• neptune@dmv.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    While I think it’s a good word and due the attention: this is just the normal cycle of capitalism.

    A new brand hits the market. It’s innovative. It’s made in America. It’s exclusive to at least some degree (whether it’s supply, cost, or some sort of cultural or knowledge barrier to entry). Early adopters are “elites” due to their money, location, culture or knowledge.

    Soon enough, the brand reaches public knowledge and then general desire and/or accessibility. A couple things happen in a variety of orders. The brand either gets sold for a lot of money, or the people who have a shit had their fun building the business and move on to something else. Supply cannot keep up with demand, so they change production methods, materials, and/or locations. A ton of competition shows up forcing the brand to compete in new and difficult ways.

    And then soon enough, you have a Made in China facsimile that every kid in America gets for Christmas, that bares little to no resemblance to the original state of the brand.

    The new and novel facet for tech enshittification is how they pivoted from a “losing money during a low interest rate period” model to a “making money by focusing solely on advertising dollars now that we have a monopoly” strategy.

    You saw it with american made tools, Doc Marten boots, Chipotle turning into the new fast food, Gucci et al becoming brands for poor people…

    You see it with baby names even. Rich people start a baby naming trend, poor people pick it up, and then rich people stop. In this example it normally skips the middle class altogether as we aren’t willing to risk the cultural capital to name our child AeonFlux.

    • prole@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, this behavior has a name already, it’s called “rent seeking.” It’s kind of annoying that so many people think this is a new phenomenon.