When YOUR brands go bad.
Discussion
ukwill said:
This thread smacks of snobbishness (imo).
If you're so shallow that you would stop buying a brand simply because someone else/some other demographic chooses to, then that says a fair bit about you.
It might sound like that to you Will but it's real and it happens. In more ways than the literal examples above. If you're so shallow that you would stop buying a brand simply because someone else/some other demographic chooses to, then that says a fair bit about you.
"I used to love that song till they used it on that toilet paper advert"
And if your line of work means that you are soley responsible for a brand or product and it's success and profitability - then it's something you need to understand and avoid.
The examples used - were in order to provoke discussion.
t looking clothes and a sReading through some of the posts and now understanding where ParakitaMol is coming from with her original post I am going to come from a different angle - the perspective from a brand's point of view.
As someone has already mentioned previously a product brand cannot be waiting on just a certain demographic especially in these troubled times.
I suspect that if a brand wanted to maximise it's sales then if utilising a site such as Twitter to achieve those sales, well you would wouldn't you?
If I suggested to my shareholders that we don't do something that could maximise the sales of our product because it may tarnish that brand's overall repuation, I guarantee that those shareholders would still push to go ahead, rather than lose potential business.
As someone has already mentioned previously a product brand cannot be waiting on just a certain demographic especially in these troubled times.
I suspect that if a brand wanted to maximise it's sales then if utilising a site such as Twitter to achieve those sales, well you would wouldn't you?
If I suggested to my shareholders that we don't do something that could maximise the sales of our product because it may tarnish that brand's overall repuation, I guarantee that those shareholders would still push to go ahead, rather than lose potential business.
Romanymagic said:
If I suggested to my shareholders that we don't do something that could maximise the sales of our product because it may tarnish that brand's overall repuation, I guarantee that those shareholders would still push to go ahead, rather than lose potential business.
So they prefer short-term gain for potentially terminal long term losses? No wonder we're in the $hit. Romanymagic said:
Reading through some of the posts and now understanding where ParakitaMol is coming from with her original post I am going to come from a different angle - the perspective from a brand's point of view.
As someone has already mentioned previously a product brand cannot be waiting on just a certain demographic especially in these troubled times.
I suspect that if a brand wanted to maximise it's sales then if utilising a site such as Twitter to achieve those sales, well you would wouldn't you?
If I suggested to my shareholders that we don't do something that could maximise the sales of our product because it may tarnish that brand's overall repuation, I guarantee that those shareholders would still push to go ahead, rather than lose potential business.
Thanks Romany - that's exactly the issue. Except it's not so much reaching new markets with the likes of Twitter - that would be used to re-inforce existing relationships - the problem lies in understanding the % of people who HATE Twitter (like me) being potentially turned off.... As someone has already mentioned previously a product brand cannot be waiting on just a certain demographic especially in these troubled times.
I suspect that if a brand wanted to maximise it's sales then if utilising a site such as Twitter to achieve those sales, well you would wouldn't you?
If I suggested to my shareholders that we don't do something that could maximise the sales of our product because it may tarnish that brand's overall repuation, I guarantee that those shareholders would still push to go ahead, rather than lose potential business.
This can be particularly useful with service brands rather than products - where word of mouth recommendation is vital because there aren't products to sample, touch and feel.
Its an interesting discussion. Thanks.
I'm not into twitter, facebook or any of the social networking sites. I don't see any appeal in it for me. As for brand association being negative, I guess to a fair proportion of the demographic it could well be. I purchase Charles Tyrwhitt shirts and get pissed off with the amount of e-mail special offers I get from them. I have occassionally bought Tiffany jewellery for my wife and occassionally I get an e-mail from them with seasonal promotions and find they bother me much less.
It's not about the exclusivity of the brand image as that doesn't bother me as I like the products, it's just the manner and regularity of it. I guess to more image conscious brand "snob" buyers the social networking presence may have the same effect as CT sending me loads of e-mails with special offers.
