uBlock Origin on Firefox Android gave me the eye.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#83

Heh, up here in Canada the Loblaws grocery chain still sells the No Name generic brand. No Name products are about as simply presented as possible: black text on a yellow package, sometimes with a simple photo of the product. And yet they’re wildly popular (and, of course, cheap). Their website gives a pretty good indication of what their products look like: https://www.noname.ca/en_ca/ They actually experimented for…

Walking into a No Frills is like walking into the grocery store in Repo Man except everything is yellow.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#84
post #4
post #3

I miss the old old generic food packaging... It had its own special aisle. Big cans with white labels that merely said “BEANS” or “CORN” in fat black letters. Of course, it was embarrassing to have a cart full of that stuff as everyone would know you were poor.

> Of course, it was embarrassing to have a cart full of that stuff as everyone would know you were poor. I don't mean this to pick on you personally, but this sentence sums up so many problems with consumerism, advertising and it's ability to make us overpay. You don't look poor because you get the white label, you look financially responsible, unwilling to pay a branding premium for essentially the same product. Esp…

> You don't look poor because you get the white label, you look financially responsible, unwilling to pay a branding premium for essentially the same product. Especially with things like corn where no one could differentiate between the white label and name brands.

In many cases, it's not just that nobody can differentiate between them. They are literally the same product from the same factory, sometimes coming right off the same line. As in: Some of the cans of product go left for the "name brand" label and go right for the "store brand" label.

It's excellent price discrimination. Get consumers to spend as much as they can afford for the same product.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#85
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard the opposite: that the higher price of name brand goods means more profit for everyone. It would be good to know what the truth is.

Where I work, store brand gives us a huge margin, even at a low sale price. There’s not a single middleman trying to extract a profit.

So why is the store brand not in the prime spot rather than the bottom shelf. Is the major brand paying for placement?

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#86
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aldi was split into two groups in 1960, along geographical lines (Nord and Süd, serving resp. the North and the South of West Germany). Aldi Nord operates as Trader Joe's in the U.S., while Aldi Süd operates as Aldi.

Some more background on this because I find it really interesting: Aldi was formed by 2 brothers and then split after a disagreement about whether or not to stock alcohol. The reason I find it interesting is actually because Aldi isn't the first big brand formed by two German brothers to split into two (big, recognizable) brands. That honor would go to Adidas and Puma.

Adidas and Puma are direct competitors though, but Aldi seems to have divvied up the countries between them so they don't compete with each other, with the exception of the USA.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#87
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aldi was split into two groups in 1960, along geographical lines (Nord and Süd, serving resp. the North and the South of West Germany). Aldi Nord operates as Trader Joe's in the U.S., while Aldi Süd operates as Aldi.

Some more background on this because I find it really interesting: Aldi was formed by 2 brothers and then split after a disagreement about whether or not to stock alcohol. The reason I find it interesting is actually because Aldi isn't the first big brand formed by two German brothers to split into two (big, recognizable) brands. That honor would go to Adidas and Puma.

There are also 2 Mercks: the original in Germany, and the USA Merck which was split by the government due to WWI.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#88
This article puts quite a bit of focus on packaging, but I think there is a much bigger picture here. We started using store brand products more and more when the store brand products got better. Not long ago, most store brand foods were very mediocre. It’s only when companies like Costco started creating their own good house brands that my wife and I started going with store brand stuff.

With true “generic” product, a company doesn’t need to invest in good food quality. There is no brand to protect. “Kirkland”, is a decent respected brand on it’s own. You can only buy it at Costco, but you know it’s going to be decent. Trader Joe’s is similar. It’s not “generic”, it’s Trader Joe’s Brand. It’s a pretty significant difference, particularly at places like Trader Joe’s where a big portion of what they sell is their house brand.

The other significant piece of this is the ubiquity of branded stores. 30 years ago, when you went grocery shopping, you had 5 different regional supermarkets. Those supermarkets couldn’t afford to front their own brand so they went with generics as their cheap product. Now, we have so many country or even world-wide retailers that those retailers can afford their own brands. Some of them even have multiple “store brands” for their higher quality products.

The packaging is just the end-result of all of this, to have a brand, you need an identity.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#89
post #16

Unrelated to actual content: if you visit the site with ad-blocker on, it does not load. Instead, you just have this icon of the eye looking at you and blinking. And the eye will just blink until you turn ad-blocker off. I know the site is called "eye on design", but the associations of user tracking via ads and this blinking eye were amusing to me. Imagine having a blinking eye in the corner of each website for each…

Apparently I didn't need to read the article, okay.

Re: When did generic grocery brands get so good looking?

#90

I'm fairly sure (not an economist or insider etc) that the generic / own brand products actually have the highest profit margins for the shop, because there's not a big external brand like Unilever that wants their share of things.

I am something of an insider, and I can tell you in-house brands are what drive profits. See Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=17728530011

The true pioneer in this space is of course Trader Joe's.

Post reply on HN