behavioral economics
In Buttons We Trust
Do CTAs, contact forms, and manipulative nudges still work?
Hey button-bashers—
We’ve all been told that CTAs are the lifeblood of digital marketing.
Add a big red button.
Put “Buy now” everywhere.
Make the form impossible to ignore. But are people still falling for it? Or have we clicked so many “Download the free guide” buttons that our eyes skim over them like potholes on an old road?
The uncomfortable answer: yes, CTAs and manipulative design still generate results. Not because users are gullible, but because human psychology hasn’t evolved as fast as the web.
Why CTAs still work (and the numbers behind it)
- Conversion rates: HubSpot’s 2023 benchmark report shows that landing pages with a clear, visible CTA convert 202% more often than those without. Even minimal friction—like hiding the button—kills momentum.
- Email campaigns: Campaign Monitor (2022) found that adding a single, well-placed CTA button in an email increased click-through rates by 371% compared to text-only links.
- Color and clarity: Nielsen Norman Group’s UX studies show that users are still highly responsive to visual cues like contrast and size. “Buy Now” continues to outperform “Learn More” because clarity trumps creativity.
Manipulative tactics—scarcity timers, “only 2 seats left,” or fake urgency—aren’t dead either.
A Baymard Institute meta-analysis (2022) confirmed that scarcity cues improve e-commerce conversions by 5–15%on average.
That’s not a marginal gain—that’s millions in revenue at scale.Who profits the most
Direct-response marketers treat every click as money in the bank. For them, CTAs are oxygen—the lifeline that keeps campaigns alive and measurable. SaaS and subscription businesses lean on them too: auto-renewals, free trials, and frictionless signups mean that even a small increase in conversion cascades into recurring revenue. Think Netflix, Spotify, or Adobe locking users into monthly payments. And of course, the platforms themselves take a cut. Google and Meta reward ads with higher click-through rates, so CTAs aren’t just a tactic—they’re fuel for algorithms.
Meanwhile, the consumer profits the least. At best, they buy something they wanted anyway. At worst, they wake up paying for another subscription they forgot to cancel. At best, they buy something they wanted anyway. At worst, they wake up paying for another subscription they forgot to cancel.Who profits the most
Direct-response marketers treat every click as money in the bank. For them, CTAs are oxygen—the lifeline that keeps campaigns alive and measurable. SaaS and subscription businesses lean on them too: auto-renewals, free trials, and frictionless signups mean that even a small increase in conversion cascades into recurring revenue. Think Netflix, Spotify, or Adobe locking users into monthly payments. And of course, the platforms themselves take a cut. Google and Meta reward ads with higher click-through rates, so CTAs aren’t just a tactic—they’re fuel for algorithms.
Meanwhile, the consumer profits the least. At best, they buy something they wanted anyway. At worst, they wake up paying for another subscription they forgot to cancel. At best, they buy something they wanted anyway. At worst, they wake up paying for another subscription they forgot to cancel.
Who profits the most
Direct-response marketers treat every click as money in the bank.
For them, CTAs are oxygen—the lifeline that keeps campaigns alive and measurable.
SaaS and subscription businesses lean on them too: auto-renewals, free trials, and frictionless signups mean that even a small increase in conversion cascades into recurring revenue.
Think Netflix, Spotify, or Adobe locking users into monthly payments. And of course, the platforms themselves take a cut. Google and Meta reward ads with higher click-through rates, so CTAs aren’t just a tactic—they’re fuel for algorithms.
Meanwhile, the consumer profits the least.
At best, they buy something they wanted anyway. At worst, they wake up paying for another subscription they forgot to cancel.
Why they still work in 2024
It isn’t rocket science: CTAs keep working because they tap into habits we can’t shake.
People scroll fast, think less, and default to the easiest action. The smoother the path, the more likely we are to take it. Platforms have trained us to live by buttons—like, follow, subscribe—and the rhythm of clicking feels natural.
In other words, people are on cognitive autopilot:in the infinite scroll luna park, we skim and click without much thought, and the easiest option usually wins. That’s where friction economics kicks in—strip away steps and doubts, and conversion rates climb.
Amazon’s one-click purchase isn’t just convenience; it’s a weaponized CTA.
Over time, this behavior has been normalized. Every interaction on social media is itself a CTA, conditioning us to act on prompts without hesitation.
And clarity always beats novelty:“Buy Now” or “Get Started” consistently outperforms the fluffy metaphors. Data from Unbounce shows that these blunt imperatives outperform phrases like “Explore Your Journey” by 30–50%.
The lesson? We’re wired to respond to simple cues, even when we think we’ve outgrown them.
The cracks in the system
But here’s the catch: they work less reliably than before.
- Banner blindness → button blindness: As early as 2019, studies showed users subconsciously filtering out design elements that look like ads or CTAs.
- Ad fatigue: Click-through rates for display ads have fallen to 0.35% globally (Statista, 2023). Users see CTAs as noise.
- Legal risk: Dark patterns are under fire. The EU’s Digital Services Act (2024) and California’s CPRA explicitly ban manipulative consent flows and “roach motel” subscription traps.
- Generational skepticism: Gen Z, raised on ads, is less responsive to “Sign up now” funnels. Surveys by Deloitte show they value authenticity over urgency, and trust peer reviews more than buttons.
Let’s not forget the math.
If an e-commerce store gets 100,000 monthly visits and a CTA tweak raises conversion by 2%, that’s 2,000 more sales. At an average order value of €60, that’s €120,000 in extra monthly revenue—from one button change.
Multiply that across industries and you see why CTAs remain central despite fatigue.
But it’s also why manipulation persists. A fake scarcity banner might be legally risky, but if it increases quarterly revenue by 8%, many businesses roll the dice.
Here’s the line worth drawing: persuasion respects agency, manipulation erodes it. A clear CTA—“Book your call now”—is not inherently unethical. A hidden auto-renewal, a countdown timer that resets every hour, or a form that makes cancellation impossible?
That’s manipulation.
Both still “work,” but one builds trust, the other burns it.
The bigger lesson
The future isn’t buttonless.
The future is honest buttons. CTAs will remain necessary—humans need cues to act. But the way they’re used will decide whether brands are remembered for trust or for trickery.
