00:00:00
Hello and welcome. You're listening to Marketing Matters on the Wharton Podcast
00:00:06
Network, our weekly podcast where we analyze the latest in advertising, marketing, customer behavior, new
00:00:12
product launches, branding, retailing, etc. I'm Barbara Khan, the Patty and JH
00:00:18
Baker Professor of Marketing, and I'm joined by my co-host, Americus Reed, the
00:00:23
Whitney M. Young Jr. Professor of Marketing and the brand identity theorist. Hello, Americas.
00:00:29
>> Hi, Barbara. Okay, so uh real quick. So, I've done probably nine interviews on
00:00:34
Cracker Barrel. I have to get your I got I just got to get your hot take real fast.
00:00:39
>> It's amazing to me. You wouldn't believe this, but I'm actually doing research on
00:00:43
those kind of minimalist brand logos, and it's so clear to me that if you have
00:00:48
a logo that's steeped in legacy and history, you don't throw the whole thing
00:00:53
away. And I heard your um your talks on all sorts of media and your basic point is did you test the damn thing?
00:01:01
>> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. But it's amazing though, Barbara, because I grew up in
00:01:05
the South and uh I've been to Cracker Barrel stores a million times and just I
00:01:09
don't know. It just seems as though to your point and this question of not really understanding not only your brand
00:01:16
identity, what's in the DNA of your brand, but also your customers and it just seems like a mistake that just
00:01:20
keeps on getting made over and over again. And then the other point real quick, Barbara, thoughts on this. A
00:01:26
100,000 person digital board of directors who steps in and says, "You're
00:01:32
not doing that. Then you go back." What do you think about this? This is incredible.
00:01:37
>> You know, it's very interesting and I'm really glad you brought it up because
00:01:40
today we have with us Daphne Howland who's a senior reporter at Retail Dive.
00:01:46
Hello, Daphne. >> Hey, it's so nice to be here. >> Hey, Daphne. And we're gonna ask you to
00:01:51
weigh in because what Americas is talking about is like these legacy brands and what when they throw their
00:01:59
their their DNA away and then they go back and when the internet responds and says what the hell are you guys doing?
00:02:07
Come back. We're going to talk today about some stories that you've been
00:02:11
writing on legacy brands. We're going to talk about the gap. We're going to talk
00:02:17
about Victoria's Secret. We're gonna talk about Dillards and just regular
00:02:22
malls instead of the fancy malls. And to Americas's point, I don't know Dafany if
00:02:27
you remember, but Gap did the same thing. >> Do you remember when Gap came up with
00:02:32
that streamline logo, but they invested more money in it. It's a very big deal
00:02:38
when a retailer changes their logo because then you've got to change it on stores, on uniforms, on all of these
00:02:46
things. And Gap did what Americas is talking about that Cracker Barrel just did where they had the internet tell
00:02:53
them. What are you guys kidding? Go back to your legacy. And at that time, if I remember
00:03:00
correctly, right now, Cracker Barrel, which by the way, this reminds me of a we there's a McDonald's near us that was
00:03:08
really sad. It clearly needed a re renovation and got one, but now it's a gray box. No golden arches. Wow.
00:03:16
>> No golden arches >> as sacrilege. >> It's weird. Um, >> you know, I started to mention I am
00:03:24
doing research on that. We're actually running some experiments on this new minimalist trend and just, you know, too
00:03:31
long don't read, you know, like that notion of it. The bottom line of our research is these minimalist logos make
00:03:39
sense for small brands without any legacy because they're not well known and if you make it very easy to grasp
00:03:48
what's going on which we call fluency it actually helps the the small brands.
