[QatzelOk]

if BMW was simply a rebadged Kia

That's just it, GodSpeed, they're both just cars. There's no such thing as a "Kia" or a "BMW." Those are just badges that your and my brain have been branded into believing in.

And for the psychological relief that our brains let these brands give us (because of branding), you and I pay a huge price. There is a social competition involved in buying premium, and even the poorest among us is forever being forced to buy stuff in order to establish "status" or "belonging."

If there weren't so many brands to choose from, it would be harder to convince society that they can buy individuality or social acceptance.

[smashthestate]

QatzelOk,

There are certainly some "designer" or luxury items that are probably a waste of money beyond simply paying for the name brand display. However, there are many "luxury" items that have a functional purpose for their higher price. My drums are quite expensive compared to a lot of the "big" drum companies top-end kits. However, I didn't buy them just to have the name. They have a better sound, they are built better, and I like their styling better. Upon inspection from anyone, it's easy to tell that a lot more work and attention to detail went into their construction.

BMW cars definitely have some "snobbery" about them. I personally wouldn't buy one just because I think a luxury car should be dependable, and BMWs are far from that. However, while most consumers would probably buy the car for a combination of reasons (including the name and some of its tangible superiorities from other offerings), some actually purchase the car for the sole reasons that it is superior in many ways.

I highly doubt a pair of Dolce & Gabbana sun glasses are of any higher quality than your local Walgreens pair. Items like these truly have no reason to be up-priced except that people are willing to pay more to display the name. It's basically a bragging right.

QatzelOk...I thought you would have already figured this whole deal out a long time ago.

[Maxim Litvinov]

Then again, people are often more likely to pay for something if it's priced higher. Here's one interesting article about it.

So there's the point: it's quite common for buyers to use the price of an item as an indicator of the quality of that item.
Consider the case of the experimenters who set up a stall selling boxes of Belgian chocolates at the annual Brussels food fair. On the first day, they set the price at 9 ($14) a box. Sales went well.
The next day they raised the price to 15 a box. An economist would expect this to lead to greatly reduced sales but, in fact, they doubled.
On the third day they slashed the price to 2. An economist would expect a total sell-out at that giveaway price but, in fact, sales collapsed.
So what on earth was going on? It's simple when you think about it. Without buying a box and tasting the chocolates, you couldn't tell how good they were.
So, in the absence of any other information to guide them, customers used the price being charged as an indicator of the quality of the chocolates.
They took the higher price to mean high quality and so they bought up. They took the lower price to mean inferior quality and so they avoided buying.

[smashthestate]

Sometimes higher price is an indicator of higher quality. Or that higher quality is an indicator of higher price...sometimes...

There are millions of examples of items that are higher priced and higher quality, and there are millions of examples of items that are higher priced but aren't higher quality.

Of course it's dangerous to assume without research that an item is higher quality than its competitors' items because it is higher priced. Admittedly a lot of people do this.

[redhat]

That's just it, GodSpeed, they're both just cars.

Ever heard of auto enthusiasts? There's many more differences between a Kia and BMW M5 than leather seats, trust me.

There is a social competition involved in buying premium, and even the poorest among us is forever being forced to buy stuff in order to establish "status" or "belonging."

Did it ever occur to you that 'status' has nothing to do with it. Perhaps some people just have certain tastes, or prefer to spend their money on quality if they're going to spend it in the first place.

Now if you're going to draw comparisons with this argument, BMW vs Kia was a poor contest. Gucci vs Oakley sunglasses would have been a better comparison for your particular argument.

[A Bear]

Sometimes higher price is an indicator of higher quality.

Agreed. A $1000 computer is faster than a $300 one. As for cars, same there. Also, I find that brand name brown sugar is superior to store brand, why, that is a good question.

Had a random thought up there.....

[QatzelOk]

Ever heard of auto enthusiasts?

Ever heard of blender enthusiasts? Detergent enthusiasts?

I guess they just don't advertise enough.

[GodSpeed]

That's just it, GodSpeed, they're both just cars. There's no such thing as a "Kia" or a "BMW." Those are just badges that your and my brain have been branded into believing in.

There is such a thing as power. It is a real function of force and velocity. Now if you want to deny the existance of velocity and force, be my guest.

There are numerous other reasons, from styling to image projection to safety to space and comfort to buy one brand over the other.

[GodSpeed]

Ever heard of blender enthusiasts? Detergent enthusiasts?

I guess they just don't advertise enough.

I buy brand names because of thier reputations for reliability and quality. I'm sure you've bought something before and been dissapointed in its quality.

