Brands are the Invention of Human Greed to Exploit Others

I really had a great time doing this debate and the topic posted by my opponent and co-debater is really interesting. However, everything must come to an end. After this concluding rebuttal, I request the would-be readers to reread the entire debate and analyze the parameters and technicalities. I. REITERATION OF THE ISSUE TO BE RESOLVED 1.1 As I have always saying, the issue is simple and clear: Whether or not 'All the brands we use now are the invention of human intellect to exploit others.' 1.2 For the sake of this debate, this is the issue hat should be resolved. II. SUMMARY OF THE PROCEEDINGS 2.1 The issue was presented by the pro but without further discussion. 2.2 The herein Contender accepted the debate and presented the definitions of the 2 terms, namely: BRAND and EXPLOIT. 2.3 Contender argued that 'BRAND' is neutral and served for the sole purpose of assigning names for certain products. 2.4 Contender concluded that since 'BRAND' is neutral, it is, then, not the reason for the high prices of some products. 2.5 Pro conceded with the definition and accepted that 'BRAND' is neutral and presented practical examples to argue that 'BRAND' is used to exploit the people. 2.6 Contender reiterated the issue and discussed that 'BRAND' is not the cause of high prices and established the facts presented in the case. 2.7 Contender presented the formula to compute for the price of a certain product which the pro did not refute. 2.8 Contender concluded that it is the MARKETING/ADVERTISEMENTS which causes the high prices of some products and established that the expense used for the MARKETING/ADVERTISEMENTS of a certain BRAND is the reason for its high price and not the BRAND per se. 2.9 Pro, for his concluding rebuttal, argued that BRAND is used to mislead the consumers and concluded that Quality matters, the Name never. III. DISCUSSION 3.1 First of all, my opponent is guilty of prejudice. He wants to establish that popular brands are just misleading the consumers and that popular brands are over priced. He failed to see that some brands earned their popularity and prestige out of their efforts to make quality products. 3.2 Secondly, my opponent is vehemently underestimating the consumers. He is implying that the consumers are not good in choosing the commodities to buy and that they can be easily deceived with the prestige of some brands. He failed to see that the consumers are smart; that they patronize some brands because of the sense of trust they got from the very first time they buy a product with a certain brand and that is because of the quality of the product. 3.3 Thirdly, my opponent failed to see the social construct and psychology of using a product of a popular brand. 3.4 Finally, the issue is Whether or not 'All the brands we use now are the invention of human intellect to exploit others.' Since my opponent conceded that BRAND is neutral and used solely for assigning names for certain products, he, then, accepted the other side of what he is supposed to be arguing. IV. CONCLUSION 4.1 With all the above premises, it is then established that BRAND is neutral. It is not the reason why some products of a certain brand cost more than others. It could be the MARKETING/ADVERTISEMENTS for that certain brand of a certain product,but NOT the BRAND per se. V. PRAYER 5.1 WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of the would-be readers: a) to consider the technicalities and analysis of the issue and not be swayed of the common and popular notion about top or popular brands; b) to make a personal and deep analysis of the issue; c) to think of possible remedies with regards to the issue of high prices of more popular products like the possibility of imposing legal cost limits to marketing/advertisements; and d) to render the judgment in favor of the con. I would like to thank again my co-debater for posting a very nice topic and encourage other debaters to continue discussing topics of great social relevance. Your name is neutral until you make it otherwise.