So yes, CTAs and nudges still drive clicks in 2025. But the businesses that last will be those who use them transparently, not those who weaponize them until the law—or the audience—strikes back.
Until next time, stay discerning.
Alex
At Kredo Marketing, we build growth strategies that work without trickery. Clear design, transparent funnels, real results.
The Confidence Cartel
Hey mind-hackers—
There’s an entire industry that discovered the obvious truth: humans are insecure. And insecurity scales.
So they package “charisma,” “dark psychology,” “seduction systems,” and “high-ticket closing” into $997 courses with countdown timers and rented Lambos.
Not wisdom—just theatre, with good lighting. They call it transformation.
It’s really manipulation for sale.
The theatre of hope
The trick is always the same: recycle basic psychology, strip it of nuance, and serve it with a shot of shame. If you don’t buy, you “don’t want success badly enough.” They stack authority with borrowed symbols of wealth—luxury cars, fake screenshots, staged testimonials.
They manufacture urgency with countdown timers that reset every night. They create communities with insider slang, badges, and rituals to make you feel chosen. And then they drown you in 50 hours of fluff so you can’t tell if you’ve learned anything useful.
The product isn’t confidence or charisma. The product is hope—hope that shortcuts exist, that power can be downloaded, that status can be hacked. Hope is easy to sell, and easier still to upsell.
And when the scripts don’t work?
The guru’s defense is simple: you failed, not the method. Convenient.
Familiar faces, recycled scripts
We’ve seen this show before.
Julien Blanc’s pickup empire collapsed after global outrage, but the same material reappeared under a safer name: “social dynamics.”
NXIVM marketed itself as executive coaching before a court declared it a criminal enterprise. Even Tai Lopez’s garage video—the Lamborghini, the shelves of books—wasn’t selling knowledge.
It was selling the image of knowledge.
The iconography changes, the pitch doesn’t: create insecurity, present yourself as antidote, and monetize the cycle until the spotlight fades.
The fascinating thing? These figures rarely disappear.They pivot. The PUA coach becomes a “masculinity influencer.”
The failed crypto pusher becomes a productivity guru. They shed names like snakeskin but keep the same funnel architecture.
It works because platforms love banality.
A ten-second soundbite—“You’re broke because you’re lazy!”—will always travel faster than a lecture on opportunity cost. Algorithms don’t reward depth. They reward volume, cadence, outrage.
It works because parasocial relationships feel real. A stranger on YouTube can start to feel like a mentor in your living room. Once you believe you “know” them, you’re less likely to question their claims.
It works because the promise of secret knowledge is irresistible.
Humanity has always fallen for alchemy, mysticism, quick fixes. Why would TikTok be any different?
And it works because insecurity is infinite.
The market never saturates. There will always be someone who feels unconfident, powerless, or behind. That’s the raw material these sellers refine into dollars.
The economics of insecurity
The business model is brutally efficient.
Margins on info-products hover between 75–90%. A guru can spend $500 on ads to sell a $1,997 course and scale fast. A thousand sign-ups equals nearly $2 million in revenue. After refunds, affiliates, and chargebacks, many walk away with 15–30% net margin—healthy by any standard.
But the average shelf life of these businesses is short: 12 to 36 months.
Then fatigue sets in, platforms change policy, or reputations catch up. The guru rebrands, launches under a new domain, and restarts the machine. To them, a failed program isn’t a disaster. It’s just version one of the next funnel.
That’s why it feels like whack-a-mole. Shut down one name, three more appear. The business is designed to survive scandal by reincarnation.
And here’s the line that matters: persuasion respects your agency. Manipulation erodes it.
Persuasion gives you options, disclosure, and a chance to test. Manipulation hides costs, shames doubt, and resists verification.
Most of these sellers don’t want you to think. They want you to buy—and to blame yourself if it doesn’t work.
The pitch is airtight because it’s never falsifiable. If you succeed, the system worked. If you fail, you didn’t “want it bad enough.”
Either way, they win.
What it leaves behind
The most dangerous product online today isn’t fake crypto or dodgy skincare.
It’s weaponized insecurity.
These businesses rarely leave legacies, except for the trail of debt, disillusionment, and broken trust they plant in their customers. They don’t teach you to lead, to persuade, or to grow.
They teach you to buy the next fix.
And as long as platforms reward addictive content, as long as quick fixes feel easier than slow truths, the manipulation sellers will have another stage to perform on.
Until next time, stay skeptical.
Alex
At Kredo Marketing, we build systems that earn trust instead of exploiting it. If you want growth without manipulation, let’s talk.
The Risks and Realities of Personalization in Marketing
Hey there, Business Hackers!
If you enjoyed my last article, “Late Bloomers – The Power of Achieving Success Later in Life” get ready because this time we’re diving into a fascinating exploration of the limits of personalization in marketing. In this article, we’ll cover:
- The allure and benefits of personalization.
- Examples of personalization by major tech companies.
- The challenges and failures of personalization.
- Critical opinions on why personalization might fail.
- Negative implications of unethical personalization.
- Practical tips to protect yourself from online tracking and unwanted personalization.
The Allure of Personalization
Sometimes you could receive an email that seems to have been written just for you, with product suggestions that perfectly match your tastes. Magical, right?
Well, not always.
Personalization in marketing promises to create tailored experiences that satisfy individual consumer preferences, increasing their satisfaction and loyalty.
But behind the magic, there are shadows we need to explore.
The Bright Side:
- Engagement and Sales: According to McKinsey, companies excelling in personalization generate 40% more revenue than average (McKinsey & Company).
- Customer Loyalty: 78% of consumers say that personalized communications make them more likely to repurchase (McKinsey & Company).
Before diving into specific examples, let’s set the stage for how some of the biggest players in the tech industry are leveraging personalization to enhance user experience and drive engagement. These companies use advanced algorithms and data analytics to tailor content, ads, and recommendations, creating a highly customized interaction for each user. While these strategies can significantly boost engagement and loyalty, they also raise important questions about privacy, data security, and ethical implications.
