Purpose of BRANDS?

  1. There will always be opinions on which brand that produces better, higher quality and better looking handbags. The quality difference is very similar between brands of the same price range and design will always appeal to different people, but, the other day I was thinking that all of the brands, in order to sell, serve a purpose. The fill a niche in what people need and appeal to those people accordingly.

    So, I after this I was thinking, what is the purpose of each brand? Maybe we will be able to apreciate other brands, even though we might not like what they put out more in this way?

    I'll try to illustrate what I mean by doing my own:

    Chanel: I don't think when people hear of "chanel" that handbags neccessarily the first thing they encounter. Chanel more than anything is a fashion name, and Chanel handbags empitomes the chanel style in handbags, feminine, womanly and luxurious.

    Louis Vuitton: I think more than anything Louis Vuitton has proven to be the greatest "inventeur" of travel pieces. Not only on shape and practicality, but lately also design and fashion forwardness. LV may have turned into fashion house, but their heritage as inventors are still illustrated by the enormeous number of model available and fashion forwardness and courageousness put into the seasonal models (sometimes resulting in quite unusual looks..)

    Bottega Veneta: More than anything I think (especially after maier arrived) BV is appealing to those who want toned down and discreet look. No visible logo, monograms and visible reference to the brand is quite rare these days.
  2. You are very right...every brand vehicules a certain image. I would go even further the point is to sell a "dream" a way of living rather than a bag. To convince an "average" woman to spend $1000 plus on a bag there needs to be more than a piece of leather to it.

    Hermès: craftsmenship, old money, horse & hound etc...

  3. Coming from an Arts College, and being an Interior Decorator, with a Creative Director BF (with product, graphics and branding background)... me and my beloved have always thought of "Brands" are the Identity of a company. The Logos/Names are the Visual to recognize the brands.

    Believe it or not, the different brands appeal to different people because that brand portrays their ideals in lifestyle.

    Just examples:

    Burberry: Conservative, classic
    Hermes/LV/Chanel: Aristocracy, formal, classic, haute couture
    Versace/D & G/Cavalli: Pop, Vouge, Rock with a wild side.

    Like a piece of artwork, every successful brands have a personality to uphold, a legacy to tell. It is all about "Lifestyle"... believe it of not, Steve Jobs have it right!

    You can even apply that "lifestyle" to an interior of a house... some loves French Country, some Modern... it is not about the Decorator (we can only advise), but about the identity of the homeowner! It is about who (the story of) that person is! And that is what "Brands" brings out!
  4. ^
    Very well put. And that's what I find so attractive with brands too and exciting. You're able to put on a different "personality" though dressing up and wearing/carrying differen things. :yes:
  5. What a great thread! I had a boyfriend (became a fiancee but never husband - long story!) and we were at University together. He went into 'branding' and I learned so much from him. The name, logo, quality and product are only the beginning - it is the image that is all and that leads to positioning, then market success. He used to spend hours listening to focus groups telling him what brands represented to them and whether they were or weren't appealing to them.

    And of course it's self-perpetuating providing the publicity is right - so people identify with the brand and aspire to ownership, then become even more identified etc. etc.

    And I guess if we all thought of brands in designer bags, we'd all come up with buzz words (as some posters already have) - indeed that is probably the phenomenon that led to the demise of Burberry's reputation in the UK in recent years.

    As I said, what a great and fascinating thread!
  6. This is really a very intresting subject, the one thing that makes me smile is when I think about the icoic Hermès Birkin, as much as the Kelly (Grace) namewise totally blends with the "Hermès lifestyle" as much I think the Birkin is off not style but namewise.

    When you think Birkin you think classic elegance and the bag is truly very classic but Jane Birkin is so far from that: bohème, artsy, just a bid off, "dans les nuages" etc...but certainly not classic, elegant, conservative.
    Today I totally dissociate the bag and her namegiver.
    But this is just me.
  7. ^^ It's a great point you make Catcat, especially as the oh-so-desired (and my most favourite bag style ever) Birkin was a solution for the kind of girl who was carrying her stuff around in a plastic bag . . .hardly Grace Kelly is it?!
  8. Good point!

    But the Brand is also associated to people who bought the purses and like to have the lifestyle that bag bespoke. Again, it does not mean that in every Ferrari or any branded sports car in fact will carry the iconic passenger (well dressed all the times) like James bond and his girls. It is just a lifestyle idealized... that is why we dream our bags.

