People Don't Buy Things Because They're Good

People don't buy things because they're good. They buy them because there's a need.

Art is a perfect mirror of product design.

Fred Armisen said

"People [just] want to be entertained [just like] people... want to eat... Just bring us something pleasant."

This turns everything we believe about art on its head. We think the best get famous and are remembered forever. According to Armisen though, it's just about getting in front of people with something decent.

This tracks with the way art is marketed. Use a consistent visual brand. Make content over and over that is similar to what already exists. If something is working, show it over and over.

Art marketing is the complete opposite of art making. Kind of funny.

You can market alone, but if you have representation, money, or friends you can outsource attention. Get subcontractors, influencers, or fans to create and distribute media about you. Show up in visible placement, get more easily promoted on popular algorithms and shows.

More effective than that is to just own an app.

Elon Musk buys Twitter, renames it X and changes the feed so his Tweets are in every feed no matter what. It's rumored that because many major music labels are part owners of Spotify, their artists get priority placement on the algorithm and higher royalty payments per stream.

If you want to be a successful artist, you have to get in front of people. Outwork, outspend, or own the means of distribution.

----everything above this line is edited

The reality is that most people, especially when exhausted from a full work day, choose the default option. There are even scientific studies on how willpower depletes over the day and it becomes harder to resist temptations like fast food and doomscrolling. It's easier to remove your phone from your house so you don't order grubhub or use tiktok than it is to will yourself to do something different. In that same sense we often reason with what is in front of us. If there's a show on TV we don't like we often talk to others about why we don't like it instead of turning it off and deciding maybe we should pick up fishing or build a trebuchet. That kind of extreme divergent thinking is really rare.

Humans aren't really great at going "I don't like this option, let me think of all currently available options in the world and also reevaluate my entire thought process around this issue."

Humans are pretty good at going "I'm in this situation. I have two options, I will pick the one I like more." If every option sucks, most will pick the least worst one and either complain or just assume it's as good as it gets. Some will ask for more, demand more, even build new solutions, but try to count on your fingers the amount of people in your life who have very serious opinions on the future of garbage bags or residential waste disposal patterns.

A great paradigm shift for garbage is to just ensure that everything termed as consumer grade or disposable that will break in 5 years or less is made of something compostable or recyclable metals. You could then throw all of the garbage into a gigantic compost heap at the dump, and once it is all broken down, use a physical or chemical process to separate the metal. Then process that. Ad infinitum.

Knowing this doesn't help me choose a better garbage bag at the grocery store. And it doesn't magically make buying a compostable washing machine possible.

There's a pretty decent reason for why people think this way. It's a lot more energy efficient to exist in an imperfect system than it is to spend a few decades proselytizing about something in the hopes that you might see a small change. One that may bring you 0 monetary benefit in your lifetime.

So when we build products, we're often, as hopeful designers, thinking what is the best possible way to solve this? A better mop handle. A better way to log in to websites. On and on. When the reality is that most people want a cheap mop handle that won't break. And they won't think about things like ergonomics in the same way a designer will. Even if your youtube video on mop ergonomics gets 10million views on youtube. There are over 8 billion people. It's easy to assume a majority of them will just never consider that factor.

There's also no way to evaluate product longevity at the store. This is why we have things like lifetime warrantees. They are a way of stamping a product with a sign that says "This is so good, it will last you forever. And if it doesn't we will give a new one to you for free, forever." And guess what, this will create a loyal customer base, but it won't ensure that every customer in the store makes a beeline for the mop handle that they only have to buy once. Many customers will still buy the one that's $10 cheaper and breaks in a year because there's just no way to really tell without an industrial design degree.

People just want to be entertained. They want cereal that doesn't taste like cardboard. They want to do their best to follow their doctors instructions. They just need a mop.

I know this is a little sad. It feels like I'm saying don't try. Which I'm not. I'm saying the opposite. We will live in a much more interesting place if we do try. It's just worth it to look at what is and isn't effective when putting forth effort.

If you're looking for something to be adopted globally, you should focus on price competition and distribution. Own a social media company or get bought out by one. Partner with a global inventory management and shipping company. Etc.

If you're looking to make the best mop ever, make the best mop ever.

Personally I think making a better mop is more fun. But just realize they're not the same thing.