gapingvoid: "cartoons drawn on the back of business cards"

No wonder I feel as I've I'm trapped in goo during some branding conversations. Many of them seem much like the particpants are speaking from the same unsettled ground creatives speak from when trying to justify a concept or execution that was invented before seeing the actual brief. Or like interminable exchanges about religion, though thankfully, things don't usually explode in branding chatter. As usual, you drilled to the core of the matter.

Your comics are great, although your webpage seems broken (the archives)

The brand is dead. Long live the brand.
I heard the words "Corporate Identity" long before I ever heard the word brand used in the same context.
A brand is an identity, that's fine. That brand identity helps me choose a product down the washing powder aisle.
I do object to branded apparel, but that's only because I'm not getting paid to wear someone's logo, whereas Michael Jordan is.
Humans like to have things with labels on and put things in metaphorical boxes, that's like, human nature. A strong brand enables me to go into a McDonalds anywhere in the world and know exactly what sort of "food" I'm going to get.
A lot of people are afraid of markets. They smell, and they are not ISO compliant.
Are you a robot or a monkey?

Branding is the artificial imposition of a false proposition.

I read your article about blogvertising. In it, you refer to the merchandising you've undertaken to capitalize on the popularity of the illustrations/cartoons you post on your blog. Speaking about the items you sell, you say:

"Although they're selling well, the Blog cards and t-shirts are done for the fun of it. 'If just wanted money from readers, I would have made a lot lesser quality. Instead I decided to do them the way I want them to be and not dilute brand equity'."

Dilute brand equity? Busted!

In your "Branding vs Markets" piece that leads off your home page, you assert:

"For the last couple of years, using the word "Brand" in a sentence usually causes my eyes to start glazing over. And it gets worse every yer. I often wonder where my disaffection came from. What compelled me to once write "Branding Is Dead" etc.

I'll tell you why.

I dont like branding. I don't like brand theory.

I like markets. I find them much more interesting."

Obviously, you're not as committed to the demise of branding as you claim. At least not where the almighty dollar-in-your-own-pocket is concerned.

Harry - give the dude a break, "Obviously, you're not as committed to the demise of branding as you claim. At least not where the almighty dollar-in-your-own-pocket is concerned."

I don't think someone giving away artwork for free is after the "almighty dollar-in-your-own-pocket" plus you can still use the phrase "brand equity" even if you don't believe whole-heartedly in it.

I don't really buy into "corporate self-governance" but I can still use the phrase in it's correct context.

Keep up the good work Hugh.

Adios.

Methinks poor Harry's missing the point. Heh.

And of course, he has no blog himself. Typical.

PS archives are fixed.

Just when I thought your drawings were nothing but random nonsense, you come up with a piece of genius like this.
-----------------
theblogspace.org: http://www.theblogspace.org
blog101.org: http://www.blog101.org
-----------------

archives fixed or broken? As of 9:26 AM EDT, I'm getting error messages.

Good luck, and good work!

I agree with your statement "branding is backward looking" & that's why I think it's necessary to build a brand (goodwill?), so one CAN look backward.

You can't have a good old friend without looking backward and dont we all cherish good old friends?

PS Enjoy your musings, drawings, doodles & insight.
May your void be ever gaping :)

The interesting thing is that your hatred of branding is simply a dismissal of bad branding habits, and in fact depends on a very specific definition of the word "brand."

No real way to avoid this, but...

The more things change, the more they stay the same. It seems as if you (and others) are interested in boxing up the word "brand" as "an inefficient way of interacting with the market that was old a generation ago."

Then you go on and do your own version of marketing, which is REALLY just branding under any other name, and claim to be better. After all, you're more efficient - you utilize new technology, recognize the value of transparency, and all that jazz. You criticize the old branding strategies, which are designed to do different things.

Really, a "brand" is really just a word that has a reputation. The foundation of a brand is TRUST - the buyer trusts the branded company to adhere to a set of stated values. Brands don't have to be the best of the cheaptest, but they do have to have a clear idea of what they stand for (and then they MUST stand for what they say they do.)

Your entire history as a consultant has been to define a set of values (universally: high quality), and then to promote those values through viral marketing over the internet; using a blog as a primary vehicle. Your marketing strategy depends on people accepting your clients as high quality, high-priced alternatives; and you build that trust by providing lots of honest, real information about their products, market, and competitors.

But you use that strategy ONLY because you make sure your clients are at the higher end of their market. That doesn't automatically make other strategies that concentrate on defining low-priced or mid-market brands BAD, simply different.

Just a note :-)

- Michael

Michael, I wouldn't describe Stormhoek as high-priced.

Brand is shorthand (so we can do other things besides trying to decide what to buy). Markets is longhand (in case we are in a mood to take the time to compare). Both serve their purposes.

Veto. I think the Question "what is it?" is sometimes just as important as "What does it?". It is giving you a moment of safety within a shape of a clear identity. A brand is what you make out of it. People want to know "What is it" Just as well as "What does it" How could Pepsi or McDonalds become so big without an image everybody knows("What is it?"). Now the difficulty is to keep what it promises, like "I love it" or "ev'rytime a good time".("What does it"?)

If I had read all the other comments before writing mine I would have found out that Michael Griffith is exactly of my Opinion.