# data[].attributes.body
I do agree with certain point in the article, but somehow not. The content that the famous brand costs more expensive than other no-name brand is cannot be denied. Both of them might cost same in production as they use same materials and method to produce their product. However, the effort for reaching the high position among the markets nowadays cannot be ignored and judged by others. Winning the market competition may means that the brand might provide the safe and good quality of product to consumers rather than their competitors. Therefore, I strongly disagree with the point that the brand names do not represents the better quality of the product.

# data[].attributes.body
From my perspective, brand name products which exist in super market like: milk, medicine, shampoo, and so on do not mean much. Both generic and name-brand might actually being produced by the same company with the same set of ingredients. It is predictable that consumers will switch to these close substitutes simply due to the fact that it can be an easy saving of more than 30% the price of name brands without scarifying any qualitative means.

# data[].attributes.body
2 minutes

# data[].attributes.body
4 minutes to comment

# data[].attributes.body
I disagree with this article. People tend to buy 'reliable' goods when they are buying certain types of goods they really care about. No brand goods without blind tests would be considered as 'unreliable' products. Mentioned products in the article are commonly used, and basically it is difficult to know the difference between brand products and no-brand products because they are relatively easier to make.  However, products which require some hidden technique or know-how for better quality. The producers of those products mainly focus on certain products they are producing while markets simply require ask the other factories to produce their no brand goods.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree as the perspective that branded goods are better quality helps marketing of that particular product. Even though it is said that the percentage of people disagreeing that brand equals high quality is decreasing, people still have the sense that branded products are to be trusted and also gives a sense of safety. If people had to choose between branded or generic product, having no regards to price, majority would buy the branded one. As the perspective and the image people have on branded are different, it changes the decisions people make even if the two products are similar one another.

# data[].attributes.body
hello

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the article in part because when there's a really big brand already for a certain product, the brand will over shadow smaller, maybe newer, brands. So customers wouldn't get exposed the the smaller brands and thus even if the product of the smaller brand is better, people won't know it is better. However, the reason why brands get big in the first place is because they're doing something right and they're making good products. So in the way brand sizes do some what represent the quality of their products. Quality is also somewhat subjective because it depends on what aspect(s) the customer is looking in the product. For example if speaking about sound quality, Bose might be better than Beats however, Beats has the better form factor. Bose is higher quality in terms of sound and Beats is higher quality in terms of form. So even though smaller brands can be ignored despite of their quality, bigger brands also may have good products. :^) :)

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the article because if a brand is popular, people will trust and would tend to buy the product from that brand rather than a no-name brand. This is because consumer will not know how good the quality of the no-name brand product is. If there is two similar product from a named brand and a no-name brand, even if the price of the named brand is a little more expensive, consumer will still choose the named brand since they already know the quantity therefore I agree that perspective is essential in the pursuit of knowledge. However, they can take an opportunity cost to try out the no-name brand to test the quality of it.

# data[].attributes.body
hi

# data[].attributes.body
Dia dhuit

# data[].attributes.body
Please say hi

# data[].attributes.body
The knower’s perspective is essential in the pursuit of knowledge.' To what extent do you agree?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Peter Cade / Getty Images

No matter if we're talking about cereal, cough syrup or batteries, products featuring nationally recognized name brands tend to cost more than their generic store-brand counterparts. But the assumption that higher price means higher quality is fading.

The Great Recession brought with it new opportunities for supermarkets and drugstores to reach out to consumers who grew increasingly eager to save on everyday purchases. One of the simplest strategies to trim bills has been to switch to cheaper brands - or rather, generic "no-name" brands sold only at specific chains.

These products, also categorized as store brands or private-label goods, include Archer Farms, available only at Target, Whole Foods' 365 Everyday Value line and eponymous labels at CVS and Publix, among other stores. By late 2010, surveys indicated that 93% of consumers had changed their grocery-shopping habits because of the economic downturn, and many of them did so by trying out more store-branded goods, sampling everything from generic shampoo to generic frozen pizza.

( MORE: Season of Giving? Holiday Shopping Hits New Heights of Selfishness with 'Self-Gifting')

For the most part, consumers have been impressed by the no-name brands, with many of them scoring well in blind taste tests. (The taste tests referenced were for things like orange juice and soup, not shampoo - though it'd be really impressive if any shampoo scored well in a taste-off.) Consumers have also gotten clued in to the fact that many "generic" store-brand foods are actually made by the same companies that produce the higher-priced name-brand stuff. The foods have been known to come out of the same factories, with the same ingredients inside and everything, with the only difference being the label. The result is that often, switching to a store brand is an easy way to save 30% or so, without sacrificing quality.

Because store-brand sales are often more profitable than those of national brands, major chains have been putting more effort into bringing generics to the marketplace. It's been reported that the growth of store-brand sales at Safeway has been outpacing national brands by a ratio of 3 to 1, while nearly one-third of the new items introduced at Kroger stores are house-brand products.

As store brands inched up in popularity, private-label prices rose as well. Even so, it's still common for store brands to cost 25% to 30% less than their name-brand equivalents at full retail prices.

( MORE: Vote of Buy: 11 Weirdest Election-Themed Products for Sale)

What's the latest on store brands? A new "Private Label" report from the Integer Group offers some insights. Here are some highlights from the study:

Women are especially likely to check out store brands. Most shoppers scope out both private-label and name-brand products before making purchases: 77% of all consumers report doing so. But women are far more likely to compare store and name brands - 9 in 10 are known to look at both options before making selections.

Guys are cool with generic health-and-beauty products. Unsurprisingly, women care more than men when it comes to products that go on their skin and in their hair. While 74% of women report a preference for name-brand health-and-beauty merchandise, just 56% of men say they like name brands better.

Brands make a big difference with laundry detergent. Of the eight product categories covered in the study (including batteries, ice cream, milk, cereal, and cookies and snacks), consumers think brand names are most important when it comes to laundry detergent: 69% prefer name brands in the category.

But not so much with medicine and milk. Only 26% of consumers report a preference for name-brand over house-brand milk. As for aspirin, cough syrup and other over-the-counter medicines, 68% of shoppers say they actually prefer the generic store-brand versions - presumably because they know the ingredients are virtually identical to pricier name brands.

Race plays a role in name-brand preference. African Americans are more likely to report a preference for name-brand detergent (76%), cereal (72%), cookies (68%) and ice cream (62%), compared with whites (68%, 61%, 56% and 50%, respectively). More whites, on the other hand, go for name-brand batteries - 65%, compared with 57% for African Americans.

( MORE: Highly Educated Have Biggest Debt Problems)

Coupons and sales help boost name brands. Many of the shoppers refuse to switch to private-label products because of their impression that, with a little timing and strategy, generics aren't much cheaper. Of those who stick with name brands, 45% say they do so at least partly because they can find coupons for their brands (up from 35% in 2010), and 41% say their brand is often on sale (up from 36% two years ago).

Fewer people assume a brand name means top quality. This is truly the biggest takeaway - and a cause for concern among manufacturers who think they can be successful simply because they have a nationally known brand. In 2010, 57% of consumers agreed with the statement "Brand names are not better quality." More recently, the figure inched up to 64%.

And if brand names do not represent better quality, why would it be worth paying more for them?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brand Names Just Don't Mean as Much Anymore

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
No matter if we're talking about cereal, cough syrup or batteries, products featuring nationally recognized name brands tend to cost more than their generic store-brand counterparts. But the assumption that higher price means higher quality is fading. The Great Recession brought with it new opportunities for supermarkets and drugstores to reach out to consumers who grew increasingly eager to save on everyday purchases.