petej + consumers   39

Internal exile — authentic sharing
"Sharing companies do nothing to facilitate that sort of interaction; indeed they thrive by doing the opposite. (Authenticity marketing does the same thing; it precludes the possibility of authenticity by co-opting it.) They subsume more types of interaction and exchange to market structures. They are popular because they do what brand communities do: They allow people to extract value from strangers without the hassle of having to dealing with them directly. Sharing companies and brand communities mediate social relations and make them seem less risky. Actual community is full of friction and unresolvable competing agendas; sharing apps’ main function is to eradicate friction and render all parties’ agenda uniform: let’s make a deal.

When sharing companies celebrate the idea of community, they mean brand community. And if they appropriate rhetoric about breaking down the attachment to owning goods as a means of signifying identity and inclusion, it’s certainly not because they care about abolishing personal property, or pride in it. It’s because they are trying to sell their brand as an alternative to the bother of actually having to come up with a real alternative to product-based personal identity."
sharing  economy  consumers  ownership  renting  identity  community  authenticity  marketing  dctagged  dc:creator=HorningRob  sharingEconomy 
january 2015 by petej
The Sharing Economy Isn’t About Sharing at All - HBR
"When “sharing” is market-mediated — when a company is an intermediary between consumers who don’t know each other — it is no longer sharing at all. Rather, consumers are paying to access someone else’s goods or services for a particular period of time. It is an economic exchange, and consumers are after utilitarian, rather than social, value."
Airbnb  Zipcar  sharing  economy  business  consumers  prices  community  access  capitalism  sharingEconomy 
january 2015 by petej
The Ad Contrarian: Who The Hell Is "The Consumer?"
The writer of the piece thought he had uncovered a startling anomaly. He found that people with crappy cars held on to their cars longer than people with quality cars. Why would people hold on to lousy cars, he wanted to know?

He was digging around for explanations for this crazy fact. I'm pretty sure this would have stumped most agency people.

So here's the answer Mr. Strategist -- they hold on to their crappy cars longer because they don't have any fucking money.
advertising  consumers  class 
february 2013 by petej

related tags

access  Acxiom  advertising  Airbnb  austerity  authenticity  banks  BIS  borrowing  branding  brands  Brexit  brokers  business  capitalism  CentreForCities  cities  class  commerce  commodification  community  confidence  consent  consumerism  consumers  control  credit  creditCards  cults  culture  customers  data  dataBrokers  dataMining  dc:creator=Cellan-JonesRory  dc:creator=ClarkePaul  dc:creator=HirstTony  dc:creator=HorningRob  dc:creator=MurphyRichard  dctagged  debt  digital  disclosure  economics  economy  education  EU  fees  finance  funding  GDP  Google  government  growth  higherEducation  identity  identityProvider  individualism  inflation  infographic  insurance  Internet  InternetOfThings  legal  libraries  loans  marketing  marketisation  markets  midata  money  opendata  openness  opt-in  optimism  ownership  pay  personalData  personalisation  pessimism  policy  prices  privacy  profiling  radicalisation  recession  renting  resistance  retail  sharing  sharingEconomy  shopping  smartHome  spending  stagnation  students  technology  TheRegister  transformation  transparency  trust  tuitionFees  UK  undergraduates  universities  wages  Zipcar 

Copy this bookmark: