Brands spend millions finely tuning their image, so what can they do when the ‘wrong sort of customer’ starts buying into them, asks Gemma Goldfingle

Abercrombie & Fitch has tried to maintain its aspirational image by distancing itself from Sorrentino

All publicity is good publicity, or so the old adage goes. Not according to US fashion giant Abercrombie & Fitch.

Last week it emerged that the casualwear retailer has offered to pay the star of hit reality TV show Jersey Shore, Michael ‘The Situation’ Sorrentino not to wear its clothes.

The retailer was worried that the link with the hard-partying, fake-tan addict would damage its brand so was keen for The Sitch to ditch his Fitch sweatpants. 

Abercrombie & Fitch is not the first retailer and brand to be concerned at potential harm created by a gap between their target customer and some of their actual ones. Luxury group Burberry became an icon for so-called ‘chav’ Britain, and its style became ubiquitous on football terraces and on the streets.

It was former soap star Daniela Westbrook, famously pictured with her child in head-to-toe Burberry, that cemented the brand’s position as the epitome of ‘chav’ in the early 2000s before its image was rehabilitated under Rose Marie Bravo and subsequently Angela Ahrendts.

Rita Clifton, chair of consultancy Interbrand, says one of the few things a brand cannot dictate is who buys into it.

She says: “Abercrombie & Fitch is a cool brand. They manage every part of its customer experience – design, sales staff and distribution are all very controlled. One thing it can’t control is who wears them. They can give hints but ultimately they have no final control.”

Verdict analyst Maureen Hinton wonders whether Abercrombie is actually taking a risk by stigmatising Sorrentino because “many of its wearers look exactly like that”.

She believes that there is often a divide between a brand’s image and the reality of who wears it and says: “You can’t exclude a [customer] segment because it doesn’t fit the brand image. It’s only becomes a problem when the media start highlighting it.” When the media does that, she observes, the aspirational nature of a brand’s marketing can be undermined.

Damage control

So how should retailers and brands best react in such situations, which are not uncommon. Other brands such as Hackett and Stone Island, which were adopted by football hooligans, have also suffered an image problem in the past.

Clifton says: “Once your brand has been adopted by a segment of society, it’s difficult to do anything. The brands involved resorted to investing heavily to restore their image.”

Continued investment is key to a brand’s health. Future Laboratory partner Tom Savigar believes that many brands were too relaxed about their images in the 1990s and the early part of the new millennium as they chased growth, and the result was that the brand credentials was weakened.

He says: “It wasn’t just Burberry. Pringle also became diluted. Many brands were in growth mode and went for the quick win, and lost sight of their strategic goals. You have to grow wisely to protect brand image.”

Savigar pinpoints licensing as part of the reason why some brands suffered. Burberry withdrew some licenses in order to reinforce its exclusive credentials. He claims Ralph Lauren’s brand was also damaged in China at one point because of the management of distribution rights.

He says: “They weren’t looking after the brand equity. They’re needs to be some guidelines in place.”

Clifton says although brand managers cannot dictate exactly who buys their products they should be giving “as many clues as possible”.

She says: “You can’t rip the clothes of people’s backs, you just emphasise what is aspirational for your brand. Brands choose to dress A-list stars, or the latest cool celebrity.”

Be cool

Sorrentino is evidently not the cool A-lister that Abercrombie envisaged sporting its brand and it was akin to “product placement gone wrong” according to Hinton. “They were already selling to people like that,” she says. “They just didn’t want to advertise it.”

Clifton reveals some well-known sleights of hand to minimise the fall-out from such associations. She says: “It’s a well-known trick of luxury PRs that if someone undesirable is wearing your stuff, you subtly drop some hints around the industry that it’s knock off.”

However, a sense of proportion is also needed. Clifton points out that Burberry’s link with the ‘chav’ culture was purely a UK phenomenon and “small fry” for the business on a global level.