Here’s a closer look at how personalization is implemented by some major tech companies:
Amazon:Uses recommendation algorithms to suggest products based on purchase history and browsing behavior. This boosts sales and encourages impulsive purchases. Imagine browsing Amazon for a book, and suddenly, five more books that seem equally interesting pop up. Irresistible, right?
Netflix: Offers content recommendations based on past viewing preferences. If you’ve spent a whole week watching crime documentaries, don’t be surprised if Netflix suggests yet another thriller that will keep you on the edge of your seat. This strategy keeps users glued to the screen, reducing subscription cancellations.
Google and Facebook: Personalize ads based on browsing data and online interactions. Have you ever noticed how a shoe ad magically appears after searching for “best running shoes” on Google? Coincidence? Absolutely not. It’s the power of personalization in action.
Spotify: Recommends music based on listening habits. If you’ve listened to “Bohemian Rhapsody” a hundred times, Spotify might suggest an entire classic rock playlist. This not only enhances user experience but also increases platform engagement and loyalty.
The Shadows of Personalization
While personalization in marketing has its bright spots, it’s not all sunshine and rainbows. The approach comes with numerous challenges that can compromise its effectiveness and create unintended consequences. Inaccurate or incomplete data can ruin the user experience and alienate customers, as seen with emails that incorrectly address recipients, showcasing personalization gone wrong. Additionally, the pressure to produce personalized content can overwhelm marketers, leading to lower quality and less effective marketing messages. In fact, 65% of marketers feel swamped by the need to generate enough content to support personalization efforts. Consumers also have high expectations for personalized interactions, with 71% expecting companiesto provide these experiences and 76% getting frustrated when their expectations are not met.
Privacy concerns add another layer of complexity, as consumers are increasingly worried about data misuse. The Cambridge Analytica scandal highlighted the massive loss of trust that can result from data privacy breaches. Implementing advanced personalization technologies can also be challenging and expensive, which many companies struggle to integrate effectively. These issues underscore that while personalization offers many potential benefits, it also brings significant challenges that businesses must navigate carefully to avoid its pitfalls.
Critical Opinions on Personalization
Several experts believe that personalization might be destined to fail for various reasons. One major issue is data quality: if the data used for personalization is inaccurate or incomplete, the entire strategy can fail. Additionally, the pressure to show quick results can lead to mistakes that damage the brand’s reputation and alienate consumers.
Another critical aspect is psychological manipulation: personalization can be used to create artificial needs and influence consumer purchasing decisions, often to their economic disadvantage.
Unethical personalization can have serious consequences that extend beyond immediate marketing gains. By using personalization to manipulate consumers into making unnecessary or harmful purchases, companies exploit consumer vulnerabilities and create psychological manipulation. This strategy can induce consumers to spend more through targeted offers that create a sense of urgency or artificial need, leading to significant economic impacts. Additionally, personalization can create social disparities and dependencies on certain products and services, increasing the influence of specific companies over consumer behavior. This raises ethical concerns about the broader social implications of such practices.
How to Do Personalization the Right Way
To implement effective and ethical personalization, companies should take several critical steps. First, they should use first-party and zero-party data, collecting information directly from consumers to ensure greater accuracy and transparency, thus avoiding data misuse (Ninetailed). Investing in the right technologies and training staff properly to manage personalization strategies is also crucial for success (McKinsey & Company). Lastly, maintaining an ethical approach is essential; companies must ensure that their personalization practices respect consumer privacy and are not manipulative, thereby building trust and long-term loyalty with their customers.
How to Protect Yourself from Online Tracking and Unwanted Personalization
For those who don’t want to be tracked or personalized, here are some practical tips:
- Use Privacy-Focused Browsers: Browsers like Firefox, Brave, or DuckDuckGo offer advanced privacy features and block trackers.
- Privacy Extensions: Install extensions like uBlock Origin, Privacy Badger, or Ghostery to block trackers and invasive ads.
- Browser Privacy Settings: Configure your browser settings to block third-party cookies and regularly clear cookies and cache.
- VPNs: Use a Virtual Private Network (VPN) to encrypt your internet traffic and hide your IP address.
- Anonymous Search Engines: Use privacy-focused search engines like DuckDuckGo that don’t track user searches.
- Social Media Privacy Settings: Adjust privacy settings on social media platforms to limit data sharing and control who can see your personal information.
- Opt-Out of Ad Personalization: Many platforms allow you to opt-out of personalized ads in the privacy settings.
Wrap-Up
Personalization in marketing presents numerous challenges and risks, but with a responsible and transparent approach, companies can harness its potential without compromising consumer trust and integrity. The promise of personalization lies in its ability to create tailored experiences that resonate deeply with consumers, driving engagement and loyalty. However, this promise is fraught with pitfalls, from data inaccuracies and content overload to unrealistic consumer expectations and significant privacy concerns. Balancing these strategies with ethical considerations is essential to ensure these practices are sustainable and beneficial for all parties involved.
Businesses must strive to collect and use data ethically, respecting consumer privacy and avoiding manipulative tactics. Investing in the right technologies and training staff adequately to handle these advanced systems is crucial for the successful implementation of personalization strategies. Companies that focus on transparency and build trust with their consumers will likely see long-term loyalty and positive brand perception.
As we navigate the complexities of the digital marketing landscape, it is imperative to remember that ethical personalization is not just about boosting sales or engagement—it’s about fostering a respectful and trustworthy relationship with consumers. By prioritizing ethical considerations, companies can create a more inclusive and respectful marketing environment that benefits both businesses and consumers.
Stay savvy, and see you in the next issue!
Alex
The Anti-Scroll Manifesto: Why the Future of Design Might Be Slower Than You Think
Hey restless minds—
Let me guess: your screen time is a horror story.
So is mine.
Between Slack pings, Instagram scrolls, LinkedIn carousels, and twenty open tabs that scream “just one more click,” it’s easy to feel like we’re drowning in design made to seduce us—fast.
Speed has become the default setting for everything digital. Quick reads. Snappy CTAs. UX patterns optimized not for meaning, but for momentum.
We don’t consume information anymore.
We skim, swipe, discard.
And we call it efficiency.
But what if we’ve confused urgency with value? What if slowing down was the real power move?
Design as dopamine trap
Let’s be honest.
