Luxury brands are doing very well – witness the recent success of Burberry – while the pound shops and cheap card outlets flourish but, with the notable exception of the John Lewis partnership, many middle market retailers are struggling and may disappear.

There was a time when being in the middle was considered a good thing but now the market seems to have polarised with consumers opting for the so-called Primark/Prada route – bargains or treats.

According to the futurologist James Harkin, as quoted in the London Evening Standard,  what we are seeing is no less than the death thoes of the mainsteam, a process which he believes started in the Sixties.

“The mainstream is no longer seen as quality, it is discredited. The idea that it was good enough for everyone has gone.”

While this may be seen as a good thing and that selling rubbish at an inflated price is no longer possible, it may sound the death knell for middle-market retailers such as Marks & Spencer. The strapline of ‘affordable luxury for everyone’  may no longer work in a market that is happy to mix couture and bargain basement.

Where Catherine Middleton has led others may not follow. The next few months in retailing will prove interesting.

Steve Jobs (Pic: AP)

The recent sad death of Steve Jobs robbed the world of an amazing man, regardless of whether one loves the iPhone, the iPad or the Mac.

The question now is how Apple will survive his loss.

Obviously, the company has been run – and run well – during his absences but it will be interesting to see how it performs in five, ten years time without its visionary leader.

During that time the current ‘news kids on the block’ will have matured and one may be the next Steve Jobs or Bill Gates.

At the moment Apple products are flavour of the month but the test will come with the next new product launch.

But maybe customers will be kind as many seem to have a personal bond with the Apple brand. As one of the tributes on the RememberingSteve page on the Apple website said: 

“I fell in love with my first MAC in 1987, and have been in love with Apple ever since. Steve, your vision of what these products could do enabled me and millions of others to express our creativity in ways we once thought unimaginable. I can think of no greater gift to humanity than helping us all tap into our limitless potential to make art. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. Sandy”

Few technology products have inspired so much love so maybe Steve’s real legacy will be that the Apple dream will live on into the future.

Time will tell!

It was very noticeable that during the riots in August, the retailers that suffered the most – such as JD Sports – were those that had positioned themselves as a desirable, aspirational brand for the under 25s. Other  retailers who suffered included Foot Locker, Debenhams, Boots and Carphone Warehouse.

These riots are clearly a wake-up call for brands that actively cultivated a “gangster chic” image as they found themselves targeted by looters across the country.

The issue of good brands attracting bad customers is one that must be exercising the minds of many Marketing Directors right now in the wake of the riots. We may well see a radical ’repositioning’ of some brands in the near future.

Meanwhile Abercrombie & Fitch has taken a different route and recently offered money to ‘Jersey Shore’ star Mike Sorrentino to stop wearing their clothes. 

The 29-year-old ‘Jersey Shore’ star – who is regularly seen in the brand – has been asked by the retailer to stop because it could be ‘distressing’ to its customers.

The company was quoted as saying ‘We are deeply concerned that Mr Sorrentino’s association with our brand could cause significant damage to our image.’

Time will tell if other brands follow suit. Whatever happens it is going to be a costly exercise.

Image from International Business Times

As marketers we often tell clients that they should encourage everyone in the organisation to ‘live the brand’.

This covers everything from the way staff answer the telephone to the colour of the plants in Reception, the idea being that the (positive) values of the brand are expressed at every touchpoint between the organisation and the outside world.

Such seamless expression is fine when the values of the brand are positive but the reverse may be true if the values are negative. The recent sad death of the talent singer Amy Winehouse is such a case in point.

Her struggles with alcohol and drugs have been well-documented and it was startling to see that – amongst the floral tributes and cards outside her Camden home – there were (full) bottles of vodka and other drinks, cigarettes and doubtless drug impedimenta discreetly tucked away at the back.

Sadly, it seems that Amy the brand had negative values to which her fans responded wholeheartedly. Certainly she seemed to relish those negative values herself in the latter years of her short life – and became her own brand, living it to the full.

While this is probably a unique situation there is a lesson here for all brands, particularly those  in alcohol, music and leisure.

Beware of how your brand values are being perceived by your customers – it may not be how you imagined it!

