←back to thread

68 points Lyngbakr | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
gtrealejandro ◴[] No.45909374[source]
The article mentions MKBHD calling it a "litmus test," but it's more than that: it's a "brand anchor."

This product's primary purpose is to generate this exact wave of online ridicule and media coverage (like this BBC article).

It makes Apple's other "expensive" accessories (e.g., a $129 FineWoven case) seem perfectly reasonable by comparison.

It generates millions in free PR, all centered on the theme of "Apple as an exclusive, luxury brand."

They aren't selling a sock for $230. They are selling the conversation around it. As others have predicted, it will sell out.

replies(6): >>45909421 #>>45909430 #>>45909453 #>>45909747 #>>45909769 #>>45909794 #
jordanb ◴[] No.45909430[source]
MKBHD's point is that this would have worked the way you describe it a decade ago, but is Apple's brand and fans the same as they were back then? At some point doing something like this just makes you look greedy and out of touch.

If Microsoft had tried to sell a "limited edition" zoom sock for $220 it would have produced a lot of mockery and no sales.

replies(2): >>45909589 #>>45909644 #
1. gtrealejandro ◴[] No.45909644[source]
If Microsoft had tried to sell a "limited edition" zoom sock for $220...

That's the entire point, though. Microsoft can't do this.

This move only works precisely because Apple is not just a tech company anymore, but (as dmix also points out) a luxury/fashion brand.

The fact that Microsoft would fail is the proof. This isn't a "tech accessory" play; it's a "luxury brand" play, where the "ridicule" from outsiders (i.e., tech-focused people) is part of the marketing that signals exclusivity to the target audience (fashion-focused people).