Most digital design today is behavioral manipulation in a fancy outfit. Infinite scroll, autoplay, microinteractions tuned to your nervous system. Interfaces are built like casinos:
frictionless, irresistible, and forgettable.
We’ve optimized everything for the click — and almost nothing for the consequence.
You get faster feedback, faster bounce rates, and faster burnout. Good design should feel like a conversation.
Instead, it’s become a slot machine.
But a quiet revolution is coming.
Some brands are flipping the script. They’re rejecting speed as the main KPI and embracing a radical idea: Design that slows you down.
Not because it’s clunky. Not because it’s inefficient. But because it’s intentional.
Let’s take a look at some of the rebels:
- Aesop — Their website is famously quiet, elegant, even contemplative. No sticky navbars. No auto-play. Just space to breathe. The layout invites reflection. It’s UX as ritual.
- Kinfolk & The Gentlewoman — These editorial brands embrace friction. Long scrolls, slow fades, unexpected compositions. Their visual language resists skimming. The experience demands attention — and rewards it with intimacy.
- Off-White (Virgil Abloh) — In fashion, Abloh was a master of embedding slowness into visual communication. Hidden layers, delayed reveals, texts within texts. He weaponized friction to make people stop. In an industry driven by trends, he created moments.
- Amber Case and Calm Technology — Her work advocates for interfaces that stay in the background. Not every notification needs to buzz. Not every UI needs to glow. Calm tech respects attention as a scarce resource, not a commodity to mine.
- VK (Russia’s Facebook) — In a bold UX experiment, VK made new users answer a few reflective questions during sign-up. Slower onboarding = higher retention. The friction filtered noise.
These aren’t accidents. They’re signals.
Slowness is not inefficiency. It’s a strategy.
Think about it: when did you last remember a lightning-fast experience? Now think of the ones that made you pause.
Memorability often lives in the resistance.
When everything is instant, delay becomes luxury. When everything is gamified, contemplation becomes rebellion.
When everyone wants your attention, the rarest brands are the ones who don’t beg for it.
The age of anti-anxiety design
Here’s the part nobody talks about:
☞ fast design is making us sick.
It accelerates decision fatigue. It erodes trust. It keeps us in constant pre-reaction mode.
Slow design isn’t just aesthetic. It’s psychological. It restores agency. It whispers instead of shouting.
It offers space instead of stimuli.
It doesn’t just ask “what do you want to do next?” It asks “why are you here?”
What this means for your brand, product, or message.
Don’t slow things down just for the sake of being quirky. But do ask:
- Can I remove urgency from this interface?
- Can I replace stimulus with substance?
- Can I create depth without overwhelming?
Because here’s the real opportunity:
In a market saturated by seamlessness, friction becomes differentiation.
If your audience is drowning in notifications, maybe silence is your brand voice.
If your users are lost in speed, maybe clarity is your anchor.
If your competitors are sprinting, maybe walking is your edge.
Your move.
Design something that doesn’t rush.
Design something that feels like a conversation.
Design something that makes people stop — and maybe even stay.
Until next time, stay deliberate.
Alex
Want to design digital experiences that don’t just convert — but resonate?
At Kredo Marketing, we help brands build interfaces that are intentional, emotional, and unforgettable.
Let’s rethink the way your users interact with your brand.
Decoding the Cognitive Biases Hijacking Your Business Brain
Hey there, business enthusiasts! I’m thrilled to have you back for another exciting dive into the world of business strategy and psychology. This week, we’re peeling back the layers on cognitive biases—those pesky mental shortcuts that can trip us up and lead us astray. Whether you’re making high-stakes investment decisions or just trying to pick a restaurant for dinner, understanding these biases can help you navigate the world with a sharper, clearer mind.
Ready to boost your decision-making skills?
Let’s get started!
+++ Article Roadmap +++
- The Giants of Behavioral Economics
- Anchoring Bias: The First Number Sticks
- Overconfidence Bias: The Dot-Com Bubble
- Confirmation Bias: The 2008 Financial Crisis
- Authority Bias and Availability Heuristic: Everyday Examples
- The Giants of Behavioral Economics
- Mitigating Cognitive Biases: Practical Steps
The Giants of Behavioral Economics
Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky revolutionized our understanding of decision-making with their work on prospect theory. Kahneman’s book, “Thinking, Fast and Slow,” delves into the dichotomy between our fast, instinctive thinking and our slow, deliberate thinking. This book is a treasure trove of insights into how our minds work, revealing why we often make irrational decisions even when we believe we’re being rational.
Richard Thaler, another giant in the field of behavioral economics, introduced the concept of nudges—subtle changes in the environment that can lead to better decisions. In his book “Nudge,” co-authored with Cass Sunstein, Thaler explores how small interventions can help people make choices that are in their own best interests without restricting their freedom. For example, automatically enrolling employees in retirement plans (with the option to opt-out) significantly increases participation rates compared to requiring them to opt-in.
Let’s now see what are the main cognitive biases we encounter in everyday life and in business.
Anchoring Bias: The First Number Sticks
Have you ever found yourself irrationally fixated on the first price you hear when shopping for something, like a new car or a house? That’s anchoring bias at play. Anchoring bias occurs when individuals rely too heavily on the first piece of information they receive (the “anchor”) when making decisions. This initial information unduly influences their judgment and decision-making, even if subsequent data suggest otherwise. Let’s see an everyday case.
Shopping for a Car
Imagine you walk into a car dealership, and the first car you see is priced at 25,000€. This price sets an anchor in your mind. As you continue shopping, even if you find a similar car priced at 22,000€ the initial 25,000€ tag sticks with you, making the 22,000€ car seem like a better deal than it might actually be. This skewed perception can lead you to make suboptimal financial decisions based on the anchored price, rather than evaluating each option on its own merits.
Anchoring bias doesn’t just affect shopping decisions; it can have significant implications in the business world, particularly in negotiations, pricing strategies, and financial forecasting. For instance, during salary negotiations, the first number put on the table often sets the tone for the entire discussion. If a job candidate anchors high, they might receive a better offer than if tlhey had started lower.
