Go Bigger, Go Non-sense

It's not often a company admits their customers are stupid, but here's one.

Greg likes big things

No matter how costly, useless, wasteful, or dangerous to his health. Greg seems to buy as much as he can.

Buying an ice-cream as a kid? Get one so tall you can't start licking it without spilling the entire thing.

Getting a hair-do in the 80s? Make you hair enormous by spraying 2 parts hairspray to 1 part hair.

Going to the movies? Buy a popcorn serving the size of a small table. The movie will finish before you've eaten 4% of it.

Going on another date? Impress your lady-friend by ordering a basketball-sized burger. Nothing says romance like leaving with 5 litres of food in your belly, bursting to get out (one way or the other).

Why does Greg never learn?

Apparently Greg "knows" that bigger is better. No amount of spilt ice-cream, boxes of leftover popcorn, or dates ruined by regurgitated burger can convince him otherwise. Perhaps that can of hairspray leached into his brain.

What's this ad for?

Cut to the present day and Greg (still with too much popcorn) is watching a monster-truck on (you guessed it) a monster-TV.

The ad is for TVs that measure 75, 85 and 100 inches.

What?

Why are TVs one of the few things in Australia still measured in inches? Perhaps 100 inch sounds less insane than a 2.54 metre telly.

Who buys a 2.54m telly? The 2.54m TV doesn't have to sell. It's main job is to make the 85 inch (2.16m) look slightly less insane by comparison.

Presented only with 75, 85 and 100, suddenly the 85 looks like the middle-of-the-road option, rather than ridiculously oversized.

In reality even the 'small' 75-inch is 1.91 metres. That's bigger than most people. Who needs a TV bigger than themself?

Perhaps the slogan should be "Go Bigger. Go Non-sense"

Comments

5 Reasons why we hoard - and they're wrong

"Less is More" is one of the catch-cries of downsizing. Often the fewer things we have the more we value them. So it's a great title for a book that's basically a manual for how to de-clutter your home. The introductory chapter of Less is More: How to De-clutter Your Life gives some great insights into why we find it so hard to reduce our stuff. Here are 5 of them - the last one is one of the biggest for me. 1. The cost of holding on. We were raised by our parents and grandparents and in their day items were expensive and space was cheap. It made sense in those days to hold onto stuff just in case you ever needed it. But today housing is expensive and items are cheap. It's hard to change a habit, but now we save much more by downsizing. 2. Keeping it in the family. For some reason we prefer to give things to those close to us. Again this was viable in the days of big families and lots of children to receive hand-me-downs. But these days we have smaller fa...

20 unplugged ideas

May 1-7 is Screen-Free Week . It's about spending time away from the screen and more time with each other - or doing things we love. It's a great chance to break the work-tired-watchTV-ads-shop-work cycle. This list of twenty alternative ideas is great for screen-free week. It's also a great reminder of things we could enjoy if we're shopping and spending less - and maybe working less and enjoying life more.

Will robots take your job?

The future could be very different. It's one reason I started this blog. What will technology mean for jobs? For incomes? For society? So I was excited to find Will Robots Take Your Job? at my local library. What does the book say? There's always been technological change and we've always found jobs. As the more laborious jobs were taken by machines, we took on higher skilled jobs, moving further up the "skill ladder". The main question is whether this time is different. Will the "skill ladder" continue to have higher rungs for humans to move on to? Will these rungs appear as quickly as the current rungs disappear? Either way we're headed for significant disruption. Either large-scale re-training of our workforce or massive unemployment. The author despairs that our leaders seem not to talk about this - and worse still, not have a plan for it. Farmers or horses? In 1870 about 75% of Americans worked in agriculture and used 25 million hors...

But wait... there's less!

Search This Blog