The ipod effect

It's been a while since I've blogged here. Fact is, I've been a bit conflicted about blogging in general, and writing in particular. I'm going through one of those phases that many a writer trying to find his voice goes through: the one that makes you wonder time and time and time again whether the immense effort is all worth it. On some days, it seems one of the most rubbish things to do in life. Writing in the hope that someday it will all bear fruit. Clutching at straws might be a more rewarding pastime. I suppose, the fact that I'm still hammering away at a keyboard for an audience of not more than one can only mean one thing: I'm still an optimist. Why else would I want to share with the world a stupid little theory that I have about the kind of gifts one should give out to winners of the various contests the men in marketing are constantly organising to sell more of their products.

In my view, the best giveaways are things that emit the 'ipod effect'. The 'ipod effect' is that aura of intangible value some products carry with them for reasons that go beyond mere functionality. So while a product that exhibits the 'ipod effect' might cost something, the people who are given this product think it's worth more. The ipod is a great example of one such 'ipod effect' product. Which is why it makes for one of the most popular gifts marketers like to use for their promotions. Over 50% of the promotions in the last one year have given away ipods as prizes to the winners. And for good reason.

Most of the time, with certain emotional exceptions, people feel a gift is worth less to them than if they were to go out and buy it themselves. Something in the 'gifting activity' reduces the 'monetary attachment' that people have towards it. Some products escape this 'negative gifting effect'. The iPod, for instance. Can you think of other products that enjoy the 'ipod effect'?

Wii told you, told you, so.

In the weeks following its launch in November, the Wii console blew away Sony's PS3, thanks in part to Sony's failure to deliver enough new consoles to the all-important U.S. market. Nintendo had sold 1.1 million units of the Wii in the U.S. by late January vs. 687,000 PS3s during roughly the same period. "Nintendo Wii won the launch phase," noted Standard & Poor's equity analyst Clyde Montevirgen at the time. (S&P, like BusinessWeek, is a unit of The McGraw Hill Cos. Well you know what, we knew this was going to happen. And happen.

Idol v/s Idols

Slate.com has run this article which posits that voting in American Idol is not objective because people can vote more than once for their favoured participants and that Sanjaya Malakar is the worst performer among the surviving lot. My contention is how can any voting be objective? The graph in the article shows how people have voted if they're allowed to vote only once but on what basis can you say that the people who voted did so only on grounds of singing skills? We all know how Pop Idols are created. It's not all about talent. It has much to do with market realities and what kind of product can make you the most money. Sanjaya is up there because Indians constitute a lucrative global set of voter and , more importantly, consumers. He might well go on to be the first international Indian Popstar. Despite his lack of talent. It's all about the money, dohs!