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