00:03:55
Alternatively, if you've built up this big legacy and have all of this tradition and brand identity, going to a
00:04:03
minimalist logo is crazy. You know, it's just nuts. >> Now, let me let me ask you this,
00:04:09
Barbara, and jump in on this as well, Daffany. Is the research and sort of the boots on the ground telling us that
00:04:15
younger consumers like these modern minimalist uh logos more or what's what's going is there anything that's
00:04:22
generational about this in terms of preferences? >> You know, that's interesting because we
00:04:28
didn't test that. We didn't do it by individual differences. We did it across
00:04:32
the board. And what we basically found was that our minimalist logos worked better for a brand that doesn't have
00:04:39
legacy and less good for a brand that does, which just kind of makes sense. But now you're adding in a new twist,
00:04:46
which is what happens if you know the the style, so to speak, is to streamline. Should the logos chase after
00:04:55
these changes in styles in fashion? And I think that's basically what you're
00:04:59
saying in some sense because the younger people are coming in with these new preferences. You know, are leggings
00:05:05
tight or are they loose? You know, are jeans short or bellbottom or whatever. And if you chase after all of those
00:05:12
tastes, I think it's going to be hard for a brand. I I I would need research like yours,
00:05:18
Barbara. But if I had to bet, I would think the younger generation would want the old man in the logo.
00:05:24
>> Oh, interesting. That's what that would be my guess for Gen Z. >> Interesting. What's the thought process
00:05:30
behind that? Yeah. What what why that hypothesis? >> I I it's totally anecdotal. It's based
00:05:36
on the Gen Z kids in my life. >> Um and like that >> they're I think they're into vintage. I
00:05:44
think they're into grandpa. >> Interesting. >> Maybe. >> Interesting.
00:05:49
>> So the the car the character is actually named Uncle Hershel Barbara. Okay. And
00:05:54
uh it turns out that this uncle Hershel was the act was is a real person and who
00:05:58
was the actual uncle of the founder. >> So there's a lot going on there. So your
00:06:04
point and your point as well, Daphne, be very careful >> when you start messing around with stuff
00:06:08
that's been around that has some some equity associated with it. >> But you know, anecdotally, again, I we
00:06:14
can look at the data, but since we don't have it, let's look at anecdotes. I
00:06:18
actually agree with what Daffany is saying about this younger generation because I just recently became a
00:06:24
grandmother. I have a twomonth-old grandson and you know all these cutesy grandmother names like this or that and
00:06:31
my daughter-in-law who's just on the cusp of of Z and Millennial, she's just
00:06:36
at that age. She really wants me to be called grandma, you know, like I don't
00:06:41
want a name. I actually want the support of some legacy, some tradition. And you
00:06:48
can see that it might make sense even from that point of view. >> Well, I got to say though, Barbara, jump
00:06:52
in on this, Daffany, you know, Barbara, you do not have grandma energy, okay? You're you're not ready for that social
00:06:58
category label. I'm just going to say that right now and put it on the record.
00:07:01
>> I'm going to make it hip. We're going to make it new. But, you know, let's get
00:07:05
into our retail stories because there's actually a lot happening. But it's
00:07:08
really much built on this idea. We've been talking about GAP for a long time,
00:07:14
you know, being bad and the shining light in the GAP portfolio. The GAP portfolio of course is Gap, Old Navy,
00:07:21
Banana Republic, and Athleta. And historically, the Gap portfolio, the shining star was Athleta, but now,
00:07:29
ironically, that's the one that's falling a little bit behind. And they have a new CEO at GAP. um I think well I
00:07:36
don't know how new he is but um he's been trying to make some changes and
00:07:41
they've seen some real changes in GAP. Why don't you tell us a little give us a
00:07:46
little background on that and tell us what's happening. So um it must be said that Old Navy is
00:07:53
their sales powerhouse. It's not necessarily the fashion cred that even the probably the other
00:08:00
three, Banana Republic, Athleta, and Gap are supposed to have. Um, Old Navy just
00:08:07
makes the most money, like billions. Um, Gap, you know, kind of lost its way. It
00:08:16
was so important actually in the '9s, and it wasn't just the clothes. I mean,
00:08:22
was it ever the clothes? We're talking about khakis and jeans and sweatshirts and stuff that's very
00:08:30
recognizable um essentials. I don't know what you call them. Basics. Basics. And that basic now
00:08:39
is a is an insult, right? >> Um but they they knew how to have a conversation.
00:08:46
Um, I a couple years ago when I when I looked into what exactly happened with them, where they were and where they
00:08:55
ended up, there was a DJ talking about how GAP would actually break songs the way
00:09:04
Tik Tok does now. So DJs would would be hearing requests for songs that Gap would have broken, you know, just
00:09:12
through an ad. >> Oh, interesting. And I feel like they they did it again.