Real-Life Business Scenarios
Negotiations: In mergers and acquisitions, the initial offer can set an anchor that skews subsequent negotiations. If a company is initially valued at $1 billion, all further discussions and counteroffers revolve around this anchor, even if a thorough valuation suggests a lower price.
Marketing and Pricing: Retailers often use anchoring to their advantage by displaying the original price next to a discounted price. Seeing that a jacket was originally $200 and is now $120 can make the deal seem more attractive, even if $120 is still a significant amount to spend.
Financial Forecasting: Analysts might anchor their predictions on past data or initial forecasts, potentially leading to inaccurate future projections if they don’t adequately adjust for new information.
Strategies to Counteract Anchoring Bias
Awareness and Education: Being aware of anchoring bias is the first step in mitigating its effects. Educating yourself and your team about this bias can help you recognize when it might be influencing decisions.
Deliberate Delays: Taking a step back and deliberately delaying a decision can provide time to consider other information and perspectives, reducing the impact of the initial anchor.
Use of Objective Data: Relying on objective data and multiple information sources can help counteract the influence of an initial anchor. For example, in salary negotiations, consider industry standards and multiple job offers rather than just the initial number.
Scenario Analysis: Conducting scenario analyses can help you explore different outcomes and perspectives, reducing the weight of the initial anchor in your decision-making process.
Consulting Diverse Opinions: Seeking input from a diverse group of people can provide different viewpoints and reduce the influence of anchoring bias.
Overconfidence Bias: The Dot-Com Bubble
In the late 1990s, the tech industry was booming, and everyone wanted a piece of the pie. Investors were swept up by overconfidence bias, convinced they could predict the market’s next big thing. Initial high valuations (anchoring bias)set unrealistic benchmarks. Companies with flimsy business models, like Pets.com, were suddenly worth millions—until reality hit, and the bubble burst.
The aftermath? Trillions in lost value, numerous bankruptcies, and a harsh lesson in how biases can skew market perceptions.
Strategies to Mitigate Overconfidence Bias
- Seek Feedback: Regularly seek feedback from trusted colleagues or mentors to gain an external perspective on your decisions.
- Acknowledge Uncertainty: Recognize and accept the inherent uncertainty in predictions and decisions.
- Break Down Decisions: Divide large decisions into smaller, manageable parts to evaluate each component more critically.
- Historical Analysis: Study past decisions and outcomes to understand where overconfidence may have led to mistakes.
- Risk Assessment: Conduct thorough risk assessments and consider worst-case scenarios.
Confirmation Bias: The 2008 Financial Crisis
Fast forward to 2008, where confirmation bias played a starring role in the financial meltdown. Financial institutions cherry-picked data to support the stability of mortgage-backed securities, ignoring contrary evidence. When the housing market collapsed, it triggered a global economic crisis. The crash exposed how dangerous it is to ignore dissenting data, showing the devastating impact of collective cognitive biases on a global scale.
Strategies to Counteract Confirmation Bias
- Actively Seek Contradictory Evidence: Make a deliberate effort to seek out information that challenges your current beliefs or hypotheses.
- Diverse Teams: Encourage diversity in teams to bring in different perspectives and reduce groupthink.
- Devil’s Advocate: Assign someone to play the role of devil’s advocate in discussions to question assumptions and highlight potential flaws.
- Pre-Mortem Analysis: Conduct pre-mortem analyses to identify potential reasons why a plan might fail.
- Blind Review: Use blind review processes to evaluate ideas and data without knowing the source.
Authority Bias and Availability Heuristic: Everyday Examples
Picture this: You’re at a restaurant, struggling to choose between the steak and the salmon. The waiter suggests the chef’s special—suddenly, your decision feels easier. This is authority bias—trusting and following the advice of perceived experts. Or imagine scrolling through social media and seeing ads for a gadget you’ve been eyeing. Suddenly, it seems like everyone is talking about it. This is the availability heuristic in action, where the frequency and recency of exposure make the product seem more popular and desirable than it might actually be.
Strategies to Mitigate Authority Bias and Availability Heuristic
- Question Authority: Always question and verify the advice or recommendations from authority figures, no matter how credible they seem.
- Research Independently: Conduct your own research to gather multiple sources of information.
- Diversify Information Sources: Rely on a diverse range of information sources to get a more balanced view.
- Reflect on Decisions: Take time to reflect on your decisions and the factors that influenced them.
- Awareness Training: Engage in training sessions that highlight common biases and their impact.
Understanding cognitive biases isn’t just a theoretical exercise—it’s a practical tool that can drastically improve your decision-making in business and life. By being aware of these biases, fostering diverse perspectives, using structured decision-making processes, leveraging technology, and conducting pre-mortem analyses, you can mitigate their impact and make more rational, informed decisions.
For those eager to delve deeper into this topic, “Thinking, Fast and Slow” by Daniel Kahneman, “Nudge” by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, and “Predictably Irrational” by Dan Arielycome highly recommended.
These books offer profound insights and practical advice on navigating the complex landscape of human decision-making.
Thanks for joining me in this exploration of cognitive biases and the market. Stay tuned for more insights and hacks to boost your business acumen in next issue of “Business Hacks & Theories”!
With Love
Alex
Burn It Down to Build It Right: The Truth About Extreme Rebranding
Hey bold believers—
This is our 100th edition of Business Hacks & Theories, and I just want to say:
Thank you. ❤️
Over the past months, we’ve explored the weird, the brilliant, the broken, and the beautiful corners of marketing, branding, economics, and behavior.
We’ve dissected logo psychology, algorithmic traps, chaos packaging, and branding in VR. This space has grown into a place for critical thought, honest analysis, and a touch of provocation. And today, we’re doing all of that—but with scalpel precision. Because this is no ordinary topic.
To mark this milestone, we’re diving into Extreme Rebranding—not a color palette update or a typeface refresh, but the kind of radical brand transformation that alters a company’s DNA.
The Theory Behind the Transformation
Extreme rebranding isn’t about chasing trends—it’s about restoring narrative control. It emerges when a brand’s existing identity is no longer compatible with its environment, its audience, or its ambitions. This level of change is a strategic decision rooted in semiotics, behavioral economics, and corporate survival instinct.
