Reply Response to ‘Gibbs and the problems of satisfaction and well-being’ Paul Gibbs n I appreciate the effort that my interlocutor has made in developing an argument in response to my paper. I shall take it that the key issues to answer relate to:  the essence of exchange and satisfaction to the practices and purpose of marketing;  the normative responsibilities of marketers in how they respond to satisfaction as well-being; and  the role the market does, or ought to play, in distribution. There may, however, be a fourth concern that deals with the contextual location of the paper. The paper is in a Business Ethics journal and the argument I intended to make was a normative one. It is about looking at the value of what is marketed in a consumerist society and its worth regarding the well-being of consumers. It is grounded in the existing practice of marketing but argues, perhaps idealistically, for marketers, as professionals, to exert a professional moral responsibility. It does not assume that marketers will follow the path of caring for humanity but suggests they do. In making this suggestion, the nature of the market itself changes as products that might provide pleasure at the cost of well- being – for example, excessive alcohol consump- tion due to low market penetration pricing strategies – cease to be offered. In this sense, the paper is not a marketing paper but an attempt to reflect the ethical responsibility of marketers. I also do not hold marketers exclusively culpable, or culpable beyond what is reasonable to expect in respect of self-interest, but believe they are in a critical position to influence the consumer and the creator of the product or service. If only for this clarity I am grateful to my interlocutor. Turning to the three core issues, I will start by engaging with the petrol example used to infer exchange rather than satisfaction. As my colleague considers any marketing transaction, it should be understood, at its essence, as an exchange where a form of money is exchanged for goods (petrol), rendering the notion of satisfaction unnecessary for the successful completion of the transaction. As the basis of a theoretical market economy I would agree. However, that does not occur and has never actually occurred and, if it should, marketing would be unnecessary as each one would have access to the market and have perfect knowledge of the conditions of the said market. However, from a real-world consumerist situation other issues do, or could be created to, influence that exchange so that it is contextualised in an array of desires, the satisfaction of which may extend the relationship between buyer and seller. The service that the petrol station provides enhances the brand of the petrol supplied and/or of the station that enhances the experience. The petrol is not now viewed as a commodity; rather it satisfies the desire to go somewhere, meet someone n Professor of Work Based Education at the Institute for Work-Based Learning, Middlesex University, London, UK. r 2009 The Author Journal compilation r 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main St, Malden, MA 02148, USA 412 Business Ethics: A European Review Volume 18 Number 4 October 2009