As for the higher prices bringing in more customers:
Often times, when uninformed about a product, consumers will use price as an indicator of quality.
If Kia badged their cars as $100,000, virtually no one with any shred of automotive knowlege would purchase it

[A Bear]

There is such a thing as power. It is a real function of force and velocity. Now if you want to deny the existance of velocity and force, be my guest.

There are numerous other reasons, from styling to image projection to safety to space and comfort to buy one brand over the other.

Agreed. I, personally, am willing to pay more money for a car if it has a 5-star crash test rather then going cheaper and getting a 3-star crash test rated car. Staying amongst the living is one reason to go for a certain brand of cars.

[QatzelOk]

Staying amongst the living is one reason to go for a certain brand of cars.

This is the kind of senseless statement that branding leads to.

[GodSpeed]

This is the kind of senseless statement that branding leads to.

No, this is a senseless statement. What kind of experience do you have with the automotive industry?

[QatzelOk]

What kind of experience do you have with the automotive industry?

Well, I've almost been killed by them on a few occasions, and my species (human) is on the verge of extinction because of them.

[NYYS]

This is the kind of senseless statement that branding leads to.

Really? I wasn't aware all cars had the exact same safety features.
[quote]

[GodSpeed]

Well, I've almost been killed by them on a few occasions, and my species (human) is on the verge of extinction because of them.

Translated to remove nonsensical banter: None, I have absolutely no expertise to offer in this conversation.

I was involved in a head-on 75mph crash into a concrete wall in a racecar. I didn't so much as have a sore neck or a headache. It doesn't make me an expert in the field, but I'm pretty sure you'd be dead in a KIA. Yours for a mere $500,000. I suppose it's the brand you've never heard of that makes no difference jacking up the cost though, not the rear subframe that costs 2x a Kia.

Thanks,
GodSpeed
Former Automotive Body Structures Engineer
Former Automotive Powertrain Development Engineer

[QatzelOk]

Here is your original nonsensical statement, GodSpeed:

Staying amongst the living is one reason to go for a certain brand of cars.

Thing is, cars are killing us all softly anyway, through various forms of pollution, car accidents, making us fat and unhealthy, antisocial and money-crazed, and making our environments extremely unpleasant and dangerous for normal life.

Saying that this brand or that brand of car helps you "stay amongst the living" is like saying this brand of heroin will keep you healthy. It invests too much magical powers into the brand.

People die in every brand of car every day, and get killed by Kias and 500 kph race cars. With a plethora of airbags (and I never use the word "plethora").

[redhat]

Thing is, cars are killing us all softly anyway, through various forms of pollution, car accidents, making us fat and unhealthy, antisocial and money-crazed, and making our environments extremely unpleasant and dangerous for normal life.

If it wasn't cars, it'd be something else. There is no stopping the inevitable. You've never heard the roar of an American made 350 horsepower, supercharged, v-8 have you?

People die in every brand of car every day, and get killed by Kias and 500 kph race cars. With a plethora of airbags (and I never use the word "plethora").

People are going to die every day with or without cars.

[QatzelOk]

People are going to die every day with or without cars.

But not the healthy people who get their bones crushed by cars. They wouldn't die "today" if it weren't for our toxic toys.

[GodSpeed]

Thing is, cars are killing us all softly anyway, through various forms of pollution, car accidents, making us fat and unhealthy, antisocial and money-crazed, and making our environments extremely unpleasant and dangerous for normal life.

Back pedal, back pedal, back pedal...

What kind of nonsense is this?
How does a car make you less social? By enabling you to interact with a 200 mile radius of people at work daily?

How does it make us fat? I dont remember the last time my car shoved a cheeseburger down my throat or broke my legs. Ohh the fall of personal responsibility. "It's my car's fault I'm overweight!"

How does an automobile make life more dangerous? Traveling 50 miles a day to work on a horse sounds dangerous. Waiting for the horse and buggy ambulance to arrive sounds dangerous. A three week drive on a trail with my family in wagon sounds dangerous.

Creating resistance to medical progress and access to these medical advances through the lack of infrastructure sounds harmful.

The safe, feasible and productive trasnportation of goods sounds unpleasant. I bet they'd have no problems transporting all this cool stuff around on a horse or ox.

Ohh yes, the automobile has ruined the world!

What nonsensical banter.

[QatzelOk]

Creating resistance to medical progress and access to these medical advances through the lack of infrastructure sounds harmful.

You make an interesting point here, GodSpeed.

If I didn't take that limousine 100 km (at full speed) to buy those aspirin, I could have died of that headache. That six-wheel Nazi-era limo actually may have saved my life.