Let's talk about the reasons why we don't like live broadcast.

From the perspective of people (consumers):

First, live broadcast with goods as a consumer shopping is definitely good, but it brings a decisive problem and time is not enough. For most people, time management is out of order. Confused, somehow, one day passed; Some people don't know why the day is so long and so sad.

Anything that comes in at this time is undoubtedly disrupting the rhythm. What the live broadcast needs most is the consumer's time, which is to seize the time in a day's work, study, eating, rest and entertainment, while consumption itself is not a real-time demand, which is not attractive enough and easy to be weighed. So people in the future will pay more and more attention to the problem of insufficient time. The more fragmented the products that take up time, the more they will be abandoned, and the live broadcast will bear the brunt.

Second, consumption level and commodity cognition. The goods people tend to choose will not be cheap and low-quality, nor will they be high-priced and high-quality, but cost-effective, which is in line with the overall consumption level and people's expectations of commodity value.

Based on this deduction, the low-priced and inferior goods and luxury goods in the live broadcast will be eliminated, and if the remaining ones have been at a high cost performance, it will undoubtedly bring pressure to manufacturers to reduce costs, so all kinds of shoddy and inferior products will emerge as the times require, resulting in a vicious circle (after all, high-cost goods are fiercely competitive, and if you want to make a profit, you can only weigh the input-output ratio, so the original high cost performance will also have a trend of low price and inferior quality, and gradually).

Third, vanity. Sometimes I wonder what most people buy in shopping malls and what is the difference from ordinary food markets. After observing more places, I found that what people buy is not the goods themselves, but a kind of vanity. You will find that the more high-quality goods, the more people you see, and the fewer people see cheap goods.

This can also explain the phenomenon that some people haggle over every ounce for food in the vegetable market, but they can spend a lot of money in big shopping malls. Compared with online, what is lacking is not the lack of brands, but an enviable sense of existence-vanity.

To put it more clearly, live broadcast is many-to-one, that is, countless consumers have the nature of a salesperson. What is lacking is the interactive experience among countless consumers, and there is a desire for the other party to see that they have purchased high-quality goods, which is what the live broadcast lacks, and this desire has been further enhanced by the rise of live broadcast.

Fourth, people's consumption is rational, thus reducing impulse consumption. I have an experience. I am very interested in buying goods, but after buying them and using them once or twice, I often ignore them. This is attributed to their irrational consumption and impulsive consumption, but in recent years, consumers' purchase has gradually become rational, and their awareness of buying on demand has gradually increased.

Because of the characteristics of live broadcast with goods, people are prone to impulsive consumption, so its concept is contrary to the current rational consumption concept. Habits are easy to change, but ideas are not. At least in changing people's consumption concept, live broadcast with goods is impossible.

2. From the live broadcast itself:

First of all, the live broadcast only changed the sales model (sales channel). The freshness of a few people, the short-lived freshness of most people. It is exactly the same as the early market call and TV shopping, and it is also a replica of the e-commerce live broadcast (it is true that it is generated by the rise of short videos, but it is more based on the concept of e-commerce live broadcast). It is different from e-commerce platform and online ride. The latter changed people's cognition, ideas and living habits. The former is just a copy of the latter. When people are awake, the heat will drop instantly (from my friend's point of view, most of them are awake).

Secondly, in the process of live broadcast, the trust established in a short time is quite fragile. The live broadcast hopes to turn it into sales by increasing traffic. The establishment of traffic actually depends on the time of 10 seconds for users to enter the live broadcast room, and it is relatively difficult to leave users in this short time. Because of this, the platform will introduce some traffic anchors, stars and well-known online celebrities to promote delivery, and use their word of mouth to do the first pass-let people trust the platform. This is a strategy, but it is difficult to hide the fragility of trust behind the live broadcast.

Moreover, the live broadcast products are gradually deteriorating, like a "show" field, vulgar. The program is not a commodity, but an anchor; It's not content, it's coquettish. If we watch the live broadcast with commodities instead of commodities, the nature of the commodities themselves will change (however, it can still be suppressed by strict management of the platform).

3. Talk about my thoughts on live broadcast with goods in the future.

Taobao and JD.COM have changed people's consumption concept (people can buy goods without leaving home). If we keep this view and sell some cheap and low-quality goods, not many consumers will pay the bill. Then what changes the fate of live broadcast with commodities is live broadcast evaluation, which brings commodities with evaluation so that consumers can fully enjoy the initiative.

What needs to be set is that the anchor needs to bring goods to serve multiple brands, which is fair and just. After all, the evaluation needs multiple brands to compare and needs fair comparison. Remove the competitive relationship, so as to achieve mutual perfection (I don't think the idea is ridiculous, it is easy to arrange by live broadcast).

Finally, as far as the live broadcast itself is concerned, it is a one-way guidance, that is, from merchants to consumers, whether it is promotion or information transmission, it is a mode that merchants take the initiative and consumers passively accept. I hope there are strategies to break this pattern and promote two-way choice.