Live data from Hacker News

The death of Don Draper?

newstatesman.com

41–50 of 78 posts

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#41

It's scary how targeted google ads are now a days. I was talking about buying a bed to my mother and noticed ads for mattresses started popping up in my ad sidebars. I miss being anonymous.

“What’s an ad sidebar?”

Ok, tongue-in-cheek remark. I left Facebook, block ads aggressively, use DuckDuckGo, and live in the weak sauce privacy of the Apple ecosystem.

Since I block ads, I also block a bunch of trackers. But given that I can’t see most ads, I have no idea whether people are trying to sell me mattresses after I discuss beds.

For all I know, I don’t live in a house with the shades drawn, maybe I live in a house with one-way shades such that the advertisers can watch me, but I can’t see anything they’re trying to show me.

——

If the above is the case, I will still be vulnerable to micro-targeted astroturf stuff. Like bots posing as Members of whatever social media I participate in, dropping brand names in their conversations.

Is everyone on Swedespeed really a Volvo enthusiast? If one of them posts a picture of a Trek mountian bike on their roof rack, how do I know this is “organic,” and not an ad campaign?

For how long will the above be a pleasant chuckle about a dystopian possible future, and not everyone’s daily “reality?”

This is already happening with political discourse, it must be inevitable for commerce.

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#42

Is it me or does this article contradict itself throughout the piece? It tries so hard to sell it’s headline, but every point and interview it does paints a completely different picture. You want to sell a da Vinci? Well then you have to make private meetings with potential clients, and, you have to create ads that sell it as iconic. You want to make people buy your brand of beer? Well you have to sell the story of i…

> You want to sell a da Vinci? Well then you have to make private meetings with potential clients, and, you have to create ads that sell it as iconic. That’s sales, not marketing. You wouldn’t bother to create ads for a Da Vinci, as the pool of people with the means to buy one is so small and the process of buying one is so convoluted. See also jet engines. > You want to make people buy your brand of beer? Well you h…

What are those connotations? As someone who has had the misfortune of drinking Stella, I speculate that Europeans challenged themselves to make something even nastier than Budweiser, and they succeeded.

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#43

It's scary how targeted google ads are now a days. I was talking about buying a bed to my mother and noticed ads for mattresses started popping up in my ad sidebars. I miss being anonymous.

ublock in browsers, a PiHole at home, ad blockers on your phone, and duckduckgo as your search engine.

I'm basically free from seeing online ads and from sharing too much of my life away.

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#44
I disagree with a number of points in this article.

"Now, we live in an age in which the intangible haze of soft-sell is no longer necessary, and the battle for market share comes down to the raw strength of your product. “The sun has passed midday on brand,” he says."

I don't think this is remotely true - as an example, take a look at the insurance industry (GEICO, AFLAC, AllState, etc). These guys are spending on massively on brand advertising. Now, obviously, the LTV of these customers is huge so they can afford the high CAC that comes with brand advertising. This advertising is pure Don Draper imho.

"The brand getting the most buzz in the car industry is Tesla. “What’s different about them? No advertising. Innovation in the car industry is not about putting Cindy Crawford in a TV ad. It’s about building a better battery.”"

Yes they have a great product - and, at the moment, they have that differentiation and, most importantly, buzz. That will change as the market for electric cars matures - and then you'll see Tesla start to advertise. It doesn't make any sense for them to spend on advertising right now given that they are in the press literally every day (right now for some stuff that isn't necessarily positive). Maturity of market matters.

"Clients have even started to question the ad business’s claim to efficiency. The model I described above is a simplified version of a dizzyingly complex system whose details few can fathom, involving multiple companies taking multiple fees. Unsurprisingly, fraud is rampant."

If this is true we'll likely see a pullback in digital advertising - or at least a movement to direct buys only on specific websites (vs. network buys).

My opinion: digital advertising is proving to be less and less efficacious, with costs going up and results going down. At the same time, we have less and less product differentiation. The result should be more spending on traditional brand advertising. Digital advertising is a channel - and spend to that channel will ebb and flow.

In my small world of advertising (B2B SaaS), I've seen digital advertising becoming largely ineffective. Too many companies marketing similar products and services. I would argue, in this world, brand advertising therefore becomes more important. That is, developing a brand is as or more important than product because all the products (in the eyes of prospects) are largely the same. Note that I am not saying product doesn't matter, or that a product cannot differentiate in a specific market (e.g. Slack), but that companies need a distribution advantage to succeed over every other company - and that either comes from the product or brand (e.g. Drift).

Now, having said all this, do I think the Ad Tech industry is a mess and that a major shakeout is needed? Yes. Do I think that digital advertising is largely too consolidated with a handful of players (Google, Facebook and now Amazon) - yes. Advertising can be still be great and useful - but Ad Tech needs some help.

