The more the product is a commodity, the more the brand matters. For example, celebrities branding alcohol and VCs branding money.
The first statement is true (brand advertising is everything for vodka) but I don't think VC is a good example of it. VCs do differ greatly in quality, and even the best ones have much weaker brand recognition than they realize.
-
-
The best advertisements don’t look like advertisements - s.a., a useful blog, great podcast, a helpful tweet, conference talks, guest lecturing etc
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
For VCs, not having negative brand equity is super important. Though money is a ccommodity, the service and level of interference surrounding the money is not.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If a VC can legitimately help get the company the next round (or sale) it's adding value...otherwise it's just $.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Everyone is a booster for their own cause.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Branding isn’t a label tag you place on a product. Branding is the gap between reality and perception. You brand what you sell and it’s not always a product Sequoia isn’t selling money Sequoia is selling you the perception that you are likely to be the next Apple If it funds you
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Agreed, in the VC case the branding isn’t by mere association - it comes via bundling with network, banking, advice, recruiting...
-
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.