The news that supermarket giant Tesco has launched a range of premium own label products with branding that is not immediately recognisable – such as ChokaBlok ice cream and Lathams dry dog food – has caused a great stir in the media.

Speaking at a recent retail industry conference Tesco chief executive Phil Clarke was quoted as saying:

‘With F&F clothing, Technika electricals, Go Cook kitchenware, Lighter Choices foods – we’ve shown that we can build brands that consumers trust. Now we are going to do more,’ he said.

‘When customers buy Tesco products, I want them to feel good about it. Getting value for money should not mean sacrificing the sense that you are treating yourself. You should not feel that you’re buying a product that you want to hide at the back of the fridge or the bathroom cupboard.’

‘Once customers have an understanding of our retail, product and pillar brands, we should be looking more actively to extend into new areas.’

These so-called venture brands are different from the usual supermarket own label products in that they are priced at a premium level and will compete for shelf-space on their own merit with products from other suppliers, although they are being made for Tesco by large manufacturers of supermarket own brand lines.

However, the fact that Tesco has registered a wide range of brand names means that they will control distribution, can move supplier at will and, perhaps more intriguingly, in due course could supply their venture brands to other retailers.

Could this be actually be a major shift in strategy in which Tesco plans to compete directly with companies  such as Unilever, Procter & Gamble, Mars and Nestle?

If one of their venture brands becomes a major seller the temptation may prove too great and we could see Tesco venture brands being sold elsewhere.

Earlier this year Marks & Spencer announced they were going to develop their range names (e.g. Per Una) into real brands and were recruiting brand managers for each one.

Maybe we are seeing the beginning of a trend in retailing – perhaps as a response to the difficult trading conditions.

But in the week that Habitat went into administration, Jane Norman went down and Thorntons announced they were closing 120 shops, it  does beg the question whether Tesco should not be concentrating on their core activities, rather than flirting with becoming suppliers.

Time will tell.

In the happy afterglow of the recent (British) Royal Wedding, commentators are already talking about the ‘re-branding’ of the Royal Family and how the young couple seemed to have brought a new ‘lightness and humour’ to what could have been very formal and ’stuffy’ occasion.

Evidence of this is seen in the happy couple’s drive up The Mall in Prince Charles’ vintage Aston Martin, trailing red and white balloons with a Just Wed sticker on the bumper. There is no doubt that Will and Kate have a sense of humour, if nothing else!

While the event was a great success (with even the notorious British weather behaving) it may be too soon to start seeing this as the beginning of a ‘new look’ Windsor family.

The institution has proved very resilient in the past and has adapted to new circumstances, notably in the immediate aftermath of Princess Diana’s death.

But, as every marketer knows, a successful re-brand is more than merely changing a logo or designing a new website – or in this case putting on a noticeably more lighthearted major event.

For a re-brand to really be successful an organisation needs to change fundamentally in line with the (new) brand values. Everyone has to live the new brand – from the Receptionist’s tone of voice to the van driver’s shoes, everything should be consistent.

In this case, while Will and Kate may wish to herald in new way of doing things in Windsor Plc but will they be able to do so? After all, Diana tried to make changes and was apparently blocked by courtiers at every turn.

And we are a long way from having a new, young King and Queen. It may be 35 years before William becomes King – a long time for the goodwill and ‘re-branding’ to last!

Time will tell but Diana’s legacy may yet bear fruit in a new, ‘improved’ Royal Family.

Early in March, ITV reported a 16% increase in advertising revenue in 2010 and is on track to be 12% up in the first quarter of 2011.

Meanwhile, over at WPP advertising industry giant Martin Sorell must be delighted by a 9.7% increase in the UK over the last quarter of 2010 – the fastest quarter’s growth all year. And in France Publicis was up 12.5% in the fourth quarter.

So why is this happening? According to Gideon Spanier in the Evening Standard it is because comapanies are now planning their advertising spend – not by GDP figures – but by their profits and conusmer spending. So his argument is that, as corporate profits are rising, companies are starting to spend on marketing again. He cites the example of moneysupermarket.com who have raised their budget for traditional media by 20% for 2011 and who are sponsoring Britain’s Got Talent.

Maybe big brands have always felt more ‘comfortable’ with traditional media than with the less controllable world of social media. So when profits are up their thoughts turn to the glossy and memorable advertising campaigns of yesteryear.