    Then again, like every piece of artwork... everyone is different. It is how we as an individual identify with the bags we love (as with any products)... even for hardcore "Brand" shoppers... within that brand, there will be certain products that does not fit their lifestyle even though they associate themselves to that brand with a majority of that brand's products.

    Jane Birkin may not look the "grace" (looks is always in the eye of the beholder) part of the Hermes birkin like Kelly... but grace is also not limited to her personal style or look... maybe in her decision on choosing a product (the Birkin) that have increased the stock value of Hermes. Her "success" definitely did portray in the birkin bag that was so sought after in the fashion industry. We could also say... Birkin is a "success story".
  9. I just love this discussion, but I must admit that at times it is hard to not be a native english speaker! I would love to go on about this but fear I won't be able to express myself accurately enough.
    Anyway..."Birkin" is a sucess story...the product just "outlives" the namegiver and starts to live by itself. Which gives the name another dimension. There are many examples like this a famous one in french is the word "poubelle" which actually is a trashcan named after M. le préfet Poubelle...now if you learn french you learn the word but only a few years later you will know it's origin....

    Now please don't think I mean to compare the "Birkin" to a trashcan this is just a linguistic example...!!!;)

  10. LOL! Good one! This is such a fun thread! Its like a gathering place for all that is passionate about what we adore... purses and brands in this case.

    Everyone contributes to even a single word, a meaning that only that individual could express in their own life's experience. Free expressions... that is why we carry the bags we chose... to express ourselves, voiced or in silence.
  11. :yes: :yes: :yes:
    As are so many things, it's all about marketing. And that means that all brands are, to one extent or another, in a constant state of transition, change, movement, and it is of necessity this way, in order to keep one step ahead, or at least current, with the constantly moving, shifting, swirling chicken and egg dance that is what the market wants because it has been told it wants it, and the market agreed, but not being a complete automaton, the market also wants what the other company told it it wants, so it wants your product, but it wants it to have tassels like the other company's.

    So even if yours is a fine old company whose original and long-dead founder loathed tassels, and even if your company's main claim to market share today is a deal made by the original founder's grandson with an entity representing the name of a famous artist, also long-dead, and who abhorred tassels, as we peek into the production line of your next product, guess what we will see?

    It is a delicate balance, maintaining, as the original poster illustrates, that market share traditionally targeted by the company, but also, in order to remain competitive and to grow, increasing that share, branching out, either by stepping up your marketing to convince other segments that what they want is your product, and at the same time adding those tassels, or offering it in the current It color, in order to make it more attractive to that wider audience.

    So the purpose is, at the bottom line, cold, dry numbers - a bottom line, but to get there also requires that to the consumer, a Brand means something much less quanitfiable, that indefinable something that we variously call image, cache, and a thousand other things, that je ne sais quois that will cause otherwise perfectly rational people to spend $1000 for your product when they can get the same thing, minus your name on the label, for $20.

    It is truly a fascinating subject, and despite the lengthy treatises that are regularly produced by various ologists, I don't think anybody really understands it! :shrugs:
  12. I think you're right about the mystery of branding Shimmapuff. Even the 'experts' are completely mystified by the sudden highs and lows that can happen to long-established brands. And then there are those that completely lose their way and others that reinvent themselves for a whole new market. Such an endlessly intriguing subject.

    I always wondered about transferable skills in branding too. The boyfriend I mentioned was a huge success in beauty branding, then had a very successful consultancy in the same area. He was headhunted to lead branding at a postal company and it is a disaster. He has gone from golden boy to being really worried about fixing this ailing company. I know he struggle with that hugely having thought he was an expert in all things branding, and always argued that it was a generic skill with transferable expertise.
  13. On the Birkin;

    I think some of the reason that the Birkin has turned "bigger than Jane" is that it IS the most famous expensive handbag model and filled that hole in the market as a status item, rather than being the "bag that Jane Birkin carried", which is what happens to many seasonal IT bags. If that Jany Birkin carried it was the main appeal of the bag it wouldn't have lasted longer than her. I knew what the bag was before I knew ms Birkin, as think I the case would be with many new fashionfans today.


    I think if we ever understand how the brands truly affect people and their buying habits there would be no point in living on, as we would've solved one of the greatest mysteries in the world; how the human mind works.