Is Status For The Smart Or Stupid?

Steven Lang
by Steven Lang

Most people are pegged on the predictable and reassuring.

It’s not that they hate. It’s that they are comfortable in their world and prefer familiar borders over new horizons.

Our human mind may have gradually evolved to a higher state of being and capability when it comes to complex problem solving and reasoning. But it acts not too differently from other simpler life forms when it comes to the ‘daily routine’. It takes pleasure in re-mastering the known… and avoiding the unknown.

Fear, familiar pleasures and adrenal driven instincts are reflected in the vast conformity and commonness of what we buy.

Do our choices eventually come about because certain products are truly better than others? Not at all. We’re slaves to the marketing of ‘great’, and the mental satisfaction that comes with accessing ‘good enough’. Any product, service or person that simply does what is promised, and nothing more, will almost always win out over an unknown that has neither the name, nor the societal track record.


Am I wrong?

Well consider the strong footing of legendary models throughout the decades. Model T, Model A, Corvette, Impala, Eldorado, Cutlass Supreme, BMW 3-Series, Mercedes S-Class, Camry, Civic, Corolla.

All of these models dominated their respective market segments well after they no longer delivered a best in class experience. Good enough is not only a name when it comes to consumer behavior. It’s a religion as old as the Greek toga and the Indian medicine man.

So given the conservatism of ‘The Human Ape’, entry level luxury should be one of the hardest markets to crack for any newcomer.

Buying the status’ of betterment is what counts for the majority of auto enthusiasts. Regardless of whether the car they buy is truly better or not. I have experienced countless conversations over the years with car buyers that start with, “What else do you think I should consider?” and end with, “Yeah, but I think I’m gonna just stick with my first choice.”

Better product? Doesn’t matter.

Thrift store shoppers will often look for designer labels to look rich. Even if the poor clothes are in tatters. Poor people still want to buy older European luxury cars that make them look rich, but keep them in the poorhouse. Even the aspiring and over-educated Yuppies among us will usually buy the status symbol that keeps them in debt. Instead of embracing the affluence that comes with keeping the common car and the beater.

New cars are just a small symptom of the bigger truth. Status sells. But should it?

That’s the question for today, “Should the status of a car be considered when buying it?

Steven Lang
Steven Lang

More by Steven Lang

Comments
Join the conversation
10 of 170 comments
  • Gingineer Gingineer on Apr 27, 2012

    For a 23 year old, I consider myself fortunate to have developed my car tastes rather quickly. In doing so, I've found that amongst the new cars we're constantly surrounded by, there is a threshold where the car someone buys transcends simple utility and plows into the territory of emotion. Furthermore, after really thinking about it I've found that what I'm calling the "emotion boundary" is surprisingly low in most cases. Take for instance a financial accountant. He or she needs a commuter car that will reliably and efficiently transport them to work. And say, maybe they have a dog so back doors are a plus. I submit that their needs can be met for about 6 grand (a used corolla with plenty of life in it, for instance). Anything above that amount is due to the unrelenting social pressure of appearing 'successful', or due to desires of driving something exciting or fast. And for a financial accountant that has plenty of steady money coming in, it wouldn't be outrageous to see them buy an Audi A4 for a whopping 37 grand off the lot. Think about that amount. That's a 31 THOUSAND dollar premium not to be successful, but simply to appear successful. If it weren't for these emotional forces this normal financial accountant could go on exotic trips, start a business, or invest in assets that will INCREASE that amount. And every day, all around us, people don't. They buy an expensive car, and that's the end of it. I went from a BMW M3 to a Jetta TDI for commuting and a $1000 Subaru for rallycross/winter driving. I have more money to play with, and I get more kick out of that Subie than the M3 ever delivered. Just my thoughts.