00:09:19
This time with Milkshake. It's it's it's happening again. I have no idea if it's
00:09:25
a oneoff, but it has legs. I mean, we're we're going, if you look at social
00:09:31
media, there is it's still a topic of conversation. Gap, the brand itself, is
00:09:37
posting video of ordinary people trying out the dance moves and they're not even
00:09:44
necessarily wearing Gap clothes, but Gap is interested enough in hearing back from people who connected with that ad
00:09:52
that they're they're posting footage of them dancing, even if it's not an item of clothing from Gap.
00:10:03
So it's kind of trying to find its place in the cultural zeitgeist, you know, is
00:10:08
that I mean and that's a lot what we're seeing America is that is kind of part
00:10:13
of your whole pitch on brand identity and things like that. F I believe to find your place in the cultural design.
00:10:20
So it's an interesting strategy for GAP. What do you think? >> So obviously it has staying power but
00:10:28
but like how big does that picture go? Did they crack Did they crack the code finally or
00:10:36
>> is this just a really successful one-off for them? >> Interesting.
00:10:40
>> Let me let me pose this. I want to ask you something, America, because you put
00:10:43
me on the spot. I want to put you on the spot with current events and what she just said. Okay.
00:10:47
>> So, one of the things that's interesting in this whole story, this oneoff or not
00:10:51
oneoff, is one of GAP's competitors, of course, is American Eagle. And talk about something that's been
00:10:57
controversial recently. you know, that was the Sydney Sweeney story. Yes. >> And so if you're talking about this
00:11:04
brand identity or tribes or cultural relevance or, you know, what's your take
00:11:10
on what happened with American Eagle and originally Sydney Sweeney, now it's
00:11:14
Travis Kelce, you know, and what what what Daphne's saying about Gap, they were really kind of moving in on this
00:11:21
one particular um dance thing. What do you think? How does that all work? Do these things work in building brands?
00:11:29
>> I think they do work, but I think they kind You jump in on this, Daffany, and
00:11:33
tell us does what you're seeing in the from the journalistic side uh affirm this. uh the idea that you know there's
00:11:40
a lot of risk in in what's going on with respect to these cultural moments Barbara because there's a there's a
00:11:46
group of folks that are political actors that are looking for opportunities to to
00:11:52
to ride some of these cultural waves Barbara in a way that can take it somewhere different right so this whole
00:11:59
idea of sort of ideologies and the fact that hey you know Uncle Hersel or you know good jeans wait a minute what are
00:12:06
you saying all of these things that get amplified. And now I would assume that it's it's
00:12:12
it's a it's the decision calculus and the risk analysis is very different. Now
00:12:17
to Barbara's point about the fact that this double edge of trying to ride that
00:12:21
cultural zeitgeist or figure it out or crack the code as Barbara's saying has a
00:12:26
lot a lot more risk associated with it. Would you agree with that Daphne or how would you how does that how has the
00:12:31
landscape changed to Barbara's point? The the interesting thing to me is the
00:12:35
way so many people interpreted GAP's ad, which was a very diverse, it didn't lean
00:12:41
on one person, right? It it leaned on not just the six member musical group, but then also this huge dance troop. Um,
00:12:54
it was interesting to me how many people thought that Gap answered American Eagle
00:12:58
with this ad. M >> when you look at it, there's no way this wasn't an ad that had been in
00:13:04
production. I mean, it had to have been in production for months and months and months.
00:13:08
>> Happy accident, as they say. >> Yeah, I I do think it was probably
00:13:14
unfortunate for American Eagle because if anyone was confused about why people took the American Eagle,
00:13:24
you know, message the way, was it intended that way? Was it not? There was this argument about it, but anyone who
00:13:32
might have been like, "Huh, where' they come from?" might have >> the Gap ad almost answered that. Like,
00:13:39
there's a way to do marketing and show our clothes showing a lot of different
00:13:45
types of people with a lot of different >> style. The some of the Sydney Sweeney
00:13:52
um you know, her messaging was confusing. I'm not going to tell you to wear American Eagle ads jeans. Like, why
00:13:59
not? Um, >> isn't that the job? >> Yes. >> So, yeah. So, so it was sort of very
00:14:08
dependent on this one person. I actually thought of Gap when I first saw the Sydney Sweeney ad before
00:14:15
Gap came out with Milkshake because I had done that story in 2023. If you remember remember those ads with
00:14:23
it was there were portraits, black and white portraits and there were Spike Lee and there was Joan Ddian and there was
00:14:31
>> all these different people with the same tagline. >> Could it have been interesting if you
00:14:37
had a diverse panel of superstars saying so and so has great genes instead of relying on one person. Now
00:14:49
>> that whole controversy would have been more existed >> not. Yeah.
