This is not strictly true. Inbound sales is one tactic, there is also inbound marketing (aka SEO). The tactic or set of tactics available to a new B2C business largely depends on what trade offs they are willing to make between time and money. A cash-strapped B2C could invest time in SEO, while a decently-funded competitor could invest money in paid search ads. A well-funded rival could do both while also investing in social media ads. The tactics that will prove effective will largely depend on how clear the messaging is relative to more established competitors.
> Outbound sales is (usually) impossible in B2C for cost reasons. Almost every successful B2C company is evidence that advertisement works.
Again, not totally correct because you are using terms in a non-standard way. For instance, you refer to ‘advertisement’ when you really mean ‘marketing’.
Sales and marketing as human activities, have existed from the beginning.
Advertisements, the thing so derided on HN, only became feasible (and widespread) with the help technology. In other words, all ad forms depend on a enabling technology for their existence.
The spread of printing presses eventually made one of the first ad formats—handbills—economically feasible when compared to the traditional practice of shouting to draw attention from patrons to the market square. The telephone made telesales/robocalls economically feasible at a scale that far surpasses doing cold calls on foot (i.e. door-to-door sales). Same with radio, television and ad formats enabled by the modern Web.
Ban advertising, and suddenly this statement is not true anymore: "If you start a new B2C business the only way to do inbound sales is advertisement, as by definition no one knows about your company/brand/products/services."
... for the simple reason that people will look for other means to find products online. For example non-biased search engines, product catalogues, review sites, etc. etc.
And no, listing your product with objective info is not the same as advertising.
This absolutely makes logical sense and I deeply wish this could work. The problem is that in reality, almost all of these sites are as (if not more) “manipulatable” as the ads you’d like to replace. Search engines have their own optimization games, most review sites these days are pay-to-play (or would rapidly become even more so), etc.
So the fundamental issue is that any non-advertising method of getting the word out rapidly becomes just obfuscated advertising. Given the choice I’d prefer at least the ads be honest about being ads.
But let's assume advertising doesn't work. Two companies start with the same product and same market at the same time. One advertises, the other doesn't. According to you, the former one should lose, because it wastes money on ads. I'm betting that (on average), the latter will lose, though.
I know, it's a very black-and-white hypothetical situation.