Fernando Barrozza: 123rf.com
Back in June, Mark Di Somma wrote an interesting little piece about brands as a temporary market phenomenon. In his post, “The Wisdom Of Thinking Like A Temporary Brand,” he writes, “It is perhaps the ultimate exit strategy – a company with a closing date.” And he cites a wonderful article in The New York Times about nonprofits like Malaria No More and Out2Play that are “closing because they have accomplished what they set out to do.”
As Americans—though this thought is by no means limited to people in our country—we tend to think of brands as eternal. Think about Procter & Gamble, Ford, and a host of others. And think about the huge, almost-frantic efforts younger brands make to strengthen themselves by creating a tireless group of “raving fans.” (Not the most fortunate of visuals, eh?)
Mr. Di Somma believes you’d do things very differently if your brand had a set expiry date and was brought to market with that expectation. You’d make faster decisions. You’d focus on building a brand with “enormous crave factor.” And you’d look for ways to do this without increasing costs. Your eye, of course, would be on the short term. (Not so bad if you’re planning to shut down anyway.) And if you were part of a larger organization, you could stagger brand portfolio end dates, to maintain a sense of movement and excitement.
As Mr. Di Somma puts it, “consumers crave the new, and yet we expect brands to just keep running. Perhaps that’s why they go stale.” Brand strategist Dan Herman suggests short-term creations are infused with energy for their brief existences and then they gracefully leave the stage—this last is my thought—before they’ve lost their magic.
Leave a Comment