At its core, a brand exists to signify consistency, trust, and differentiation. But when that meaning collapses—due to cultural shifts, technological disruption, or reputational decay—the semiotic value of the brand turns against itself.
The old signs become liabilities.
Extreme rebranding becomes the only viable form of detox.
It has to work on three levels:
- Symbolic: the brand must communicate rupture, signaling that something fundamental has changed.
- Operational: the internal practices and business strategy must evolve in sync.
- Emotional: the audience must be brought into the new narrative in a way that feels meaningful, not manipulative.
In that sense, rebranding at this scale is more akin to identity therapy than graphic design. And every brand that survives it does so by confronting a central tension:
continuity vs. reinvention.
The case studies that follow are not the story. They are the evidence. Each one shows how theory translates into execution—and what happens when the execution hits (or misses) the mark.
Burberry – From Gangwear to Global Luxury
Burberry’s transformation is a masterclass in reclaiming cultural capital.
By the early 2000s, the brand’s iconic check pattern had become associated not with British elegance but with counterfeit markets and football violence.
The brand wasn’t just outdated—it had become stigmatized.
The leadership duo of Ahrendts and Bailey didn’t simply refresh the aesthetic. They pulled off a full semiotic reboot: digitally native campaigns, streamlined product architecture, runway credibility, and above all, narrative clarity.
The brand told a new story—about British design, digital luxury, and modern heritage.
This case illustrates how effective rebranding requires coherence between symbol (visual), strategy (distribution and pricing), and story (heritage reimagined for now).
Dunkin’ – Cutting the Donuts, Sharpening the Focus
When Dunkin’ dropped “Donuts” from its name, it was signaling something deeper: a strategic repositioning away from legacy product definitions and toward lifestyle utility. In economic terms, Dunkin’ stopped defining its category as a “donut chain” and embraced its place in the $80B global coffee economy.
The rebrand worked because it aligned with consumer behavior and market data. Coffee was the high-frequency, high-margin product.
Everything—from store design to app UX—reinforced the new identity: fast, efficient, caffeinated.
What this shows: a successful extreme rebrand doesn’t just change the name—it changes the value equation.
Old Spice – Absurdity as a Strategic Weapon
Old Spice’s reinvention under Wieden+Kennedyis one of the boldest cases of brand surrealism deployed for market gain.
The process began with a fundamental assessment: the brand was irrelevant to younger audiences and stuck in a cycle of nostalgic inertia. Axe had cornered the youth market with provocative edge, while Old Spice sat dusty on the shelf.
The rebranding was conducted in carefully orchestrated phases. First, the agency identified the need to completely reverse the tone. Instead of mimicking the hyper-sexual tone of Axe, they leaned into absurdity, irony, and unexpected self-awareness. The now-legendary campaign “The Man Your Man Could Smell Like” wasn’t just an ad—it was a thesis statement.
Next came execution across media: video ads, social interaction, and product naming followed the same exaggerated, playful language. Each point of contact reinforced the shift. Then came product line expansion and packaging redesign, which broke from traditional masculinity tropes and embraced bold color, clean vector graphics, and irreverent names.
Internally, the brand voice was recalibrated to allow creative freedom while staying within a surrealist narrative. The key to success? Consistency in the chaos.
Audiences not only accepted the shift—they celebrated it.
Old Spice didn’t just refresh its look. It reprogrammed its semiotics. It taught its audience how to interpret it anew. That’s not just a rebrand—it’s cultural sleight of hand with a sales boost.
Pfizer – Rebuilding Trust After Global Spotlight
Pfizer didn’t choose to rebrand—it was forced to. The pandemic made it a protagonist, and with attention came scrutiny. The company had to shift from industrial anonymity to public trust.
The challenge wasn’t just visual—it was philosophical.
The new branding, with its DNA-helix symbol and fluid identity system, signaled a repositioning: from corporate pharmaceutical to mission-driven biotech innovator.
The tone softened. The story changed from “we make drugs” to “we unlock breakthroughs.”
Here, the rebrand became an act of reputation recontextualization—using visual cues and narrative pivots to change not just perception, but public expectation.
Rebranding Is a Systemic Intervention
Extreme rebranding isn’t a project.
It’s a systemic intervention. It forces every function—from HR to product to comms—to align around a new organizing idea. Without that alignment, the rebrand is hollow.
What the best rebrands teach us is that branding is not the cherry on top of strategy.
It is strategy—visualized, embodied, and deployed.
So if you’re considering a rebrand, ask yourself: Are you repainting the walls—or rethinking the foundation?
Thanks for staying with me for 100 chapters of this wild marketing journey.
Here’s to the next 100.
Until next time, stay iconic.
Alex
🔥 Thinking about a rebrand? At Kredo Marketing, we help brands evolve with clarity and depth.
💬 Let’s rewire your identity—strategically.
How Your Data Became Big Tech’s Goldmine
Today, every click, swipe, and search you make is tracked, analyzed, and monetized. But at what cost? In this edition of “Business Hacks & Theories,” we dive into the murky waters of “surveillance capitalism”—a phenomenon that turns your privacy into a product and your daily life into a goldmine of data
The term “surveillance capitalism” might sound like something out of a dystopian novel, but it’s very real. Coined by Shoshana Zuboff in her 2019 book “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism,” it describes an economic system built on the extraction and commodification of personal data.
Definition and Mechanisms
Surveillance capitalism hinges on the collection of detailed behavioral data, which is then transformed into predictive products. These products are sold in behavioral futures markets for profit. What sets this apart is that the data isn’t just used to improve services—it’s used to predict and influence your behavior.
This all started in the early 2000s when Google rolled out AdWords, using search data to target ads. The idea caught on quickly. Facebook, Amazon, and others saw the potential to turn personal data into big bucks. Today, your online activity fuels a massive industry dedicated to knowing what you’ll do next.
While it might seem harmless—after all, who doesn’t want personalized ads?—the implications are far-reaching. Companies can predict and manipulate behavior at an unprecedented scale, raising serious concerns about privacy, security, and ethics.
IoT and the Ubiquity of Data Collection
Enter the Internet of Things (IoT), a network of smart devices that monitor everything from your sleep patterns to your driving habits. By 2025, we’re looking at over 75 billion IoT devices worldwide, generating a staggering amount of data.