It's not about the exclusivity of the brand image as that doesn't bother me as I like the products, it's just the manner and regularity of it. I guess to more image conscious brand "snob" buyers the social networking presence may have the same effect as CT sending me loads of e-mails with special offers.
900T-R said:
Romanymagic said:
If I suggested to my shareholders that we don't do something that could maximise the sales of our product because it may tarnish that brand's overall repuation, I guarantee that those shareholders would still push to go ahead, rather than lose potential business.
So they prefer short-term gain for potentially terminal long term losses? No wonder we're in the $hit. I won't go into the other factors, such as saving/creating jobs, increased revenue generation, chance to market/develop other products through profit etc. etc.
Romanymagic said:
Real world economics I am afraid.
I know, but that doesn't make it any more right. Focus on short-termist 'shareholder value' is IMO a big factor in what has been bringing countless basically sound enterprises to their knees, and a factor we need to deal with in some way to build a sustainable future for our Western economies. The notion of exclusivity is rather alluring.
Private memmbers clubs (the olde school ones, not the ones designed to facilitate the polishing of your knob), by invitation only( not credit cards... or airline style 'executive clubs' )
All have that mystery factor that makes them so much more desirable.
But wasn't it the late great and rather wonderful Groucho Marx who said
'I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.'
Private memmbers clubs (the olde school ones, not the ones designed to facilitate the polishing of your knob), by invitation only( not credit cards... or airline style 'executive clubs' )
All have that mystery factor that makes them so much more desirable.
But wasn't it the late great and rather wonderful Groucho Marx who said
'I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.'
I don't really understand how someone can have a fundamental hatred of something like Twitter in first place, so I'm perhaps not the best person to comment. It's just another in the plethora of ways we can communicate with each other. As with everything on the internet, if you don't want to look at it, you don't have to.
A brand associating with Twitter is not the same as a brand associating with the Burberry Cap Mafia. The former is a legitimate way for a brand to market itself, even the haters can see the potential (the OP and V8mate). The latter are human pond scum and, unfortunately, an unavoidable part of the fabric of the UK.
If there are people out there who take issue with Twitter (and similar) simply because it exists, they will probably also feel their urine simmer upon sight of a link to a Twitter feed on the website of whatever exclusive brand they are perusing. If they're a bit more sensible they'll issue a sigh of resignation and get on with not clicking the link.
A brand associating with Twitter is not the same as a brand associating with the Burberry Cap Mafia. The former is a legitimate way for a brand to market itself, even the haters can see the potential (the OP and V8mate). The latter are human pond scum and, unfortunately, an unavoidable part of the fabric of the UK.
If there are people out there who take issue with Twitter (and similar) simply because it exists, they will probably also feel their urine simmer upon sight of a link to a Twitter feed on the website of whatever exclusive brand they are perusing. If they're a bit more sensible they'll issue a sigh of resignation and get on with not clicking the link.
drivin_me_nuts said:
The notion of exclusivity is rather alluring.
Private memmbers clubs (the olde school ones, not the ones designed to facilitate the polishing of your knob), by invitation only( not credit cards... or airline style 'executive clubs' )
All have that mystery factor that makes them so much more desirable.
But wasn't it the late great and rather wonderful Groucho Marx who said
'I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.'
Thank you - this is exactly the type of niche 'service' sector that I am interested in.Private memmbers clubs (the olde school ones, not the ones designed to facilitate the polishing of your knob), by invitation only( not credit cards... or airline style 'executive clubs' )
All have that mystery factor that makes them so much more desirable.
But wasn't it the late great and rather wonderful Groucho Marx who said
'I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.'
pedantlewis said:
A brand associating with Twitter is not the same as a brand associating with the Burberry Cap Mafia.
900T-R said:
Romanymagic said:
Real world economics I am afraid.
I know, but that doesn't make it any more right. Focus on short-termist 'shareholder value' is IMO a big factor in what has been bringing countless basically sound enterprises to their knees, and a factor we need to deal with in some way to build a sustainable future for our Western economies. 
agreed! ukwill said:
This thread smacks of snobbishness (imo).
