• crashfrog
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    They don’t have any new products to sell you

    What? No, Coca-cola has new products every fucking year. Several times a year. Literally two months ago they launched “Coca-Cola Y3000 Zero Sugar”, a flavor supposedly created by “AI”. And just knowing that Coca-Cola launched it, you probably have an idea what it tastes like. That’s what branding does. But Twitter doesn’t do any of that, because again, they don’t launch new products. They have one product and they’ll always have one product.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      My point, which I though was obvious, was why does Coca-Cola advertise their main product that they never change except for one ill-advised try in the 1980s? What does it benefit them to have those ads?

      • crashfrog
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        My point, which I though was obvious, was why does Coca-Cola advertise their main product that they never change except for one ill-advised try in the 1980s?

        So that they can sell you all of the 20-odd other flavors, based on your favorable impressions of the Coca-Cola brand as a whole. Have you just not been fucking listening at all?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think the point you are missing in both cases is that the so-called customer is not who they are advertising to. In Coca-Cola’s case, they are advertising to investors. In Twitter’s case especially, they are advertising to potential advertising customers and data mining organizations.

          You are not Twitter’s customer. They don’t care whether or not you exist.

          • crashfrog
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the point you are missing in both cases is that the so-called customer is not who they are advertising to. In Coca-Cola’s case, they are advertising to investors.

            You just keep saying different things and then acting like that’s what you’ve been saying “the whole time”, but this is literally the first time you’ve introduced “investors” into it.

            But that’s also nonsense. Coca-Cola doesn’t need to buy ads during the Superbowl to talk to their investors; they already have a mailing address for literally every Coca-Cola shareholder. Every publicly-traded company does. When Coca-Cola wants to tell you, the shareholder, something, they just host a phone call and, like, tell you with their mouths. They do this once a quarter, in fact, if not more frequently.

            Aren’t you embarrassed about being wrong all the time?

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay, you obviously can’t talk to me without being hostile, so I don’t think I’m willing to continue this conversation. I’m not interested in Reddit behavior. Goodbye.

              • crashfrog
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                You think I was rude, but that’s just because I’m objecting to the Gish Gallop of idiocy you’re bringing to this. If you’d stuck to one point and tried to argue it in good faith, that would have been something.