Some use cases—>
- Amazon: Take Alexa, Amazon’s voice assistant. It records everything from your music tastes to your shopping habits. In 2020, Amazon made over $21 billion from cloud services and ads, thanks largely to data from IoT devices.
- Google: Google’s Nest thermostats don’t just regulate your home’s temperature; they track your energy use and even your movements at home.
Data Extortion Strategies
Big tech has perfected the art of data extortion. They lure you in with free services, then harvest your data like farmers in a digital field. Most of the time, users have no clue what they’re really giving away. Let’s dig deeper into how these companies get their hands on your data and turn it into gold.
◼️ Freemium Models
One of the most common strategies is the freemium model. Apps and services are offered for free with basic functionalities, but to unlock premium features, users often need to provide more personal information or agree to broader data sharing terms.
◼️Hidden Data Collection
Many apps collect data that is not necessary for their core functionality. For example, a simple flashlight app might request access to your contacts, location, and even your microphone. This excessive data collection is often hidden in lengthy and complex terms of service agreements that users rarely read.
◼️Social Engineering
Tech companies also use social engineering tactics to encourage data sharing. Features like social media quizzes, “login with Facebook” options, and friend-finding services entice users to share more personal information. These features make it convenient to connect with others but also serve as a data-gathering tool.
◼️Continuous Monitoring
Devices and services are designed to collect data continuously. For instance, smart home devices like Amazon Echo and Google Home are always listening for their wake word, but they also capture a lot of incidental audio data. Fitness trackers and smartwatches constantly monitor your health metrics, which can be sold to third parties, including insurance companies.
Data Integration
Companies like Google and Facebook don’t just collect data from their own platforms; they integrate data from multiple sources. By combining data from social media, search history, email, and third-party apps, they create comprehensive profiles that are incredibly valuable for targeted advertising.
Consent Through Design
Often, consent is obtained through design choices that nudge users towards agreeing to data sharing. For example, privacy settings might be buried deep in menus, or the default options might favor data collection. These design choices make it easy for users to unknowingly consent to extensive data sharing.
Some cases—>
- Facebook: Remember the Cambridge Analytica scandal? Millions of users had their data mined without explicit consent, all to sway political elections. This fiasco cost Facebook a $5 billion fine from the FTC in 2019.
- Free Apps: Ever wonder why some apps are free? They collect your contacts, location, and activity data, then sell it to the highest bidder. For example, many weather apps have been found to share location data with advertisers.
- Loyalty Programs: Retailers use loyalty programs to collect purchase data. Every time you scan your loyalty card, companies gather information on your buying habits, which they use to target you with personalized ads and promotions.
These strategies highlight how pervasive and sophisticated data collection methods have become. While users enjoy the benefits of personalized services and free apps, they often pay with their privacy, feeding a vast ecosystem of data exploitation that drives the profits of tech giants.
Surveillance capitalism doesn’t just invade your privacy; it can also deepen social inequalities. Algorithms used for loan approvals or job screenings can perpetuate biases, leaving some people unfairly excluded.
- Predatory Lending: Some financial companies use your data to find and exploit vulnerable individuals with high-interest loans.
- Employment Screening: Recruitment algorithms might filter out candidates based on biased data, perpetuating existing inequalities.
Regulation and Resistance
Regulations like the GDPR in Europe aim to curb the excesses of data exploitation by enforcing strict consent and transparency rules. But tech giants, with their global reach, often find ways to sidestep these regulations.
Some examples –>
- GDPR: Since 2018, GDPR has slapped several companies with hefty fines for data breaches, including a €50 million penalty for Google in 2019.
- California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA): This 2020 law gives Californians rights similar to GDPR, promoting greater data transparency and control.
Astronomical Profits
The data economy has exploded in recent years. Giants like Google, Facebook, and Amazon have built empires on the back of data collection and analysis.
- Google: In 2021, Alphabet (Google’s parent company) pulled in over $257 billion, mostly from digital advertising.
- Facebook: Meta Platforms (formerly Facebook) raked in $117.9 billion in 2021, primarily through personalized ads.
- Amazon: Amazon Web Services, fueled by user data, contributed over $62 billion to the company’s annual revenue in 2021.
Techniques to Avoid Being Tracked
To protect your privacy, you need to be proactive. Here are some tools and strategies to help you stay under the radar.
Strategies and Tools:
- VPN (Virtual Private Network): Encrypts your internet traffic, masking your location and activity.
- Secure Browsers: Use privacy-focused browsers like Firefox or Brave, which block trackers.
- Ad Blockers: Extensions like uBlock Origin can block ads and trackers.
- Digital Awareness: Be mindful of the services you use and limit your exposure on social media.
Surveillance capitalism makes us rethink the value of privacy in the digital age. As technology evolves, we must balance innovation with individual rights, ensuring progress doesn’t come at the cost of dignity and freedom.
Surveillance capitalism represents a seismic shift in how economic value is created and extracted. By monetizing personal data, companies have unlocked new revenue streams, but at substantial ethical and societal costs. The commodification of personal information has sparked a crucial debate about the limits of technological advancement and the need for robust regulatory frameworks to protect individual privacy.
As consumers, we need to be vigilant and proactive about protecting our data. Understanding the mechanisms and implications of surveillance capitalism can empower us to make informed choices about the services we use and the information we share. At the same time, policymakers must enact and enforce regulations that safeguard privacy and promote transparency in data practices.
The future of surveillance capitalism hinges on our collective ability to navigate the complexities of the digital economy while upholding fairness, equity, and respect for individual rights. By fostering a culture of digital literacy and ethical responsibility, we can harness technology’s benefits without compromising our fundamental values.
As Digital Marketer and owner of Kredo Marketing keting, I’m knee-deep in data-driven strategies. But I draw a hard line at unethical data use. Our agency transparency, consent, and ethical practices in every campaign. Data should enhance user experience and add value, not exploit or manipulate. It’s high time the marketing industry adopts ethical standards that respect privacy and build trust.
OnlyFans & Behavioral Economics: The Hidden Forces Behind Desire and Decision
Imagine stepping into a digital world where every desire can be fulfilled with a click, a world where money and emotions intertwine in unexpected ways. Welcome to OnlyFans, a platform that has transformed how content is created and consumed, leveraging principles of behavioral economics to fuel desire and spending.
Behavioral Economics Unveiled: Thaler’s Influence
Behavioral economics is a field of study that combines economics and psychology to explore how people make economic decisions. Richard Thaler, one of the leading theorists in behavioral economics and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2017, demonstrated how cognitive biases influence economic behavior.
Thaler introduced concepts such as the endowment effect and mental accounting, which help explain why people do not always act rationally in their financial decisions.
Cognitive Biases and Financial Choices
Humans often make economic decisions that are not perfectly rational. For example, confirmation bias leads us to seek and give weight to information that confirms our pre-existing beliefs while ignoring information that contradicts them. Anchoring bias causes us to rely heavily on the first piece of information (the anchor) we encounter when making subsequent decisions, even if that information is irrelevant. In terms of spending, this might mean that a user on OnlyFans could be influenced by the price of the first content they see, using it as a reference point for evaluating all other offers on the platform.
Endowment Effect and Mental Accounting
The endowment effect suggests that people value what they own more than what they do not own. On OnlyFans, this manifests when users perceive a sense of ownership over the content they access through subscriptions. This perception increases the subjective value of the content, making it difficult to cancel existing subscriptions. Richard Thaler demonstrated that people tend to overvalue items they own, even if acquired recently, compared to those they do not own.
Mental accounting is the process through which people divide their money into different mental categories. For example, a user might allocate a portion of their monthly budget to entertainment and consider expenses on OnlyFans as part of this budget. This makes it easier to justify expenditures, even if significant, because they are viewed as part of a specific spending category rather than a large total cost. This practice can lead users to spend more than they otherwise would, as they perceive the expenses as more manageable and less impactful.(McKinsey & Company) (Supercreator).
Scarcity and UrgencyScarcity and urgency strategies are powerful behavioral economics tools used on OnlyFans.
Creators often limit the number of available subscriptions or offer exclusive content for a limited time, prompting users to make quick decisions out of fear of missing out. This creates psychological pressure that can significantly increase spending.
The Appeal of Personalization
One of the most intriguing aspects of OnlyFans is the ability for users to have direct and personalized interaction with creators. This level of intimacy has been a game-changer, creating an emotional bond that often translates into increased spending. Users can request specific content and pay for private messages, creating a tailored experience that fuels the desire for exclusivity.
Belle Delphine: A Success Story
Belle Delphineis one of the most well-known creators on OnlyFans.
Her ability to create highly personalized and engaging content has allowed her to earn millions of dollars. By using intelligent marketing strategies and maintaining a strong connection with fans, Belle has demonstrated how exclusivity and direct interaction can drive user spending behavior.
The marketing success is heavily rooted in her ability to generate shock value and viral content. One of her most infamous stunts was selling jars of her “GamerGirl Bath Water”for $30 each. This product quickly sold out and generated a massive amount of media coverage and online discussions, propelling her into the spotlight.
This stunt not only capitalized on the curiosity and novelty factor but also showcased her understanding of meme culture and internet humor, which resonated with her audience.
From Movie Stars to OnlyFans Creators
Another notable example is Bella Thorne, a Hollywood actress who made over a million dollars on her first day on OnlyFans. Her presence on the platform caused a stir and led to changes in payment policies, significantly impacting the platform’s ecosystem.
Thorne’s entrance onto OnlyFans was nothing short of spectacular. Within her first 24 hours, she reportedly made over $1 million, and her earnings surpassed $2 million within the first week. This unprecedented success drew massive attention to the platform, demonstrating the lucrative potential of OnlyFans for high-profile individuals.
This success on OnlyFans was not without backlash. Many creators on the platform criticized her for misrepresenting the nature of her content. She charged $200 for a pay-per-view message, which many subscribers believed would contain explicit content. When it did not meet these expectations, a significant number of refund requests were made. This incident prompted OnlyFans to change its policies.
Social Controversies: The Dark Side of OnlyFans
OnlyFans has sparked numerous social controversies, highlighting both the empowering aspects and the darker side of the platform. One major controversy involves the potential for exploitation and the ethical implications of monetizing intimate content. Critics argue that the platform can perpetuate unhealthy relationships between creators and fans, driven by financial transactions rather than genuine connections.
There have been reports of individuals spending exorbitant amounts on OnlyFans, leading to financial ruin. For example, some users have admitted to spending thousands of dollars monthly, prioritizing payments to OnlyFans creators over essential expenses like rent and bills. This behavior reflects deeper psychological issues, such as addiction and the need for social connection, which OnlyFans can exploit.
Additionally, the platform has faced backlash for its impact on relationships. Partners of OnlyFans users sometimes feel betrayed or hurt by the financial and emotional investments their significant others make on the platform. This has led to instances of relationship breakdowns and increased emotional distress.
Creators themselves also face significant risks.
The pressure to continuously produce exclusive content and maintain subscriber interest can lead to burnout and mental health issues. Furthermore, the stigma associated with creating adult content can result in social isolation and difficulty in finding traditional employment if they choose to leave the platform .
Weighing the Pros and Cons
Advantages
- Direct Monetization: Creators can earn directly from their content without intermediaries.
- Flexibility: Creators have control over their pricing and content types.
- User Engagement: Users feel more involved thanks to direct interaction.
Disadvantages
- Privacy and Security: Risks associated with sharing personal content.
- Financial Dependency: Some creators might become overly dependent on platform earnings.
- Social Controversies: Discussions on morality and psychological impacts for both creators and users.
OnlyFans represents a fascinating example of how principles of behavioral economics can be applied to understand and optimize a digital business model. While the platform offers significant economic and flexibility advantages, it also raises important ethical and social questions. Looking ahead, it will be interesting to see how OnlyFans and similar platforms evolve in response to these challenges and opportunities.
In this journey through OnlyFans, we have seen how the interplay between emotions, desire, and money can give rise to complex and intriguing economic dynamics. The power of personalization and direct interactions has revolutionized how content is consumed and monetized, offering new perspectives on how human behavior can be guided and shaped in the digital world.