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#45
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just last week I was at an unusually good talk by an Ogilvy Vice Chairman Rory Sutherland mentioned in the article. >Rory co-heads a team of psychology graduates who look for "butterfly effects" in consumer behaviour - these are the very small contextual changes which can have enormous effects on the decisions people make The talk's on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWiB5H18aug&t=1187s Recommended if you ar…

Also thought this podcast with Rory Sutherland by Farnam Street / The Knowledge Project was particularly good, especially in what the actual value of brand is: https://fs.blog/rory-sutherland/

Yeah it was good - similar stuff but more of it.

I thought the bit on economics was interesting - that motivating people by paying or fining them is limiting because there's a lot of other factors you can look at if you are creative. (48m)

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You want to sell a da Vinci? Well then you have to make private meetings with potential clients, and, you have to create ads that sell it as iconic. That’s sales, not marketing. You wouldn’t bother to create ads for a Da Vinci, as the pool of people with the means to buy one is so small and the process of buying one is so convoluted. See also jet engines. > You want to make people buy your brand of beer? Well you h…

What are those connotations? As someone who has had the misfortune of drinking Stella, I speculate that Europeans challenged themselves to make something even nastier than Budweiser, and they succeeded.

Stella has a higher end reputation in the States, vs what I believe to be a Budweiser type reputation in Europe. Similar to the disconnect between PBR's marketing in the US and Asia (although PBR is the other way around)

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#47
Outright advertising in the old school sense is dead and has been for a long time. Marketing is not. I think this author is deeply confused. Now, more than ever, the perceived value of cheap products is being inflated by brand. Look how much people pay for a can of Red Bull, which offers less volume than a soda and less caffeine than a coffee. Look at how much people pay for Starbucks coffee and Hermès purses. It’s all smoke and mirrors. In many cases, you’re paying more for an inferior product because the brand gods took advantage of your cognitive bias.

The example of Tesla is particularly ridiculous to me and shows how little understanding of marketing the author has. Tesla isn’t a no-marketing company that only relies on its good product. What about a Tesla is superior? Not the interior. Mercedes has them beat there. Not the technology - it’s been proven unreliable at best. Not the range - many gasoline cars have better range. Not the price - their current offerings are far higher than an average person can afford. It’s questionable whether they’re even better for the environment than other cars. In fact, Tesla is so good at marketing that they’ve bamboozled the author and he doesn’t even realize it. Elon Musk knows the way to manipulate perceptions, and he’s very, very good at it.

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#48

Outright advertising in the old school sense is dead and has been for a long time. Marketing is not. I think this author is deeply confused. Now, more than ever, the perceived value of cheap products is being inflated by brand. Look how much people pay for a can of Red Bull, which offers less volume than a soda and less caffeine than a coffee. Look at how much people pay for Starbucks coffee and Hermès purses. It’s a…

I think you make a big mistake in using the word 'inflated'. The joy of doing something is configured in our brains, and we enjoy that. Science has shown that we like and are willing to pay more for things merely on the brand.

Its like saying that all kisses are the same, its inflated that you want it from a specific person!

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#49

Outright advertising in the old school sense is dead and has been for a long time. Marketing is not. I think this author is deeply confused. Now, more than ever, the perceived value of cheap products is being inflated by brand. Look how much people pay for a can of Red Bull, which offers less volume than a soda and less caffeine than a coffee. Look at how much people pay for Starbucks coffee and Hermès purses. It’s a…

I think you make a big mistake in using the word 'inflated'. The joy of doing something is configured in our brains, and we enjoy that. Science has shown that we like and are willing to pay more for things merely on the brand. Its like saying that all kisses are the same, its inflated that you want it from a specific person!

I usually buy brand name over generic stuff because it is quantifiably better to me in some way. Cereal that tastes better, garbage bag doesn't rip, etc.

Re: The death of Don Draper?

#50

Outright advertising in the old school sense is dead and has been for a long time. Marketing is not. I think this author is deeply confused. Now, more than ever, the perceived value of cheap products is being inflated by brand. Look how much people pay for a can of Red Bull, which offers less volume than a soda and less caffeine than a coffee. Look at how much people pay for Starbucks coffee and Hermès purses. It’s a…

I think you make a big mistake in using the word 'inflated'. The joy of doing something is configured in our brains, and we enjoy that. Science has shown that we like and are willing to pay more for things merely on the brand. Its like saying that all kisses are the same, its inflated that you want it from a specific person!

You might have slightly misconstrued the parent comment.

To rework your idea: there's a spectrum for the quality of kisses. Some people figured out a way to convince you that their kisses are better than they actually are. Others are likely better, but they don't know how to market themselves, and thus don't get kissed as much.

Post reply on HN