Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Brand Age

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 403 posts

Re: The Brand Age

#21

Post by lionkor »

fragmede wrote: post #11
7777777phil wrote: post #5

Nike is a useful test case (1) here. Brand was the whole competitive moat for them and once athletic gear commoditized, then management spent five years cutting the things that sustain it: athlete relationships, premium positioning, product development. Each cut looked (somewhat) rational on its own but none of them were, taken together. (1) https://philippdubach.com/posts/nikes-crisis-and-the-economi... EDIT: Neverm…

The question is, in this new software world order, how much do brands matter vs what they've done vs network effects. I could have Claude code shit out a Facebook or Twitter clone, or an Uber clone, and have none of the baggage of Cambridge Analytica, being owned by Elon Musk, or Travis kalanick of Greyball and S. Fowler legacy. An Uber driver-turned-dev could easily stand up a competitor and give way more money to t…

Also those vibe coded competitors will not make it. Feel free to try though

Re: The Brand Age

#22

Post by stackghost »

kridsdale1 wrote: post #20
fragmede wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, in this new software world order, how much do brands matter vs what they've done vs network effects. I could have Claude code shit out a Facebook or Twitter clone, or an Uber clone, and have none of the baggage of Cambridge Analytica, being owned by Elon Musk, or Travis kalanick of Greyball and S. Fowler legacy. An Uber driver-turned-dev could easily stand up a competitor and give way more money to t…

(I look over to the Coca-Cola Classic on my table that I picked because my taste buds prefer the classic brand)

Your taste buds prefer the flavor, not the brand. If they changed their name to "Caramel Diet Fanta" but kept the recipe identical, you'd still enjoy the taste.

The New Coke brand failed because people didn't like the taste, not the other way around.

Re: The Brand Age

#23

Post by JumpCrisscross »

creeble wrote: post #10

> So the only thing distinguishing one top brand from another was the name printed on the dial Respectfully disagree. Since the 60's (and one could argue, even long before that), watches are 1) fashion, and 2) male wealth-signaling fashion. That's it. Nothing more. And for males who subscribe to this wealth-signaling cult, they know from a long way away what watch brand is on that guy's wrist. Okay, today's brands si…

> they know from a long way away what watch brand is on that guy's wrist

No, they didn’t. The makers of movements and makers of cases were separate. From far away you only know the case on the wrist. Not the movement. (I think Rolex was the first mass-market Swiss watch brand to vertically integrate. Patek may have been the first boutique.)

Re: The Brand Age

#24

Post by kridsdale1 »

creeble wrote: post #10

> So the only thing distinguishing one top brand from another was the name printed on the dial Respectfully disagree. Since the 60's (and one could argue, even long before that), watches are 1) fashion, and 2) male wealth-signaling fashion. That's it. Nothing more. And for males who subscribe to this wealth-signaling cult, they know from a long way away what watch brand is on that guy's wrist. Okay, today's brands si…

I entered this cult last year. It’s been super fun to spot and infer from a distance, as you say, these hidden signals that men have chosen to spend $20,000 to $120,000 on.

G-Shock says “I do things that are so dangerous and so off the grid your Rolex or Apple Ultra would shatter and die”. And it’s true, out of my whole collection, that’s the one that will still be within a ms of true time 25 years after the power goes out after the nukes go off.

Re: The Brand Age

#25

Post by kridsdale1 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #23
creeble wrote: post #10

> So the only thing distinguishing one top brand from another was the name printed on the dial Respectfully disagree. Since the 60's (and one could argue, even long before that), watches are 1) fashion, and 2) male wealth-signaling fashion. That's it. Nothing more. And for males who subscribe to this wealth-signaling cult, they know from a long way away what watch brand is on that guy's wrist. Okay, today's brands si…

> they know from a long way away what watch brand is on that guy's wrist No, they didn’t. The makers of movements and makers of cases were separate. From far away you only know the case on the wrist. Not the movement. (I think Rolex was the first mass-market Swiss watch brand to vertically integrate. Patek may have been the first boutique.)

They were. The Acquired podcast on Rolex really opened my eyes to this whole world. They defined the playbook in the 1930s that Apple repeated in the 80s and especially 2000s.

Re: The Brand Age

#26

Post by JumpCrisscross »

fragmede wrote: post #11
7777777phil wrote: post #5

Nike is a useful test case (1) here. Brand was the whole competitive moat for them and once athletic gear commoditized, then management spent five years cutting the things that sustain it: athlete relationships, premium positioning, product development. Each cut looked (somewhat) rational on its own but none of them were, taken together. (1) https://philippdubach.com/posts/nikes-crisis-and-the-economi... EDIT: Neverm…

The question is, in this new software world order, how much do brands matter vs what they've done vs network effects. I could have Claude code shit out a Facebook or Twitter clone, or an Uber clone, and have none of the baggage of Cambridge Analytica, being owned by Elon Musk, or Travis kalanick of Greyball and S. Fowler legacy. An Uber driver-turned-dev could easily stand up a competitor and give way more money to t…

> I could have Claude code shit out a Facebook or Twitter clone, or an Uber clone

No, you couldn’t. At best you’d turn out a video game simulating Uber. The idea that all of the business is in its software seems to be one Silicon Valley perennially unlearns.

Re: The Brand Age

#27

Post by kridsdale1 »

bogardon wrote: post #9

Is it just me or are an increasing number of (high profile) people in the tech industry into luxury watches these days?

Gotta do something with those RSUs.

I asked Claude to psychoanalyze why I got obsessed with them and it said I’m likely striving for something tangible that appeals to my engineer mindset that isn’t now obsolete in the age of AI. It’s my career’s existentialism.

Re: The Brand Age

#28

Post by creeble »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #23
creeble wrote: post #10

> So the only thing distinguishing one top brand from another was the name printed on the dial Respectfully disagree. Since the 60's (and one could argue, even long before that), watches are 1) fashion, and 2) male wealth-signaling fashion. That's it. Nothing more. And for males who subscribe to this wealth-signaling cult, they know from a long way away what watch brand is on that guy's wrist. Okay, today's brands si…

> they know from a long way away what watch brand is on that guy's wrist No, they didn’t. The makers of movements and makers of cases were separate. From far away you only know the case on the wrist. Not the movement. (I think Rolex was the first mass-market Swiss watch brand to vertically integrate. Patek may have been the first boutique.)

The movement isn't part of the brand. It's not part of the signal. The case/dial/sometimes band are the brand. And if you couldn't tell them apart, they wouldn't be any good at signaling, the entire point of wearing them.

Re: The Brand Age

#29

Post by organsnyder »

stackghost wrote: post #22
kridsdale1 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(I look over to the Coca-Cola Classic on my table that I picked because my taste buds prefer the classic brand)

Your taste buds prefer the flavor, not the brand. If they changed their name to "Caramel Diet Fanta" but kept the recipe identical, you'd still enjoy the taste. The New Coke brand failed because people didn't like the taste, not the other way around.

Every time I drink a Coke (or any other soft drink), the brand's baggage (good and bad) is present. Unless you're doing a blind taste test, it's impossible to avoid that.

Re: The Brand Age

#30

Post by JumpCrisscross »

stronglikedan wrote: post #19
jgrahamc wrote: post #14

" Because at Patek he'd encounter the most extreme brand age phenomenon: artificial scarcity. You can't just buy a Nautilus. You have to spend years proving your loyalty first by buying your way through multiple tiers of other models, and then spend years on a waiting list. " Strange game, the only winning move is not to play. I've heard other brands do this (Ferrari?) and, of course, there are lines outside "luxury"…

> Why bother? ego, of course

> ego, of course

This is so silly. Do you really not have any hobbies where you spend inordinate time or money on things you could objectively accomplish quicker and cheaper, but having less fun, in other ways? Like, I ski. It’s a silly way to get up and down a hill in the 21st century.

I’m not a watch guy. But mechanical watches are beautiful. There are idiots who buy them. But that doesn’t mean everyone who does is an idiot.

Post reply on HN