"Brand Apocalypse"

[chapeaunoir]

www.marketplacepulse.com/articles/brand-apocalypse


The death of retail is never going to materialize, but the struggles brick-and-mortar stores are facing now are going to change it. This is not caused by Amazon - the often quoted villain of retail - but instead by over-expansion and debt. The retail apocalypse will continue to bring closures for years to come, yet it will make the surviving retailers better.



But this is not the point. 


The fact that branding and brand competition is relatively new is both true and interesting. 

[thekloset]

branding and brand competition is nothing new, and certainly predates the madmen-esque days of advertising. it has certainly been around longer than the last 50 years (1960s) and while maybe not defined as such, been around for the last 100 years (1918) and surely has been around as long as there have been two similar sellers or merchandise.

ask any snake oil salesman.

Macy's vs Gimbels--circa 1887.

Levi's--late 18xx's

i'd guess any caveman who was "selling" the same sharpened stones as the next guy.

its hardly a relatively new concept

----------------------

i'm not sure what i think about the retail landscape. i do think that any online presence will be the strong suit of a brand, and a physical location will be a nicety...and perhaps an added expense many will not be able to justify. brands themselves will continue to develop as always--using strong advertising/marketing...only continuing along the social media, hivemind and celebutante path instead of more traditional means--print ads and entertainment venues (television/radio spots) will wane.

but i guess we will see. its going to be an interesting ride for sure and i fully agree that winners will take all and losers will be long forgotten to history....in another 50 years, macys will be an entry on a buzzfeed list and be more remembered for a parade than a department store.

[val2525]

Apr 11, 2018 19:58:34 GMT chapeaunoir said:

I think he's talking about the brand itself being a selling tool rather than the item that is branded. It's a subtle difference but lead to a different type of marketing - emotional attachment/loyalty to the brand itself rather than the object so branded. Being able to introduce other products into a particular brand would carry along these attachments. This is the top-down branding scheme that is being changed. 

I think the brands this would apply to have shot themselves in the foot by overexpansion.

[chapeaunoir]

Apr 11, 2018 21:59:02 GMT val2525 said:

Apr 11, 2018 19:58:34 GMT chapeaunoir said:

I think he's talking about the brand itself being a selling tool rather than the item that is branded. It's a subtle difference but lead to a different type of marketing - emotional attachment/loyalty to the brand itself rather than the object so branded. Being able to introduce other products into a particular brand would carry along these attachments. This is the top-down branding scheme that is being changed. 

I think the brands this would apply to have shot themselves in the foot by overexpansion.

Yes. In fact, the entire retail sector. There's also a lot of sameness, at least that I see in the clothing sector. I admit that I'm a bit fashion blind, but I can't tell the difference in any of these fast fashion companies' designs, and they dump so much of this stuff here from the off-shore sweat shops and garment factories that there's a huge surplus, i.e., H&M.