Saw that "no name" brand bullshit things being astroturfed on reddit. It's so stupid. They're selling a product supposedly without identity yet the brand attempts to distinguish itself through this lack of identity. The characteristic colours. The descriptive label. The brand name is typed "no name" with a ®. Their products are distinctively theirs. So the brand has a concrete identity despite claiming the opposite. It isn't the rejection of products that sell more things than just products (the rejection of products involving identity). It is instead selling the identity of being a person that rejects products that sell more things than just products. Why would you buy this? Because they lack a name, and just sell products. But even this product contains a bullshit identity. And the identity the products attempt to construct is attacked by the product itself.
People easily become aware and repulsed by brands selling identities. It's obvious that the countercultural rejection of consumerism in the end gets commodified, but I didn't imagine it would ever be so nauseatingly obvious. The only no name I respect is Noname.
What is even the product? Because yeah the brand sounds like shit but if the thing/stuff works, it works.
And honestly it sounds like some uncreative marketing folks got together and decided at the very least that they didn't want to come up with another brand that's some shit like Namely or Brandr or any of that other typical crap you see these days, especially from Silicon Valley. And they had nothing else. So they went with "No Name." That's my theory.
Never seen that shit in stores (IIRC it's a canadian thing? idk) but if it's actually consistently the cheapest version of all the identical versions, then I unironically appreciate it looking distinctive.
Saw that "no name" brand bullshit things being astroturfed on reddit. It's so stupid. They're selling a product supposedly without identity yet the brand attempts to distinguish itself through this lack of identity. The characteristic colours. The descriptive label. The brand name is typed "no name" with a ®. Their products are distinctively theirs. So the brand has a concrete identity despite claiming the opposite. It isn't the rejection of products that sell more things than just products (the rejection of products involving identity). It is instead selling the identity of being a person that rejects products that sell more things than just products. Why would you buy this? Because they lack a name, and just sell products. But even this product contains a bullshit identity. And the identity the products attempt to construct is attacked by the product itself.
People easily become aware and repulsed by brands selling identities. It's obvious that the countercultural rejection of consumerism in the end gets commodified, but I didn't imagine it would ever be so nauseatingly obvious. The only no name I respect is Noname.
What is even the product? Because yeah the brand sounds like shit but if the thing/stuff works, it works.
And honestly it sounds like some uncreative marketing folks got together and decided at the very least that they didn't want to come up with another brand that's some shit like Namely or Brandr or any of that other typical crap you see these days, especially from Silicon Valley. And they had nothing else. So they went with "No Name." That's my theory.
Never seen that shit in stores (IIRC it's a canadian thing? idk) but if it's actually consistently the cheapest version of all the identical versions, then I unironically appreciate it looking distinctive.
I mean they're spending money astroturfing on reddit and establishing in nerd places. I'm sure there are cheaper brands.
deleted by creator