00:14:55
>> Yeah. That's interesting. That's very interesting. >> And it was a funny choice. And one
00:14:59
wonders if they, you know, if they did it to generate the word of mouth and then they could come back and when they
00:15:05
did come back after to America's point, it got brandnapped in some sense by people with a political agenda. Right.
00:15:13
But then when you know, so I don't think they meant it that way. Personally, I
00:15:16
actually don't think they meant it that way. And I think it was, as you said,
00:15:20
they were going to come out with a bunch of different versions, but then it got brandnapped, but maybe they were aware
00:15:26
that was a possibility. They should have been if they were thinking about it, and
00:15:30
they came back with their response. Wasn't an apology. It was just saying, "Look, it's about the denim. Like, don't
00:15:37
read into this." And what ended up happening is it generated a lot of word of mouth. Then they follow up with
00:15:43
Sydney Sweeney campaign with the Travis Kelsey campaign. I mean, you're talking
00:15:48
about a campaign and an engagement and a new album that broke the internet big time.
00:15:53
>> If the bottom line is generating word of mouth and just talking, getting your
00:15:58
name out there, >> you know, maybe it's all part of a grand scheme. I don't know.
00:16:03
>> Interesting. >> Did it have a vibe of trying to change the the conversation, though? the
00:16:11
the the Kelsey the Travis Kelsey I mean it seemed time to the announcement right
00:16:16
obviously but did it did it also have the feeling of like stop looking over there we've got something new I don't
00:16:23
know >> maybe although you know if you're going to go into the Jean thing having uh
00:16:29
Taylor Swift and Travis K >> I don't see that's that much different
00:16:33
than Sydney Sweeney on that mention right >> um but I do think they're trying to go
00:16:39
like look over here not over there. Let's talk about this. Let's just change
00:16:42
this whole conversation and went in a direction we didn't want it to go. >> I just want someone to write the expose
00:16:48
because I think if they had any Gen Z members on that committee making that decision, they would have clocked that
00:16:56
potential response, the Sydney Sweeney had. So my question is >> interesting.
00:17:02
>> How many Gen Z people do you have involved in your marketing and did you
00:17:07
ignore them? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But you know the problem with that also is if you have a panel of you know
00:17:13
six you that you're not doing a real market research you're not getting the
00:17:16
heterogeneity response that's the problem with you know with anecdotes it's so like
00:17:24
>> you it's not that hard to test anymore so I think America that's one of your
00:17:28
big points is like a panel of a thousand's not really that hard to get. >> Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. Here's a broader
00:17:35
question for both of you and this is a harder question. Give me your framework, your
00:17:42
your logic, your analysis of how a company should who has existing brand equity around its logo around its uh
00:17:51
what it does its meaning system like the Gap or Cracker Barrel whatever. How does
00:17:55
it analyze that and move to something new? What's that? What does that look like? How how does that get laid out?
00:18:02
What are the things that >> Yeah, >> that's a that's a question I'm grappling
00:18:06
with, Barbara, because I want to be able to talk to my students about it. Give me
00:18:09
some frameworks. Give me the logic. Give me an analysis about how I should think
00:18:12
about that. Something, >> you know, like that's an interesting question. So, like what turned out, like
00:18:17
you said, the panel of experts on Cracker Barrel said, "No, no, it wasn't
00:18:21
a bad logo. It wasn't a bad legacy. You didn't have to change it. You shouldn't
00:18:25
have." That's basically what ended up happening. But your question is a
00:18:29
broader one, I think. What happens when you really do have a bad legacy and you do have to change it? Yes,
00:18:35
>> that hasn't been the case for Cracker Barrel. Wasn't the case for Gap when it
00:18:39
happened to Gap either. That American legacy was really working for them. But if you do have something that's bad
00:18:45
like, and we have seen it with Anchamima, for example, there was nobody who didn't think that that logo should
00:18:51
have been changed. Um, now what they did was what's called a silver bullet. And
00:18:56
because they knew it was bad, they just killed it with a really bold statement. More often than not, it's not that black
00:19:05
and white as bad good, but it's more something it's a little out of date. We
00:19:10
got to modernize it. And then the more, >> you know, the more sophisticated logos,
00:19:15
they don't stay the same. Actually, they move, but they move in very small movements, very carefully thought out.