    • See 6 previous
    • Gingineer Gingineer on Apr 27, 2012

      @bikegoesbaa What people spend their money on is and always should be up to them (unless they're spending beyond their means). And for many people, they might be doing exactly what you're describing. There is nothing wrong with wanting a nice quality automobile. Look at me: I said I still want a Cayman S simply because of the joy I know I'd get driving one all the time. The rumble behind the seat, the light agility, that is FUN for me. But let's all understand that it's because of emotion (status, joy, comfort, anything non-essential to the duties that the person's vehicle must perform) that we would spend the extra cash on instead of being blinded into thinking this is the car I need to buy. That's what this article is about, and it's a great point. I don't think people think about it enough. People buy certain cars to fulfill an emotional need all the time, and they don't even realize it. So I guess what I'm saying is that I wonder if those people who venture deeply past the "emotional boundary" really understand what they're getting themselves into. I bet they don't, and I even know a couple that are doing this while simultaneously complaining that they don't have enough money to do things with.

  • Luke42 Luke42 on Apr 27, 2012

    I disagree with the premise of the article. Steve Lang is talking about status THROUGH BRANDS. Personally, I work my ass off for status, but I'm generally skeptical of brands. And I'm even more skeptical of people who define themselves by wrapping themselves in brands. This may just be a quirk of my personality, resulting from an unusual upbringing but, even if that's the case, it's still important to define the terms of the discussion. Status through brands may or may not be foolish. Status as part of human social structure is quite different. For many people, especially during happy economic times, these things are one and the same. I live in a college town, and many of our high status individuals (experts with track records of accomplishment, those with tenure, Nobel Prize winners, etc), don't drive "high status" cars or associate themselves with "high status" brands. Accordingly, in my town, driving an expensive car doesn't really get you much respect -- because it's not part of the town's culture. There are people who drive Cayannes, Mercedes, and BMWs here, but it merely shows that they spend more on their car than the rest of us, which doesn't correlate with much of anything. So, status != luxury brands. At least where I've lived. It's not that they're completely disconnected, but a luxury car is worth about one point, a PHD is worth five, tenure is worth another five, and one additional point for every influential publication on your CV. Most people in this town would rather crank out the publications. As much as I feel like a foreigner in military towns, you can tell by driving through the town and looking at the houses and cars that some of the same rules of apply. It's clear both military towns and college towns share the property that doing well in town's institution matters more than your house or your car -- once your stuff is good enough to be comfortable and is kind-of comparable to your neighbors. I grew up in an insular rural community. Nobody could afford luxury cars, so they marked you as "he ain't from around here", and that's a strike against your status. You had to both have a pedigree going back to the dirt, and work hard to help the community to be the highest status person there. I have been places where owning a BMW or a Mercedes is kind of a passport to being a full member of the community. But these people seem to all be my parents age and have ambitions that are different from mine. And then there are a few of their kids who think that these places are how the world is supposed to be. Against that backdrop, I'm very comfortable with looking like I don't belong in these places, because I don't aspire to live in these places. What makes you part of the in-crowd or a high-status individual has a lot to do with the culture of an individual place. Now that we have the Internet, brands don't rule culture anymore. You can't just wave a brand around and hope people jump on the bandwagon. Now, culture rules brands. So, if you want to do status-based marketing, you've got to learn the varied cultures of the people you're targeting, and work backwards from there.

    • Steven Lang Steven Lang on Apr 28, 2012

      You have just won the unofficial "TTAC Post Of The Week" Award. Take a bow. Say a few words, and put it on your CV. I genuinely enjoyed reading your post. All the best!

  • SCE to AUX We don't need no stinking badges.
  • SCE to AUX I've never been teased by a bumper like that one before.
  • 3SpeedAutomatic R&T could have killed the story before it was released.Now, by pulling it after the fact, they look like idiots!! What's new??
  • Master Baiter "That said, the Inflation Reduction Act apparently does run afoul of WTO rules..."Pfft. The Biden administration doesn't care about rules. The Supreme Court said they couldn't forgive student load debt; they did it anyway. Decorum and tradition says you don't prosecute former presidents; they are doing it anyway. They made the CDC suspend evictions though they had no constitutional authority to do so.
  • 1995 SC Good. To misquote Sheryl Crow "If it makes them unhappy, it can't be that bad"
Next