In the comments section of my first post on Good Enough, Seth says:
What drives irrational humans to make choices are the Free Prizes. We assemble a list of all the options that are "good enough" and then we choose the one we choose for reasons that have little or nothing to do with our needs. Instead, we choose based on our wants.
That means your offering must be "good enough" to make the list. And over time, that bar keeps getting raised. Hyundai, for example, just beat Toyota in the JD Power quality ratings. This means that virtually all cars are now excellent and virtually all cars are good enough. So we're going to pick a car for a reason that has nothing whatever to do with its ability to safely and reliably go from place A to place B.
I think this brings up a good branding issue. Seth, you're right; no one is going to buy a car based on how well it gets them from point A to point B. But if, for example, Volvo is focusing its brand strategy and message on Reliability, then Volvo darn well better be the most reliable car on the market. And for consumers looking for reliability, Volvo would then the most obvious choice. The phone company client I mentioned earlier was 'good enough' at providing phone service, but not nearly as good as the incumbent provider. But we found that small business owners really wanted a phone company that delivered on promises. So now they're working to be the best at customer service and delivering on promises, not to be the best phone provider overall.
So I'd second your comment that products need to be good enough in general, but I'd add that they must be the best at the attribute around which their brand is built. And this core attribute is likely a good 'edge' to begin brainstorming on Free Prizes.