00:19:24
So if you look at their logo at one point in time and you look 10 years later, it isn't the same one. But it
00:19:30
never happened as a really big move. It happened very slowly, paying attention to things, pulling out the things that
00:19:38
are no longer culturally relevant, putting in the things that are, but doing it kind of under the radar to not
00:19:44
generate to not generate this word of mouth that. But you have to be sophisticated. Yeah. And paying
00:19:51
attention to your logo and to your audience to really manage your brand equity and brand assets appropriately.
00:19:58
That's what I think you should be doing. And that's why you should be paying your
00:20:02
marketing CMOs the big bucks because they should be paying attention to this. It's not easy. It requires a lot of
00:20:09
experience and a lot of sophistication. Do you agree with that, Americas? >> I definitely agree with that. Deafany,
00:20:16
what what what are you seeing with respect to, you know, folks that are in the sea suite? Because I'm hearing a lot
00:20:21
of this notion of the chief marketing officer, Barbara, and the sort of the the the role kind of morphing into
00:20:28
something that is much different perhaps than what uh what was thought perhaps in
00:20:32
in the past in the sense that the chief marketing officer has to also be a little bit of the chief tech officer, a
00:20:38
little bit of the you know, the finance officer because the brand is is is an asset. So are is that are you seeing
00:20:45
that to Barbara's point, Dafany, that the the the leadership that is in charge
00:20:49
of these things that Barbara's talking about developing the strategy, putting
00:20:52
it out there and executing on it appropriately. Are there are you seeing these different skill sets and you can
00:20:57
talk about AI and all other things as well, but different skill sets that are required to be quote the CMO, uh the
00:21:04
person that's in charge of this very delicate asset that can, as we saw with
00:21:07
Cracker Barrel, can go haywire in an instant. So are you seeing that in terms of the the the the seauite leadership
00:21:14
that you are interviewing and and talking with Deafany? >> We're definitely seeing that. I think
00:21:21
just as a reporter I have more questions of people like you and the companies themselves than you know answers. I
00:21:29
think that especially when it comes to apparel, the merchants are I think there's a a little bit of not
00:21:39
tension, but there's push and pull around who the audience is and what our products actually are. And then there's
00:21:48
the question around not just logos but the kinds of marketing that you saw for American Eagle and GAP where where
00:21:55
you're trying to have a conversation >> and you know that's just so complex.
00:22:04
>> Let's switch gears to another story you wrote because I want to get cover some
00:22:09
you have so much to talk about. I want to cover some other things. >> Wait a minute. Hold on. Barbara, you
00:22:12
want to cover Victoria's Secret? I I Wait a minute. I have no problem with that. Do you want to
00:22:18
Sorry. >> Exactly. Victoria Secret. Talk about a brand with a controversial legacy. Yeah. You know,
00:22:26
um, so what's going on? That's an interesting brand, though, because they're finally kind of getting some of
00:22:32
it right. You know, they Victoria's Secrets, their their mainstay, their big
00:22:36
brand, Victoria Secret. Then they have the the trendy brand Pink. Um, so this is another one. Is it good to build on
00:22:44
their legacy? Is it not? What are they doing? What are you seeing with Victoria's Secret?
00:22:49
>> I honestly there it's no accident that Gap has a CEO who's only been there for
00:22:54
two years. Um, and Victoria Secret has a CEO who's only been there for a year.
00:23:01
>> Wow. >> And each of them seemed to understand what was needed and they're starting to
00:23:08
execute. Um, Hillary Super, who used to be at the Fenty lingerie brand, Savage, um,
00:23:19
she seems to understand the the what Victoria's Secret customer wants that it doesn't necessarily mean
00:23:29
not being sexy. >> It just doesn't mean being sexist. And there was uh
00:23:36
>> Wow, you just came up with a fantastic tagline. I think that was really good.
