Comments on: Fanboyism and Brand Loyalty

By: ipad on sale

ipad on sale — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 22:11:42 +0000

Better impart. Thanks for posting such an in depth impression. I’ve handled one in the shop, but your narrate covered alot of ground that i couldn’t accompanying such a exiguous number of time. based on my in-store undergo and your characterize i think i’ll be

By: AJ Ryan

AJ Ryan — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 16:36:31 +0000

The Pepsi/Coke thing is bullshit. It is like people saying video games stimulate aggression in the brain. We can’t actually conclude that because that isn’t really how the brain works. To this day studies of that type can at best hope to show a correlation between a stimulus and a part of the brain.

Aside from that gripe, yeah the article is pretty much dead on. People choose a side and stick with it in spite of their own best interests. Republicans and Democrats, Marvel and DC fans, or what have you.

Personally, I hate brand loyalty. Give me the best product for the best price, and I will still complain about its every failing and shortfall. I think it is fine to be critical of the products you choose not to buy, but it makes no sense to be any less critical of the products that you do buy.

By: Geek Gazette

Geek Gazette — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 04:07:28 +0000

Great article. As a psych major I’ve heard all of this, in some form, before, but it was still interesting.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 02:45:14 +0000

I guess this explains why I kept watching Heroes until the bitter end!

By: Joe H

Joe H — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 02:11:01 +0000

Actually, Axon, the article, while not expressly covering that, does allude to it. It talks about how when people invest in time and money, no matter the quality of the product, even if the product sours over time, the buyer will make justifications to support the buying habits. So, if someone has been buying the product for a long time, even if it’s no good anymore, they’ll still stick with it, because of the time and money already put into it while it was still good. The quality may have been what prompted them to buy it in the first place, but the time and money invested in it is what keeps them buying.

By: Axon Rey

Axon Rey — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 01:49:04 +0000

I’m not particularly moved by this article, nor too enlightened by it. Most of this seems like old news- but I think it ignores a point that most “fanboyism” or whatever one would like to call it, at some point, had roots in legitimacy. I can wholeheartedly say I have never bought a product, hated it, and continued to support it. I will say that I have bought a product, enjoyed it, and continued to support even after a decline in quality. If I smell shit right from the get-go, I tend to jump ship.

Also, appreciation to Dhaise, as I always enjoy a call-out to Wildcats 3.0, the best comic not nearly enough people have read.

By: Dhaise

Dhaise — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 23:33:52 +0000

Now see, if all of you “I only buy/read/ dc/marvel” guys had actually bought Wildcats 3.0, you could have had all this info and a kickass story years ago.

By: Generalzod33

Generalzod33 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 19:04:00 +0000

This article supports the idea that people who buy product they don’t actually enjoy will defend it, but does it say anything about people who buy product they end up hating, but still buy month after month? THOSE are the people who REALLY make me roll my eyes. THEY’RE the ones who most likely will run to a messageboard like this to whine and complain, clogging otherwise “friendly” boards with nonsense and flame wars.

By: mercwiththemouth

mercwiththemouth — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:54:59 +0000

This article also applies to peoples’ preferences for a political party.

By: Devil_Hanzo

Devil_Hanzo — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:50:42 +0000

I try very hard not to be a fanboy.

I prefer PCs because I have the most experience with them. I have nothing against Macs or Apple products (I love my iPod and I’m considering getting a iPad eventually). I keep hearing that Macs are better for video editing, and while I’m not sure that’s true, I’m sure there are some things in which a Mac does better than a PC, and vice versa.

I prefer Pepsi to Coke, but I will drink coke anytime it’s available, even more often then Pepsi since it’s more widely available. Given the choice, I would go with Pepsi, as I genuinely prefer the taste.

I just got a PS3, but I’ve had a 360 for a few years now. When it comes to consoles; it’s all about the games. At this point and time, I still prefer my 360 because it has all the games I enjoy. However, if all games were available on all consoles, I would probably buy most of them for the PS3, as it’s graphics are a tad bit better. Also, because 360s are known to have more hardware issues (I’ve already had one red ring of death repair), I would tend to buy more for my PS3.

I prefer DC to Marvel, but that’s really just because of the characters. I do read Marvel from time to time, but since I’m more into Batman and Superman than Wolverine and Spiderman, I’ve chosen my camp.

