Marketing is everything

In, "The Guardian"

Expensive tastes


Our appetite for luxury goods is driven by two myths: that we will get more and feel better


In the past week, two manufacturers have posted record sales of products that have come to define a generation. Apple announced the sale of its 100 millionth iPod, while Sony claimed the fastest-selling launch in videogame history with the PS3. In both cases, the products are the most expensive in their respective markets.

As is normal on the release of an expensive must-have item, consumer groups bemoaned the inflated cost of the new PlayStation. In justifying PS3's £425 price tag, Sony's chief executive, Howard Stringer, explained that the product was positioned as "the Mercedes of games consoles". Which would seem to have made everything all right.

Article continues
We often attribute the rising cost of living to the scourge of Rip-off Britain - being routinely overcharged for products that are cheaper abroad. But that doesn't stop us buying them. The list of luxuries we afford ourselves are all the more attractive for the inflated cost: the £3 coffee on the way to work, the exotic treats labelled as the supermarket's finest, the season's designer it-bag. Cheap versions are available, but they don't offer the same cachet. If one has the cash (or credit), why not have the Mercedes of everything? The little luxuries make life worth living, after all.

Embedded in our notion of luxury are two age-old myths, which are wholly irrational. The first is that to spend more is to get more. Second, that to spend more is to feel better. How many times have we walked into a store to buy a new gadget with a definite budget in mind, only to leave with something more expensive? We look at the goods within our price range, but the eyes drift towards the pricier versions. The mental deal-making begins. Major purchases are like investments and so it seems sensible to spend more. The expensive version must work better, last longer, and be of greater worth. Ultimately, the luxury version will be something that we cherish, having come to us at a greater cost. And so the original budget flies out of the window, along with our cash.

To purchase an iPod is not simply to own an MP3 player; it is the purchase of confidence, acceptance and sophistication. We communicate our self-worth by having the best that we can afford. As material standards of living climb higher, these emblems of status define what it is to be normal. To own anything less than an iPod is to admit defeat in the struggle for self-betterment, self-betterment being the ability to acquire the greatest volume of the highest quality things possible.

But the principles of luxury consumerism are the stuff of fiction. Almost all products halve in value the minute they leave the store. Only briefly do they remain top of their range as faster, sleeker, more desirable models replace them. And the emotional sheen of the things wear off. Owners of iPods report twice as many faults with their players than owners of any other brand, according to a report by analysts Olswang. Apple admits the lifespan of the product is but three years. One can enjoy greater memory space on alternative models at a fraction of the cost. But, like so many leading consumer brands, iPod is the most popular because it is marketed, packaged and priced to be more expensive - and therefore must be better.

None of this should come as an epiphany: it is the variety of common sense that parents dole out to children when they are pestered to buy new toys as seen on TV. But this common sense tends to desert us when we are titillated to spend on ourselves. It is no coincidence that the best-selling products are commonly the most heavily marketed, but there is little prospect of a more protective advertising code for adults. Better to accept that throwing money at luxury does not guarantee the desired return. Perhaps then we won't be so easily ripped off.