00:23:41
>> Well, I think they they got >> sexy, not sexist. >> They were really over on one end for a
00:23:47
while there and just didn't get rid of those old guys who who couldn't stop
00:23:53
talking even when everyone was telling them to shut up. And then they sort of overcorrected and
00:24:00
didn't want to didn't almost didn't want to um talk about sexiness and underwear,
00:24:09
which it's not the golden arches or the old man on the Cracker Barrel logo, but
00:24:14
it's kind of close for Victoria's Secret. >> Yeah. Um, but then they brought back the
00:24:20
the Victoria's Angel fashion show, so that was a little confusing. I feel like this company now
00:24:28
has leadership that understands um what young customers want from a lingerie brand that is capable of being
00:24:39
comfortable and sexy and not sexist. you know, Americas, this is right to your point, and I'd like to
00:24:47
hear you comment on it because this is something with a legacy that's potentially controversial, but maybe in
00:24:54
its original intent wasn't supposed to be controversial. It kind of got in a
00:24:58
little way branded and pushed in a direction that wasn't comfortable for them. And then you got to navigate how
00:25:05
you build on a legacy because Victoria's Secret definitely had a strong legacy.
00:25:10
avoid the pitfalls of bad politics or sexism or things like that that most people don't like, but you don't throw
00:25:17
the baby out with the bathwater. You know, Americans, do you have a framework for that? I mean, in your brand
00:25:23
identity, I I imagine it comes up a lot when you think about it. It's not it's
00:25:28
not a simple concept. It is a complicated concept. >> It's an extremely complicated concept,
00:25:33
Barbara. I think that, you know, we're starting to lay out some of the key key
00:25:36
areas and issues, right? And I think it's the general notion where you have you've developed something and there's a
00:25:41
core group of people who are with you on that something and now you're trying to
00:25:45
grow and do other things and you know that the same customers to Barbara's point Daphne do not stay in the market
00:25:52
forever. So you you can't be sitting there thinking that okay you know this this is going to I have to be doing the
00:25:58
same sorts of things. And so I think part of it Barbara is how do your point which is how do I think about my core
00:26:05
and how do I think about expanding my core but doing it in a way that's the the folks who are the OGs if you will uh
00:26:13
embrace and and want to actually may maybe that's part of it Barbara where you get the core and you help and you
00:26:19
have them help you bring in new people based on kind of their credibility with the brand and so it's becomes like a
00:26:26
kumbaya moment maybe Barbara to to help sort of, you know, grow in a way that doesn't create factions where you got
00:26:34
people who are like, "No, we're old school Victoria Seeker." You got the new
00:26:37
people like, "No, we're we're the sexy but not sexist group." >> So So how do you how do you I I think
00:26:43
that's part of it, Barbara, is like trying to again stepping back and trying
00:26:46
to say we let how do we how do we keep the community whole and grow it at the same time? How do we make sure that
00:26:54
everyone that's involved in the community feels like they have some psychological ownership and that kind of
00:27:00
thing as we grow forward? What are you guys thoughts on that? Does that sound like it might be? Yeah, you know, I just
00:27:04
want to weigh in and then I'm going to let you have the last word on this, Daphany. But I think that that's
00:27:09
actually the the advantage of this community building because it is a little messy and you got to kind of
00:27:15
think about it and you got to work it and you got to build on what's good and
00:27:19
figure out what to throw out and but give everybody some ownership. And if you allow people to participate in
00:27:26
creating this community, I think the end result it, you know, a couple misses, hopefully mostly hits, you know, but you
00:27:34
get a lot more loyalty. I mean, if people are part of the community, part of creating what this brand means going
00:27:41
on. I think you're going to get a much stronger community, a much stronger ownership than in the old days when you
00:27:48
would hire, you know, the advertising guru who sat on the hill and threw things down and everybody just had to
00:27:54
accept it. I think people like the community building and maybe because of that they embraced some of the
00:28:01
messiness. The messiness is almost part of it as long as you can come out of it in a good way.