By: WanderingTamer

WanderingTamer — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 16:23:37 +0000

Man, Vulcan’s would be totally screwed. They’d never be able to buy anything.

By: Rated_R(ob)KO

Rated_R(ob)KO — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:53:18 +0000

@James –

1.) Where do you see ANYTHING about “trademark”?? He says “Family Friendly Logo”. Nothing family friendly about a red triangle on beer…

“Fanboyism isn’t anything new, it’s just a component of branding, which is something marketers and advertisers have known about since Quaker Oats created a friendly logo to go on their burlap sacks.

There was, of course, no friendly Quaker family making the oats back in 1877. The company wanted people to associate the trustworthiness and honesty of Quakers with their product. It worked.

This was one of, if not the first, such attempt to create brand loyalty – that nebulous emotional connection people have with certain companies which turns them into defenders and advocates for corporations who don’t give a shit.”

2.) The article was not poorly researched or heavily flawed. Tests favor those who spend the most on them? Yeah? Then, why did McDonald’s have the Third Pounder Angus burgers in a testing phase for over 3 years before they were mass produced for the public? No one liked the choices for the burgers. They had to get it right. People didn’t “favor” it just because it was a new burger from McDonald’s. You just didn’t like what he had to say. It obviously hit you on some sort of tether of emotion. So, stop being pretentious.

By: James

James — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:33:50 +0000

This article was poorly researched and heavily flawed. The so-called “Pepsi” experiments are an “almost” urban myth. Yes, they DID happen, so they claim, but where’s the published paperwork? Second of all, PepsiCo funded the tests. It’s a well-known statistical truth that studies tend to favor those who spend the most on them.

Second of all, the first recorded trademark was for Bass Beer – in England – and it was the red triangle. Quaker Oats??? WTF? Nowhere NEAR the first trademark. A little research would have yielded this fact quite simply. Makes me question the veracity of this entire article.

By: Captain Temerity

Captain Temerity — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:27:25 +0000

I liked this article. But now I’m not sure if I really liked it, or just feel like I need to like it because of the time I invested in reading it.

I’m gonna’ go with “liked it…”

By: Harlock999

Harlock999 — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:45:29 +0000

Actually, this phenomenon is known as the cognitive dissonance theory. Or selective exposure.

It’s studied in the mass communications departments of universities all over the world.

Not exactly what I’d call “facile clever-cleverness”…

By: Joe S. Walker

Joe S. Walker — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:51:20 +0000

Facile clever-cleverness written by/for the kind of person who likes to feel superior and be offensive while being careful not to say anything that might actually get you into trouble.

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:04:17 +0000

Great article and rings very true.

By: Kolymar

Kolymar — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 05:21:51 +0000

*Doing my best Will Ferrell impersonation*

EVERYTHING I OWN IS THE BEST. ANYTHING I CHOOSE IS THE BEST. MY TASTE IS IMPECCABLE. I’M THE KING OF THE WORLD.

By: KET

KET — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 01:15:39 +0000

dan, that’s probably because your client probably weren’t discount or dollar store retailers. Low income consumers are often ‘held hostage’ to whatever price these stores decide to sell essential items (such as laundry and paper products) on any given week.

By: dan

dan — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 00:02:53 +0000

I work in advertising. I’ve never referred to members of my client’s audience as “hostages.” Ick poo.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 23:07:52 +0000

Wayne,

That depends on how much you value yourself or your sense of self.

By: Wayne

Wayne — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 22:04:55 +0000

Interesting. I think that it only really works if all works/items/things of value are all of the same quality. Obviously the perception of quality varies from person to person, but I think most people are ultimately more rational than irrational – what about the person who DOES drop his service or subscription or favorite title when it drops below a certain threshold of quality despite how much time or money is invested in it? In other words, how does this work for people who have no attachment to the past?

By: Jack

Jack — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:58:25 +0000

Is this reverse psychology? LOL In the midst of an effort to get people to comment more on your boards, you publish a psychological marketing thesis on why the arguing and debate of personal preferences on a public forum is wasteful and merely self serving?

By: JoshF

JoshF — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:51:37 +0000

I have to agree with Bryan, great article. It’s funny to think of how much the net has changed the dialog on so many subjects (and more often than not for the worse).

By: Bryan H

Bryan H — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:43:53 +0000

Wow, very cool. Best article I’ve read in awhile, thank you.