8-22-02, Lisa Laird
Lisa's Lair
By Lisa Laird
IPS Features
NEW AND
IMPROVED?
Nothing I can think of sells products better than
reinventing them as “new and improved.”
Those three words are sights for sore eyes and beautiful music to our
ears; they smell sweeter than the fragrance of a dozen romantic red roses.
“New and improved” are fancy words for “old but altered.”
The latter holds more truth, however, the former holds more interest.
I often wonder what exactly prompts manufacturers to
reinvent well-established, frequently sold items. They practically sell themselves and do not need any cheering
on to do so. Well-known brands of
well-known products will continue to be purchased year after year, same as
always. No one’s complaining, so
why make the changes? Three less
obvious valid reasons come to mind.
First of all, jobs are created. Whenever changes must be made in industries, masterminds are
required to direct such revisions and workforces are assembled to make the plans
happen. Secondly, we are kept from
straying to the competitors when the manufacturers tightly hang on to their
individual portions of the illusory limelight. And lastly, companies continually strive to achieve a
perceived product perfection that would ultimately mesmerize customer audiences
everywhere.
It cannot be argued that an increase in sales is the
first priority. This is largely
achieved by attracting competitors’ steady buyers to test the “can’t be
missed” upgraded products and dazzle them into switching to the “other
side,” where the grass is always greener.
And laundry is undoubtedly whiter. And
teeth are undeniably brighter. And
weight gets noticeably lighter…without exercising or modifying unhealthy
eating habits, of course. Etcetera…etcetera…
I can’t help but feel an aura of wariness when I
discover that products I’ve been using have, all of a sudden, become “new
and improved.” It makes me wonder
if they were actually ineffective and I was moronically duped all those months
or years of selecting my favored merchandise.
It dawns upon me that they weren’t as good as advertised, as good as
they could have been. And even more
so, they most likely are not being improved to the best of their abilities.
Basically, they start as low-level as the makers can get away with, and
improve in small increments every so often.
I’m aware that technology is habitually evolving, but what does that
have to do with paper towels being more absorbent, or chips having better ridges
to mop up salsa and various dips? This
must matter to enough shoppers, as these breakthrough improvements seem to be
crucial and well worth the time, effort and expenses of advertising.
We are offered a glimmer of hope that these products are
the material promises come true that we have been waiting for.
We experience a twisted thrill at the uncertainty of whether or not the
products in question will live up to their newly paraded reputations and
expectations. We hope they do, but
accept their flaws when they don’t.
Products are like people; they are what they are, and we
become used to them as so. They
work in predictable ways and are capable of various levels of effectiveness.
We want to believe that, like people, products change for the better when
they profess to and hope they are successfully transformed as “new and
improved.” We also understand, as human beings, how difficult it is to
transform ourselves in a positive manner. When
those around us prove not to attain “new and improved” status, they are
usually forgiven; we take for granted that they’ll be as non-judgmental and
sympathetic in turn. Very few of us
meet the highest standards we set as ideals for ourselves.
And none of us have reached perfection, are currently reaching
perfection, or will reach perfection.
Why should our products?
-30-