00:28:07
>> What are your thoughts, Daffany, on that analysis? My thoughts are actually
00:28:11
questions to you for you know the the decline of Victoria's Secret and their
00:28:16
jumbled messaging there their jumbled maybe their loss of their own sense of self um really opened the door to a lot
00:28:25
of DTC companies that took literally were taking share. I mean we know that they know that. Um now DTC sort of
00:28:36
learned some hard lessons. it's not that easy to sell online, blah blah blah. And
00:28:41
so I feel like there is an opportunity to for Victoria's Secret to yank some of
00:28:45
that back. But what do you do if you're a DTC company? You do have a little bit
00:28:50
of name recognition, but you didn't maybe get it over the hill like >> Yeah.
00:28:56
That's a really good >> That's a good point. I mean, talking about throwing the baby out with the
00:29:01
bathwater, GAP had incredible scale. I mean, some people thought they overstored and had to pull some of that
00:29:07
back, but they had the scale. So did Victoria Secret have the scale. And these little DTC brands, they are, like
00:29:15
you said, they didn't get over the hump. That's the really big deal. If you don't
00:29:18
build your niche big enough to get over that hump so that you continue to have a
00:29:23
stake in the ground, you're gonna be out when everybody starts coming for you and
00:29:29
for your market share. So for the small brands, maybe you get that brand identity, that loyalty with a very small
00:29:36
sliver of customers, but if you can't grow that >> when the big guys come after you and
00:29:42
learn their lessons, you're not going to survive. So it's kind of war out there.
00:29:52
>> America, you got a take on that? Like this? >> Well, you know what? I was going to
00:29:55
actually I I think this is a perfect moment to talk about the con matrix because I I think this is part of what
00:30:04
your analysis looks at right Barbara in terms of what are the quadrants that define growth and and this is huge
00:30:11
because I just got finished Daphne listening to Barbara's uh ripple effect podcast with Dan Looney on the same
00:30:17
Wharton podcast network and the idea your point Dafany about DTC not having an experience to now leverage
00:30:25
is huge, right? In the sense of, you know, perhaps being a disadvantage. So maybe Barbara, C, could you what what
00:30:32
does that analysis say? If you're in the DTC quadrant, what are you how are you
00:30:37
thinking about these different sorts of things to be able to get over that hump and what are the what are the next steps
00:30:42
to be able to do that? And one of the things we are seeing Deafany and I know you're seeing this too. You're making a
00:30:47
different point on scale but one of the things we're seeing with the DTC brands
00:30:52
typically they were online brands and they didn't have the physical store presence that Gap has that Victoria
00:30:59
Secret has where you can and Lulu has for example where you're creating these
00:31:05
brand communities these instore experiences in person. Uh, and if you don't have some kind of experience like
00:31:13
that and you're not big enough to really scale, you kind of get caught between
00:31:19
the crosshairs. And I think we are seeing a you we are even though there's stores are closing we are seeing a
00:31:29
emphasis on building the right instore experience the right retail experience that merges with a very strong brand
00:31:36
identity that kind of has to tinker with the changing times but you really want to create that physical instore
00:31:43
experience for a lot of these brands. Yes. um which you don't really get if it's all online. Most of the more
00:31:51
successful DTC's have managed their store experience um appropriately. Some of them opened
00:31:57
too many stores and that was bad. Some of them didn't have enough stores and
00:32:01
that was bad. But building some kind of real physical community experience I think really helps these retailers.
00:32:08
Well, you know, we could talk about this for a long time. And I know we had another story we were going to talk to
00:32:14
you about, Dapany, so we're gonna have to bring you back, but we're out of time
00:32:18
right now. So, let me thank you for joining us today and remind us where our listeners can go to keep up with you and
00:32:25
your stories and what's happening in Retail Dive. So, great to be here as always. Um, you can find my stories at
00:32:31
retail dive, retaldive.com. Um, we're all advertising um, supported, so free to read. Sign up
00:32:39
for a newsletter. U, we're a daily, so we've got a lot >> and talking to people like you. So,
00:32:45
we've got a lot of good stuff in there. >> Excellent. >> That's great. Thank you very much.
00:32:49
That's all we have time for today. I'd like to thank our producers, Dion
00:32:53
Simpkins and Marissa Rena. Thank you all for listening today. We'll be back next
00:32:58
week. Till then, this has been Marketing Matters on the Wharton Podcast Network.
00:33:03
I'm Barbara Khan here with America's Read. [Music]