Comments on: note to marketers: people like treats, dammit!

By: Tim Clague

Tim Clague — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:07:19 +0000

One additional thought on this idea which is essentially about limiting supply to drive up demand. Scarcity = treat. What about ‘ideas’ in themselves. Should you Hugh limit your ideas to make them more of a treat?

By: Jeff Schmidt

Jeff Schmidt — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:38:30 +0000

thanks hugh — makes total sense!

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 02:17:34 +0000

Jeff, if it doesn’t feel like a treat to you, then sadly, it’s not a treat. As a musician, you should know what I’m talking about. We’re talking about the emotional realm here, not the rational.
Remember, when you get in the car to drive your nephew across town to his favorite ice-cream place or toy store, the drive across town is also part of the ritual. “Treating oneself” is a form of ritual.
Whipping out your credit card to get behind a firewall to access content that’s not any better than a lot of free content out there, would be a hard process for people to internally ritualize, I would wager.
One could also argue that if suddenly, me or Kathy Sierra put our stuff behind a paid-subscription firewall, reading our stuff would no longer feel like a treat for most people, but a paid-for content service i.e. a commodity.

By: Jeff Schmidt

Jeff Schmidt — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:43:02 +0000

Hugh -
does this run counter to the prevailing web 2.0 meme about making content being ubiquitous? Where it’s available everywhere, on demand whenever the newly liberated “consumer/audience …” wants it?
Is WSJ creating a treat by keeping the pay wall?
Is Sony creating treats by selling music on little cards you have to take home and enter a code into a website to get the music?
Why isn’t DRM the same thing as having to trek across town for a Krispy Kreme?

By: John

John — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:48:22 +0000

Scarcity certainly drives up prices, as we all learned in Econ 101. But quality can become a concern when a company tries to expand to meet burgeoning demand. I have seen several cases where a local restaurant does well in a single location but fails after they try to expand to multiple locations. Quality suffers because the expansion is beyond the capabilities of management and ends up bringing the whole works down.
I think you’re also seeing the “fad” nature of some social objects. Would Cabbage Patch dolls have remained popular if supply had been kept constrained, or would the manufacturer simply have failed to take advantage of the market while it was hot?
As to Krispy Kreme, low carb dieting drove a major stake through the heart of those doughnuts.
I have more I would like to say on this, but I have to run off to Star Bucks before the line gets too long. The wait can be murder this time of day.

By: Robin Yap

Robin Yap — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 20:24:27 +0000

I wonder if this applies to availability online as well — as in people can read your thoughts on microblogs (twitter), blog posts, facebook (and other) network activities, etc. Does this make one become overexposed thus lowering the “I gotta [read, buy, get] more of..” factor?

By: Joe Raasch

Joe Raasch — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 19:35:09 +0000

Great post Hugh.
Now move from KK to Starbucks. They were originally a treat. In the name of efficiency, they don’t even grind the coffee locally anymore. Though I still see people waiting, waiting, for that $4.00USD privilege of a cup of coffee.
A commodity treat?

By: Robert Paterson

Robert Paterson — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 18:56:33 +0000

I recall when Coors beer was made in only one plant — It was Paul Newman’s brew. Now it is commonplace and a commodity.
Is growth the problem? Is Starbucks too common now? Is there a sweet spot that we should preserve and grow through margin or maybe not at all?
As organizations grow do they leak culture and just become the Matrix?
Just been talking to a friend about her challenges with growth in her organization so all of this is quite real for me right now
Your post has stirred me up Hugh
Rob

By: David St Lawrence

David St Lawrence — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 16:15:18 +0000

To build on your own excellent work, when they are no longer social objects, they are no longer interesting.

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:23:39 +0000

Michael R, and you’re argument is flawed because it makes the assumption that that the studio had no choice but to release the three installments when they did, like it was written in stone or something.
Thanks for the kind words, Everybody

By: Mark Forman

Mark Forman — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:51:10 +0000

here’s another Dammit-agree with all the above. dammit this was a most brilliant post of some damn good ones. Keep ‘em coming(from time to time of course) don’t wanna turn em into Krispy Kremes…

By: Keith Handy

Keith Handy — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:28:41 +0000

Damn, I miss Kathy’s blog!!!

By: Dave Armstrong

Dave Armstrong — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:25:04 +0000

We used to have a Deli in our lunch zone in downtown. It was an easy walk and the food was heavenly. Development came in and demolished the building they had been in for decades. $1,000,000 condos went up for 25 floors. So many folks commented on how they missed the place and so on. One day I overheard they had a new location. It was a tough walk, and they were on an upper level of an older building instead of ground level, and that required a long wait for an elevator ride. No sign outside and no sidewalk seats like before. And a smaller space.
It was packed to the walls when I went there for the first time. At the cash register I asked the owner why he picked such an out of the way, obscure, and old location.
“We are a destination. Not an impulse.” he said.
I have never forgotten that expression.
And what a treat that lunch was …

By: Michael R. Bernstein

Michael R. Bernstein — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:10:30 +0000

The LOTR example is flawed: Although all three were *shot* at the same time, post-production did in fact take a year between movies. One side-effect of this is that they had more CPU-cycles to throw at the digital effects in each subsequent movie, and it shows.

By: shelley noble

shelley noble — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:45:43 +0000

Brilliant!! AGAIN!! What are you smoking these days!? I don’t know if it’s you or me but I read your posts and am awed, this year especially.