Towards the end of my time in Berlin, I went to a concert with some friends, at the Passionskirche in Prenzlauer Berg. The band was the Kings of Convenience, a sweet Norwegian indie-pop duo. The opener was this woman whose voice sounded really familiar--a friend figured out that she does the dreamy, looping vocal on Broken Social Scene's (awesome) song, "Anthems for a 17-Year-Old Girl." Anyway, she was amazing--I bought her CD from her after the show, and it's been one of my favorite albums ever since.
Now this woman is pretty famous. She's Feist, and she's remained one of my favorite musicians. Her first major album, Let It Die, is totally brilliant. I skipped her next effort, Open Season, which is basically remixes of Let It Die singles, but now she's come out with a new original album. I've heard some of the songs already (search for her on YouTube, her videos are great, and "1 2 3 4" is from the new album), and I know I want to buy it.
The other day, it was staring me in the face at a Starbucks counter. It even had a sticker offering two free iTunes downloads with purchase. I was, quietly, appalled--there's a sort of possessive feeling to loving an artist whom nobody knows, and when that artist gets famous there's ambivalence--on the one hand, I think she's great! I want her to succeed! And on the other hand...well, Starbucks. It's such a symbol of mass consumption, and it seems to imply that she's appealing because she's bland rather than because she's awesome. On the other hand, is buying it at Virgin any less mass-consumption tinged? They don't call it "Megastore" for nothing, you know. (Maybe I'll trek down to my real favorite record store, Other Music, and buy it there, just to really make it count.) (Clearly, this doesn't matter all that much.)
Anyway, I didn't buy it. I know that I'm going to buy it, and in not buying it at Starbucks I'll forfeit the "two free downloads!" perk, which is a great one, but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. I can't be The Girl Who Buys Music At Starbucks (though apparently I don't have a problem with being The Girl Who Liked That Band Before That Band Was Cool).
I'm just totally fascinated by my overwhelming reluctance to go for the better deal here. Evidently, not buying my CDs at Starbucks seems to be worth $2 per album to me.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
How Much is a Deal Worth?
Monday, April 23, 2007
Gen Y-ers Like Our Brands Simple
This survey by a marketing group found that "Gen Y-ers" (those born after 1978, in this arbitrary definition) prefer brands that are simple and straightforward. And I have to say, the brands on that list with which I'm familiar are my preferred brands. In fact, they list all of the national brands about which I feel actively positive, including the top three: Apple, Trader Joe's, and JetBlue (further down the list are other brands I like, including Ben & Jerry's, Whole Foods, Target, and Converse). The only brand on the list I actively dislike is American Apparel, which I loathe for its skeezy sex ads (and for its skeezy CEO) (not to mention its inability to conceive of women over a size 10). I'm not that familiar with Red Stripe beer, but I admit I do find the "Hooray, beer!" ads charming, and for pretty much the reasons the survey describes: the branding isn't too elaborate or aspirational; it's just beer (hooray, beer!) without any bells and whistles. None of the classic advertising "You'll sleep with this hot babe and earn the respect of your peers if you drink our nasty beer!" gambits.
This is really interesting to me. What is it that attracts me (and my generation) to these companies? For me, there's a certain transparency to all of them--the "qualities" of the brand (i.e. the way the brand characterizes itself) are associated with the qualities (and quality) of its products, and none of them are known for terrible customer service or complicated corporate procedure. Some of them are also explicitly "in touch with the youth"--i.e. Ben & Jerry's new Colbert Report-themed flavor and the weirdo lower-cased ramblings on Vitamin Water bottles--and that counts for something, too. Mostly, though, I really do think all of these companies sell good products, generally maintain higher-than-average levels of corporate responsibility, and don't gussy it up too much.
I wonder if this apparent preference will drive future trends in branding and corporate policy--if it does, I'm cautiously optimistic that the effects will be positive ones.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Brand Identity=Your Identity. Didn't You Know?
I just got a call from a consumer survey group, which—well, I don't know how they got my cell phone number, but it was probably because I filled out a bunch of forms on the internet, and now I'm kicking myself. A highly disinterested-sounding (and rightly so) phone rep asked me questions about my brand choices, settling on the topic of cigarettes. I'm a light smoker—a pack a month, maybe—so I treat myself to cigarettes that don't make me foul-smelling and vaguely nauseated: Nat Shermans, about $8 a pack. The rep didn't recognize the brand name, but proceeded to ask me questions about Marlboro and Camel, including:
"Which brand is a fun brand?"
"Which brand is always introducing new products?" (Is that good or bad?)
and the best of the bunch:
"Which brand helps you express your individuality?"
My response: "Definitely neither."
I have a whole bunch of thoughts about the way in which "individuality" is a notion that's been coopted by branding, but right now I'm too gobsmacked to be articulate. Which brand helps you express your individuality, indeed.