They may have a point since many of us remember famous television adverts from years ago such as robots spraying cars (Citroen) to opera or metallic potato haters  (Cadburys Smash) or Leonard Rossiter throwing his drink over Joan Collins (Cinzano) . 

However, this return to advertising may be predominantly across the broadcast media. Daily Mirror publisher Trinity has seen a 9% slide in  national print adverts since January and analysts cannot agree whether this is a temporary ‘blip’ or an ongoing trend.

But, perhaps, Marketing managers of a certain age just want to relive those glorious days when televison adverts were shot by Directors like Ridley Scott and were treated like mini films. Remember the Guinness  Surfer advert?

After all, how many people remember Citroen’s last Tweet or Cadbury’s last blog post? Time will tell!

 Apparently central to this strategy in fashion is a move away from the M&S brand with labels such as Per Una defining a collection to a stable of brands with independent identities under an M&S master brand.

The article suggested that Bolland was taking a ‘department store’ approach and seeking to attract new customers through developing separate brands with differentiated offerings.

Whatever the term used for the new direction, it is one that will be doubtless watched with interest by competitors and suppliers alike.

In a difficult trading environment it may have been more productive to invest in store upgrades, new openings and special price promotions rather than in differentiated branding.

Will their core customers care if the clothes are labelled with an individual brand name? Or would they just prefer well-designed clothes at competitive prices?

Also, if the new brands are going to be strong enough to attract new customers, will the resulting plethora of brands and messaging not detract from the key messages that M&S offers value for money etc?

M&S is not Selfridges or Debenhams so perhaps the success of Per Una (created by the charismatic George Davies) as a sub-brand should not blind the management to their core market.

It could be disastrous if M&S became a poor department store rather than the great middle-market, single brand retailer it once was.

Time will tell if it is the correct strategy.

A recent article on ten of the greatest advertising campaigns in the Mail on Sunday newspaper by advertising ‘guru’ Trevor Beattie included Obama’s ‘Yes We Can’ election campaign.

Beattie cited the campaign as being ‘a perfect fusion of advertising campaign management and political campaign management, all geared to selling Brand Obama’. Certainly, the silk screen poster of Obama has become as instantly recognisable as the famous poster of Che Guevara.

Yet – just as in business – a brand has to deliver on its promise and clearly for many Brand Obama has not done that.

In recent weeks the President has suffered a dramatic drop in popularity, with some polls giving him an approval rating of less than 40%.

Not only have the Republicans mobilised to win back some of the 435 seats in Congress but also those in  the Senate. 

Traditionally, these elections are a snapshot of how the President is doing.  If the predictions are correct  the Democrats will lose their majority in Congress through a significant shift in power in US politics.

So where did it go wrong for Obama?

Perhaps the answer is that the emphasis was on the image of the politician – the brand Obama – rather than the reality of what he – and the Democrats – actually stood for and would deliver.

Just as a logo is not a brand, a glossy image is not a brand. A brand has to stand for something and deliver repeatedly on its promise – where to provide stylish, well-made clothing (Zara) or luxury cars (Mercedes).

Whatever happens in the forthcoming elections, Brand Obama clearly needs a revamp and a re-definition of its core values.

As Trevor Beattie says ‘As a how-to-do it lesson [the campaign] will surely endure, but was the promise just too great?’.  Time will tell.

While Churchill’s nodding dog has been on tour and has even ’starred’ in Christmas pantomime last year and at Pontin’s this summer, a whole film of ‘oh yes’  would probably be too much!

Where agency VCCP have been so clever with the Meerkat marketing is that they have created a complete ‘back story’ for Aleksandr and his family so harnessing our sympathy  for the struggles of his ancestors and further engaging with us.

In the ‘Battle of Fearlessness’ advert (part two of the triology) there are great lines such as ‘its only a fur wound’ which make everyone laugh.

Like Wallace & Gromit , a film ‘(The Adventures of Aleksandr Orlov’? ) would be popular with all ages regardless of background.

Could Aleksandr be that rare being – a brand concept that started as an advert but becomes an entity independent of Comparethe market.com?

Now that would be subliminal advertising! Simples!