If you're so shallow that you would stop buying a brand simply because someone else/some other demographic chooses to, then that says a fair bit about you.
Brand loyalty is inherently snobbish and shallow anyway.If you're so shallow that you would stop buying a brand simply because someone else/some other demographic chooses to, then that says a fair bit about you.
Back O/T (now the OP's explained exactly what she's after): While I hate twitter and the other social network sites (simply because it encourages people to believe that anyone cares about their banal little lives) I couldn't care less if a brand I favour chooses to use them. Principally because I tend to favour function over fashion, so as long as standards remain the same it makes no difference to me.
mechsympathy said:
ukwill said:
This thread smacks of snobbishness (imo).
If you're so shallow that you would stop buying a brand simply because someone else/some other demographic chooses to, then that says a fair bit about you.
Brand loyalty is inherently snobbish and shallow anyway.If you're so shallow that you would stop buying a brand simply because someone else/some other demographic chooses to, then that says a fair bit about you.
Back O/T (now the OP's explained exactly what she's after): While I hate twitter and the other social network sites (simply because it encourages people to believe that anyone cares about their banal little lives) I couldn't care less if a brand I favour chooses to use them. Principally because I tend to favour function over fashion, so as long as standards remain the same it makes no difference to me.
I'm not sure that brand loyalty is inherently snobbish/shallow. I tend to stick with a few brands simply because I appreciate the quality and have no reason to change. Take my vacuum cleaner - it's a Dyson. It's done it's job perfectly over the past 3-4yrs. If it brokedown I'd probably buy another one - simply because of my experience with the brand. I could go and buy a Dyson-clone for far cheaper I'm sure, but would it last as long? Would it be as good? I don't know, and I don't wish to know. Now if my new Dyson kept breaking down and caused me hassle, then I'd have to re-evaluate my loyalty to the brand. In a nutshell that's pretty much my criteria for anything.
ukwill said:
I'm not sure that brand loyalty is inherently snobbish/shallow. I tend to stick with a few brands simply because I appreciate the quality and have no reason to change. Take my vacuum cleaner - it's a Dyson. It's done it's job perfectly over the past 3-4yrs. If it brokedown I'd probably buy another one - simply because of my experience with the brand. I could go and buy a Dyson-clone for far cheaper I'm sure, but would it last as long? Would it be as good? I don't know, and I don't wish to know. Now if my new Dyson kept breaking down and caused me hassle, then I'd have to re-evaluate my loyalty to the brand. In a nutshell that's pretty much my criteria for anything.
I should have added the caveat that brand loyalty for functional reasons isn't.ukwill said:
I'm not sure that brand loyalty is inherently snobbish/shallow. I tend to stick with a few brands simply because I appreciate the quality and have no reason to change. Take my vacuum cleaner - it's a Dyson. It's done it's job perfectly over the past 3-4yrs. If it brokedown I'd probably buy another one - simply because of my experience with the brand. I could go and buy a Dyson-clone for far cheaper I'm sure, but would it last as long? Would it be as good? I don't know, and I don't wish to know. Now if my new Dyson kept breaking down and caused me hassle, then I'd have to re-evaluate my loyalty to the brand. In a nutshell that's pretty much my criteria for anything.
Oh Will,You actually fell for the whole Dyson thing! AND say that brand loyalty isn't shallow.
I love you now.Romanymagic said:
BMW is a good case in point. I have always liked them (yes even the weirder looking Bangle designs), despite the various associations people make with those who choose to drive them. I will continue to purchase BMW's and I don't care who else is associated with them or what people may think of me because I drive a BMW. Life is too short.
I bought mine in spite of the brand image, not because of it. In fact I bought it in spite of the looks, too. I got it because it ticks so many boxes; RWD, handles well, reliable, comfortable inside, goes well, economical etc.The brand image and the looks were the only negatives, and I tried to remedy the looks issue with some nice wheels and M-sport gubbins. Still a 'marmite' car though.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff