My thoughts on being paralyzed.
I agree with Schwartz when he says that too much choice paralyzes a consumer. However, I think he fails to distinguish this idea on a very important level. If I’m searching for a pair of jeans, but I very much care about my appearance and how I dress… I would be glad that I have so many choices. How would fashion designers feel if they go to their favorite clothing store, and only found one pair of cookie-cutter jeans? At the same time, if they’re unfamiliar or don’t care about technology or their computers, they would probably want limited choice to make the decision process easier. Choice facilitates individuality within our society and allows each person to choose to be different.
“Salad dressing – you made a good choice, but since there are others, you may feel regret even though the choice was good” – Again, I see his point, but I think it’s a moot point. So what if you feel regret about a choice you’ve made? You learn from your mistakes, and next time you choose a different salad dressing that will taste better.
I fundamentally disagree with his saying that “the key to happiness is low expectations”. I can see his point and how it would apply, but what if you apply that to something like technology? What if everybody was content with the first word processor? Technology wouldn’t have escalated like it has. You essentially limit your level of happiness. Let’s say that you are buying a pair of jeans in the 1960s… for the sake of ease, the jeans are all the same, just different sizes. When you buy that one pair, you may be satisfied with how it is because it is the only available one. So perhaps you are 100% satisfied with your purchase at the time. You like it, and you’re satisfied, but again… it’s the only option. Now fast forward 40 years later when you have all of the different styles of jeans that are different. You may have to search more for the pair that you like, but I believe you will come out with a higher level of satisfaction than what you experienced 40 years ago. You might be 1.5x more satisfied than you were when you bought those jeans 40 years ago, yet you’re still at 100% satisfaction. Your satisfaction ceiling has risen and now, you have an even deeper appreciation for jeans.
He keeps saying that people’s expectations go up with choice, and they are harder to satisfy. That’s how things improve, people improve, communities improve…. I guess I’m just trying to view this on a macroscopic level, thinking about the impacts that his principles would have on society. When I think about it on this level, his ideas don’t make any sense to me. Limiting choice simply prohibits progression since everybody is satisfied as a result of lowered expectations. I agree with his principles on an individual rational level… you’ll feel more easily satisfied when you have less choice because the choice is easier to make, and the marginal difference between Choice A and Choice B will be much higher than the difference between A and B when you have more and more choice. Yet, it’s hard for me to think of logical application since I can’t see a rational reason to follow this ideology.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Monday, September 10, 2007
Some of my thoughts on the music industry.
The challenges that the music industry is facing due to the mass spread of digital content has always interested me because I got on the bandwagon of downloading music really early… 1997, which was the first year or so when Napster came out. My family started using DSL around this time, and I was just amazed that I could get all of this music for free. I was only 11 at the time, so I became hooked. From an early age, I knew it was illegal, but somehow the repercussions of committing an illegal act such as this seemed, and still does seem, intangible to me. The following post will be my comments on some of the statements cited in the article about digital music.
“Historically, the majors have controlled physical distribution of CDs. Yet that barrier to entry will erode as more music is distributed on the internet and mobile phones. Artists can, in theory, use the internet to bypass record firms, though few have yet done this. The principal reason most have not is that they need marketing and promotion, which the majors also dominate, to reach a wide audience.”
I think that this is a very true statement, and hopefully the erosion of the barriers will increase the variety of music that people become exposed to. The fact that it is so difficult to get into the music industry inhibits the expansion of a lot of different artists and music that’s available for reasons other than musical talent. There are plenty of bands out there that have no musical talent, but are marketable and thus successful. Perhaps this is because I have formal music training, but I appreciate the music rather than the entertainment value, so it’s hard for me to defend a system in which music industry fat-cats have power over what is popular and what isn’t.
I agree with Norah Jones when she said that the development of piracy in the music industry is actually good for it… it will prevent artists from just putting out lots of commercial crap. The landscape has become one of survival of the fittest. Only those with good music, who can develop a loyal fan base, will financially survive.
I do agree with record labels in that the advent of digital music has brought down their profits. I’m sure most people in my generation have downloaded music, or actively download music, and people in our age group, teens – young adults, are a huge part of the market for record labels. Do I think it’s justified? Of course not, stealing is stealing and I’m well aware that I’ve been doing it. But we do many things that are illegal that we don’t care about since we don’t think we’ll get caught. How many people change lanes in the middle of an intersection? How many people cut through parking lots to avoid a red light? I know I do all of those things too. The fact of the matter is that the face of music distribution is once again changing. Record labels thought they were going to go out of business when the cassette player developed and people could record songs off the radio and from other tapes. Instead, they figured out how to harness the technology and turn it into a profitable business. The same thing is going on here, just on a more extreme scale. There is a new technology, and it has created new problems, but like its predecessors, the problem can probably be harnessed with the right customer insights and the right business model.
“Historically, the majors have controlled physical distribution of CDs. Yet that barrier to entry will erode as more music is distributed on the internet and mobile phones. Artists can, in theory, use the internet to bypass record firms, though few have yet done this. The principal reason most have not is that they need marketing and promotion, which the majors also dominate, to reach a wide audience.”
I think that this is a very true statement, and hopefully the erosion of the barriers will increase the variety of music that people become exposed to. The fact that it is so difficult to get into the music industry inhibits the expansion of a lot of different artists and music that’s available for reasons other than musical talent. There are plenty of bands out there that have no musical talent, but are marketable and thus successful. Perhaps this is because I have formal music training, but I appreciate the music rather than the entertainment value, so it’s hard for me to defend a system in which music industry fat-cats have power over what is popular and what isn’t.
I agree with Norah Jones when she said that the development of piracy in the music industry is actually good for it… it will prevent artists from just putting out lots of commercial crap. The landscape has become one of survival of the fittest. Only those with good music, who can develop a loyal fan base, will financially survive.
I do agree with record labels in that the advent of digital music has brought down their profits. I’m sure most people in my generation have downloaded music, or actively download music, and people in our age group, teens – young adults, are a huge part of the market for record labels. Do I think it’s justified? Of course not, stealing is stealing and I’m well aware that I’ve been doing it. But we do many things that are illegal that we don’t care about since we don’t think we’ll get caught. How many people change lanes in the middle of an intersection? How many people cut through parking lots to avoid a red light? I know I do all of those things too. The fact of the matter is that the face of music distribution is once again changing. Record labels thought they were going to go out of business when the cassette player developed and people could record songs off the radio and from other tapes. Instead, they figured out how to harness the technology and turn it into a profitable business. The same thing is going on here, just on a more extreme scale. There is a new technology, and it has created new problems, but like its predecessors, the problem can probably be harnessed with the right customer insights and the right business model.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)