Re: Branding and marketing

From: Geri Stunz Konstantin <geri_at_virtualadv.com>
Date: Fri 12 Jan 2001 11:48:53 -0500

PATRICK CARLSON <patrickcarlson_at_cfl.rr.com> WROTE:
> ... branding of services is common
> almost as common as branding a product.

This so-called "branding of services" is NOT branding.

PATRICK CARLSON <patrickcarlson_at_cfl.rr.com> WROTE:
> Think Fed-Ex,Visa or AT&T and Yahoo or AOl as net
> examples.

I wouldn't - It is NOT branding. I used to work on AT&T
when I was at Y&R 20 years ago. AT&T did not do
branding, not even on their products. They still
don't.

PATRICK CARLSON <patrickcarlson_at_cfl.rr.com> WROTE:
> And actually successful internet ventures will tend to
> have low overhead, and therefore no physical product.

I disagree with your baseless assumption that
successful internet ventures have low overhead, thus no
physical products. I have several clients with
successful internet businesses who have low overhead
and lots of products. But they have no brands,
therefore you don't do branding for them.

NICK WREDEN <netbrand_at_bellsouth.net> WROTE:
> Let's first define a brand as a shared emotional
> commitment to an offering (either product or service)
> based on trust and loyalty.

Sorry Nick, I respectfully disagree with your
definition and your comments. A brand is a particular
make of goods- check the dictionary.

NICK WREDEN <netbrand_at_bellsouth.net> WROTE:
> Consumers are willing to pay more for a brand. It increases
> retention. And it drives favorable reputation and
> word-of-mouth.

Consumers will not necessarily pay more for a brand. A
Hyundai is a brand. And I don't know a soul who will
pay more for a Hyundai than they have to.... Also a
brand does not necessarily drive a favorable
reputation, etc. - look at Firestone....

I wrote that you do branding for products, not services.

In response ...

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> Um, that's totally and completely wrong. No offense,
> just calling it like I see it. Brands turn users into
> evanglists, and you can evangelize a service just as
> easily as a product. Maybe moreso.

Uh- Rob, that's totally and completely wrong. No
offense, just calling it like I know it and have done
it successfully for over 30 years. (What do evangelists
have to do with this???)

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> I always point out that the ultimate success of a
> well-branded service is to have a prospect say,
> "I don't car how much they cost -- just get them
> on this job. I don't trust anyone else!"

Sorry - that's not branding.

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> Branding is branding. Advertising merely raises the
> awareness of the brand. The two obviously should be
> compatible, but don't ever mistake one of the other.

Your definition of Advertising is an insult to all
Advertising pros out there. Advertising is much more
than you claim - maybe bad advertising merely raises
awareness of a brand, but without good advertising any
brand will cease to exist. A brand can exist without
branding. You, my friend, are way off on this one.

Re: Keds Brand Sneakers & Wheaties being instantly
recognizable as such:

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> But how does that make you choose it?

It doesn't. That's not the purpose of branding.
That's the purpose of advertising.

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> Branding is critical to rapid integration of
> new products, too. That's how they get up to speed in
> an existing marketplace. The brand is how people
> distinguish the old stuff from the new.

Uh - absolutely not. I guess you think branding will
allow you to distinguish between Tide and the new
improved Tide. Sorry. Not so. I had also said "Brand
building encompasses a variety of advertising and
marketing techniques. Branding encompasses specific and
usually visual or audible techniques to in essence
create a Pavlovian response to certain stimulae to
impress a Brand name product in someone's mind. You
think Tide you think clean. Tide owns "clean". No one
else can touch it."

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> Guess that leaves Clorox and Fab and Pine
> Sol out, eh?

Yes it does - have a look at their ads.

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> More people confused as to what branding is and how
> it works. But just because they got it wrong
> doesn't invalidate the discipline.

What they did was not branding. Just bad advertising.

I additionally said " Brand loyalty is not branding
either. Brand loyalty is built up through favorable
price points, superior products and tangible consumer
benefits. This can be accomplished more quickly than
branding."

ROB FRANKEL <rob_at_robfrankel.com> WROTE:
> Wrongoritos, mon ami. You're brush is too broad. I
> can make the same claim with premium price points on
> products and services with parity quality. In fact, I
> often have to.

My brush is narrow Rob - like the real definition of
branding. I was firmly told once by a Johnson & Johnson
client years ago that I was confusing branding with
advertising brand building techniques and I will never
make that mistake again!

Geri (Geraldine) Stunz Konstantin
Principal
Stunz | Konstantin
Advertising | Website Development | Search Engines
Geri_at_StunzKonstantin.com





Received on Fri Jan 12 2001 - 10:48:53 CST