Richard
writes about the rebirth of
Woolworth’s in the UK. Removed from the den of serendipity it once was, it’s now been replaced with a rather simple ecommerce site trading on the fading memories of the fledgling brand. In Canada, struggling Woolworth’s were turned into clearance centers called “
The Bargain! Shop” in an effort to turn around failing stores. Now, TBS is growing and Woolworth’s is a decade removed.
Same goes for Circuit City in the States, similarly replaced by a website.
And now Starbucks, struggling to regain its credentials as an indie oasis, has decided to give up in spots and is now testing the conversion failing stores into those intended to capture the spirit of independent coffee houses from name to atmosphere, calling the first “15th Avenue Coffee and Tea” and selling beer and wine in the Seattle test location.
"Victrola Coffee Roasters saw the Starbucks people a lot more often.
"They spent the last 12 months in our store up on 15th [Avenue] with
these obnoxious folders that said, 'Observation,' " said Victrola owner
Dan Ollis."
But these changes do bring up a few questions concerning the nature of brands. Does recognizability trump the skepticism of a brand in a new outfit? Can a shell of a brand be bought and sold as easily today as it was yesterday? How much importance should be placed on the guts of the brand as opposed to just the façade? Or more importantly, can a brand survive by a façade alone?
More pointedly – where is a brand’s meaning derived? And when a brand, like objects, become another data point on our social graphs, can the soul of a brand really be bought and sold? Particularly if the soul itself isn’t really something you can own in the first place.
I suspect the answer to this, as with most things, is not so simple. Meaning is from the product, from the behavior of the employees and management, the color of sign and quality of communication, the proximity to one’s house and the vehemence of opinion from friends. So if a brand’s meaning is a cobbling of experience, maybe it’s just easier sometimes to start with a couple puzzle pieces in our court, or in Starbucks case, removing a couple that work against us, and try again at a starting place of an unknown somewhere rather than a known nowhere.
Comments