The Uncomfortable Conversation, No Not That One

Problem: Guys are not social about their personal grooming

Men do not talk about grooming or the products they use to do so. Example, there is sometimes some ribbing when a spot is missed shaving. This ends conversations before they start.

A brand should create a series of commercials (Internet spots etc) that spark a conversation. These spots should be about how men are uncomfortable talking about this issue. Men should want to look their best and to be their "Own Best Self". Not every guy looks like Brad Pitt or George Clooney. Every man can look his "Own Best Self".

Looking OBS takes some work. There are products on the market that make it faster, easier and more effective. (Insert Brand Name) is the company that has you covered. IBN has products that work right every time.

The conversation would lead to guys asking each other what they use for shaving, skin conditioning, shampoo etc. Conversation is what happens when you get someone to ask a question. When people are doing it (personal grooming) well, they enjoy their efforts being recognized.

Note 1: Perhaps their could be a nomination/contest for the best groomed man in (US, Canada, etc).

Note 2: OBS could be "One Best Self" too.

BRANDS, ECONOMY & CONSUMER BEHAVIOR

NOTE: This post is written from a Food Marketing angle.

BrandWeek has an interesting article about brands that do well during turbulent economic conditions. It is clear that some brands or segments do better. More meals at home means firms that are ingredient or raw material [Home cooking] oriented should see sales growth. Firms in food service will see shrinking margins and declining revenue as the total [food service] pie becomes smaller.

Assumption: Consumers pull back on dining expenses in an uncertain economy

Back to the article... Why Some Brands Cheer a Sour Economy

Likewise, Wal-Mart, which seemed to be losing brand power only a year ago, today is poised to reap the rewards of consumers who are looking to save some cash. In September, as same-store sales for Kohl's and Nordstrom fell 5.5% and 9.6%, respectively, Wal-Mart's rose 2.4%. Author and branding expert Rob Frankel thinks the retailer's gains will closely mirror the economy: "Wal-Mart is the brand that reminds people they are poor. Nobody shops at Wal-Mart because they want to; they shop there because they have to. The minute the economy recovers, Wal-Mart's sales will drop like a brick."

The snippet above [Ed. bold added] indicates that the writer believes Walmart is a brand for the poor and that people only shop there because they have to. Thirty years ago Walmart was a relatively small regional retailer. The US economy has grown tremendously in the last 30 years. People have continued to shop there during this time frame. Walmart had yearly revenue of $348 billion in 2007.

As people gain in affluence they increase spending at retailers that make them 'feel' like they are part of another demographic 'the Affluent'. Costco is an example of a firm that has done a tremendous job selling that feeling to Americans [some would suggest Starbucks as another, $4 coffee drinks].

Now that people are shopping Walmart more out of need, they are beginning to see what a tremendous value they present to consumers. Category best sellers at much lower prices than other retailers. When the economy picks up [in the next 12-18 months?] people will be hesitant to go back to their freewheeling spending. Walmart will retain most of these new shoppers. The more a shopper saves by shopping Walmart the more money that is left for other things.

Where these saved dollars may go...

• Dining out
• Debt reduction
• College
• Books
• Internet
• Computers
• Travel

Questions:

• What percent of new Walmart shoppers will defect when the broad economy recovers?
• Are you cutting back on eating out?
• Are you preparing more home meals?
• How much do you budget, generally, for dining out, now vs. a year ago?
  

PS: This post was written before reading the comments on the site with the original story. There were ten comments at the time this was posted. Read them, you might find them insightful.

Ed: Walmart has changed the way their name is presented. Formatting of the Brand Week section was left as published.

BRAND AND LOGO DISCUSSION

From: Retail Wire

7/1/08
Wal-Mart's Logo Change (...er, we mean Walmart)

Below are my comments to the discussion.


Brands--and Logos--are what PEOPLE think of them, not what the brand thinks it is.

If you have not already, check out Brand Tags. Participate at this link: http://www.brandtags.net/ and see all brands at this link: http://www.brandtags.net/browse.php

I think you will find the information enlightening.

Hopefully, Brand Tags adds a before and after feature (on a time line of some kind).

Walmart would make an excellent test case. One would think that Walmart will change all their logos in very quick fashion. If they do so, it will be interesting to see if people tag Walmart differently after the change.



Questions

• Have you been to Brand Tags?
• What are your thoughts on branding and logo relationships?

DISTRIBUTION CHANNEL; RIGHT OR WRONG?

Premium products should be available through a channel that has an upscale or premium image. Brands spend a considerable amount of time and money creating an image [a story] for consumers.

When a firm gets the items below to align, there will be synergies for lack of a better word.

• Right product
• Right place
• Right promotion
  
• Right price
  
• Right image
• Right positioning
• Right consumers

When a firm gets these right they are hitting on all cylinders. Sales can reach their potential and perhaps even surpass them. How is that possible you ask. People outside the target market will see what a remarkable [Purple Cow] thing you have and they will be drawn to it.

The reason for this post is what arrived in the mail today [See picture nearby]. You get them too, sales promotion fliers and coupons. The one that jumped off the page was for Sanders Desert Topping. Here in Michigan, Sanders has been around almost forever. It is positioning to be a premium product and brand.

The problem comes from the retail channel. The ad [see page 4] was for ACO Hardware. ACO has super deals on food products in their ads. Regular price is $5.99 and the sale price is $3.99, a $2 savings. ACO and Sanders will probably move a lot of product with this coupon. The inclusion of an expiration date also adds to the consumers sense of urgency for fear of missing out on a good deal.

Upscale says limited availability, unique, quality, [fill in the blank]. There can be wide distribution and upscale. A good example is Burt's Bees products. They have [or have had] solo displays in CVS, Borders and other stores.

It appears that Sanders is purposely pursuing this channel. To get in the ad the manufacturer generally has to pay in some way. Price discounts for bulk buying for example [discounts devalue brands]. This reduces margins while at the same time increases the velocity of product movement. Short run profit may increase but adversely affect brand strength. Sanders would be better off not distributing in this channel.

What are your thoughts on branding and distribution channels?