Hacker News Reader

Comment by IntronExon | Hacker News Reader

So in short, you sell it by flattering the supposed palette of the mark outrageously, exclusively price it, and include a backstory. It’s the the chocolate bar for people who want to know the name of the chicken they’re about to eat. It’s the candy for people who think that vodka tastes better out of a $200 bottle.

In short, status signaling people with more money than sense.

View on HN

The article it self focuses quiet a lot on the mental framework required to create the value. The consumer has to endow the bar with value by creating a complicated mental image of the process of creating the product and then consuming it. It doesn't pretend to have value as purely a status symbol, it certainly wouldn't be able to do that without existing brand recognition.

My favorite example for this is Grey Goose Vodka vs Kirkland Vodka. They are the same place, made from the same water source, just one has a fancier label and sells for 3x as much because of it.

Also, can this bar ever be enjoyed by oneself, or is it really meant to be eaten publicly and shared and discussed? It seem to me that they are not even selling a product but a symbol and story that lets the consumer signal their good taste to others

I was a vodka skeptic, but my wife can consistently pick her favorite (Ketel One) out of a lineup in a blind tasting. Even I can tell the difference between, say, Ciroc and Smirnov. So there really are differences that matter, though I agree with you that at the high end it's more marketing than quality. (My wife and I both agree that, for example, Patron is really bad.)

Obchocolate: my favorite chocolate used to be Lindt Mocha. Now it's Dove Dark.

I agree with what you’re saying about vodka, and I think as with many products a real range of quality exists, but that all goes out the window when you reach “prestige pricing” points. So yeah, Ketel One is smooth and delicious, and good wine is rarely up for $5 a box. By the same token I’m skeptical that most $50 dollar wines are not on par with $500 wines.

In my experience, there are everyday wines ($15-30), very good wines that deserve some thought and a well paired meal ($50-150), and oenophile wines that are really, totally amazing, ($250+), but to enjoy the last category you need to know wines very well, and know exactly what you enjoy in a wine (or you'll be disappointed by buying the wrong one).

Plus, most bottles of wine that are $250+ have some age on them, so you're really paying a premium for provenance too. The same wine can sell for double the price if it's still in the crate, has original paperwork, and has a verifiable storage history in appropriate conditions.

This is key: more expensive != better. It just means that it happens to be something fairly rare that someone somewhere with more money than sense likes enough to be willing to pay a ridiculous amount for. That person doesn't have to be you.

This also applies to whiskey - and especially to "craft" operations that source their bourbon or (especially) rye from MGP and sell it at premium prices. Templeton even built their own little Potemkin still to try to convince tourists that they made their own whiskey. [0]

There's nothing wrong with independent bottlers and blending houses (that has a very long tradition in Scotland, for instance), and MGP does make a good product. Just don't try to BS the customers.

For rye, at least, a good tip-off that a rye whiskey is likely to be MGP is if it touts a mash bill of 95% rye. [1]

[0] https://chuckcowdery.blogspot.com/2014/08/ and many other articles there

[1] http://www.mgpingredients.com/product-list/Rye-Whiskey.html

The classic Veblen good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

Reply on news.ycombinator.com