Brand contradictions
Walking into a damp, mouldy 'clearance sale' hall in a shopping place, I encountered two of India's premium men's clothing brands on sale. The pitch? If I buy one, I get a 30% discount which goes up to 40% on a purchase of two, 50% for three. The brands, Arrow and Van Heusen were packed in crumpled plastic covers, obviously so, having been 'handled' many a times by browsing buyers.
What's ironic is that, the very same day's TOI supplement, Times Life carried Ads taken out by premium men's wear clothing brands that included one of the brand mentioned above, namely, Ven Heusen. The Ad copy got my goat. 'Adrenaline commute, pulse racing meetings, wowed clients, cowed rivals, celebratory jam-ups'. Whatever that means. It had the image of a cool dude staring back at me with a look that got me started on a hiccup.
Brands embody a promise. It makes sense for brands to embody a single promise and to consistently back that promise, both in terms of communiques and real time action. So, if Van Heusen stood for whatever that copy meant, what was it doing in a crumpled pack, in a mouldy exhibition sort of a hall, selling at half its original price?
Ditto for the rest of the brands. They must maintain the integrity of what they stand for. In an era of brand commoditisation, that's difficult, yet must be done by innovating on factors of differentiation. A brand must never, through it actions contradict what it stands for.
What's ironic is that, the very same day's TOI supplement, Times Life carried Ads taken out by premium men's wear clothing brands that included one of the brand mentioned above, namely, Ven Heusen. The Ad copy got my goat. 'Adrenaline commute, pulse racing meetings, wowed clients, cowed rivals, celebratory jam-ups'. Whatever that means. It had the image of a cool dude staring back at me with a look that got me started on a hiccup.
Brands embody a promise. It makes sense for brands to embody a single promise and to consistently back that promise, both in terms of communiques and real time action. So, if Van Heusen stood for whatever that copy meant, what was it doing in a crumpled pack, in a mouldy exhibition sort of a hall, selling at half its original price?
Ditto for the rest of the brands. They must maintain the integrity of what they stand for. In an era of brand commoditisation, that's difficult, yet must be done by innovating on factors of differentiation. A brand must never, through it actions contradict what it stands for.
Comments
However, if ya're into women (rather women's clothes),4 designer wear, tat're totallee branded with sum fashion designer chica label- believe me, itz not worth payin tat shit- 4000 bucks 4 a fuscia buckle dress, hmmm even if i were kareena kapoor/malaika arora/posh spice, I'd still play with the idea of flickin the same frm a factory outlet/a cheaper store n flaunt it neways[:)][;)]
I stick by you! really..if i can get something at a throwaway..i wont play with the idea..i'd jump at it!
:)