[IAEP] 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total

[Dave Crossland]

On 14 June 2016 at 12:09, Sean DALY <sdaly.be at gmail.com> wrote:

> >On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> A brand that is not being diluted is stale, rigid, dying.
> >>
> >> I completely disagree, but it doesn't matter.

>

> Please speak up! :) Why do you think brand dilution is not a
> very positive thing?


> Dropping everyone but SL Marketing from a marketing discussion.
>

I think this is a really important discussion for the wider community, as
it relates to the future/vision topic :)


> A strong brand is a differentiator, which practices exclusion.
>

I kindly assert a brand does not need to practice exclusion to
differentiate from other brands in the same space - eg, _many_ companies
use Helvetica as their type identity, but are not confused. Most companies
use 'retail' typefaces that anyone can purchase a license to for a very
modest cost (typically well under $500.) Exclusion _may_ help a brand,
which is why some companies commission custom typefaces that no-one else
has access to. Eg, Google used Catull for over a decade, available to
anyone who could pay, and last year switched to their own custom brand
type, Product Sans.

The premiere NY design museum, the Cooper Hewitt, released its
(expensively) commissioned custom typeface as a libre font -
https://github.com/cooperhewitt/cooperhewitt-typeface - because its brand
designers have the same position I do.


> This might seem contradictory for a free libre open source software
> project, but then again, most such projects have feeble marketing.
>

I assert it is contradictory for _any_ brand who wants to engage with the
vibrant remix culture that epitomises the current decade. If your customers
love your brand, they want to participate in diluting it. I think an
insistence on deterring them is a hold-over from previous decades.


> For anyone to adopt a brand, they have to feel close to it and know what
> it stands for, what it is and what it definitely is not.
>

How can anyone adopt a brand without diluting it?


> Brand dilution means the vision of the brand losing focus, applying its
> values to products, services or ideas outside its core association.
>

I would rephase this as: Brand dilution means the vision of the brand
expanding to new horizons, apply its values to products, services and ideas
beyond its core that still express its values, and thus add value to the
brand.


> Brand owners often try to extend a brand, since the rewards can be
> substantial. However more often than not a diluted brand loses its power
> and is considered has-been, irrelevant or worthless.
>

I kindly assert this is only true for some brands, and not a universal
truth :)

The point is that Sugar's brand is not very strong, but the green $100
laptop brand is strong. So it would be good to continue using green laptops
if we have any reference hardware.

-- 
Cheers
Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20160616/f56dea9d/attachment-0001.html>