She believes, however, that taking on Jersey Shore, could pose a bigger threat to Abercrombie. “This Jersey Shore guy is actually a global star and has an extremely high profile with a younger audience. When someone is famous on that scale, there is also a risk on that scale,” she warns.

The consensus among consultants is that brand owners must stay true to themselves and who their products are designed for, even if there is a gulf between that and who is actually buying their products.

Morris says: “Brands have to know where they want to be positioned, and what they want to look like. It’s fine that others want to buy into that aspiration but price points, products and retail environment has got to stay the same.”

Social networking and new media has changed the way people digest brands, and according to Savigar they must be prepared for unplanned exposure.

Clifton says Abercrombie & Fitch’s “paying off” is an extreme way of protecting its brand. In general, if product and imagery reflect a brand and are cutting edge, it can weather the storm of undesirable associations.

That is how Burberry has transformed itself into the premium, quintessentially British brand it is today according to Clifton. She says: “It kept on designing fantastic product and it didn’t let the chav thing get in the way of that.”

However, Savigar believes there was a bigger fundamental change, which included the “reinvention” of Burberry’s products such as its focus on its trench coats. He says: “It became a designer brand again. It stopped making the caps and accessories and called back its licenses. It became slightly tighter in the control of its brand.” 

Richard Morris, managing director of Identica, says making Harry Potter star Emma Watson the face of the brand was also a stroke of genius.

He says: “She’s great for them; she’s the right age, attitude and importantly the right background. She completely fits for the brand, and not just because of her youth appeal.

Some brand consultants said that Abercrombie & Fitch’s initiative was not really an attempt to control who is seen wearing its brand, but a rather canny move.

The retailer has in the past sold a T-shirt emblazoned with the letters GLT – meaning ‘Gym, Laundry, Tan’ – the Jersey Shore clan’s catchphrase.

Morris says: “It’s the classic double bluff. It solidifies their brand position and creates a backlash from Jersey Shore fans – the fans will say: ‘I’ll show you, I’m buying it anyway’”.

If so, Clifton would view that as a potentially dangerous strategy that could backfire on Abercrombie & Fitch. She says: “They say that all publicity is good publicity, but that’s not true.”

Off Trend - From hip to square

It is not just the ‘wrong sort of customer’ that can affect a retailer’s brand. French Connection famously went from brand-of-the-moment to falling out of favour in the early noughties when it was deemed over-exposed as its FCUK-emblazoned styles lost their cachet.

FCUK

FCUK

Hinton observes: “It you fast become a trend in the mass market, you can go off trend just as quickly.” French Connection’s recovery from its loss of cachet came about through a return to its fashion roots according to Hinton. It shifted away from reliance on the FCUK imagery and focused on developing fashion ranges with a distinctive handwriting, she says.

Hinton believes being known for a particular logo brings risks as well as benefits, because they can lead to brands becoming stagnant. “If you produce distinctive fashion ranges which change each season, you can move on,” she says.

Future Laboratory partner Tom Savigar believes brand-of-the-moment Superdry, part of Supergroup, is approaching a difficult stage in its development and is in danger of over-exposure.

FCUK went from 'hot' to 'not' very quickly

FCUK went from ‘hot’ to ‘not’ very quickly

Its well-known Japanese logos can now be seen on high streets from London to Llandudno and Savigar warns it is may be reaching the point of saturation.

He says: “It should watch that it doesn’t become too mainstream and generic. Two to three years ago the view was ‘you must be cool, you have Japanese font on your T-shirt’, but now anyone can be part of that tribe. That product could be in H&M.”

The brand specialist suggested that the Superdry brand move on its Japanese font T-shirts to prevent it becoming too ubiquitous.

 

Superdry is the hot brand, but is it over-exposed?

Superdry is the hot brand, but is it over-exposed?

Clarkson on Levi’s

Unwanted promotion by ‘undesirable’ celebrities is a widespread phenomenon. Identica managing director Richard Morris says Levi’s brand managers must be banging their heads against the wall every time 50-something Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson mentions his much-worn jeans.

“Levi’s is marketing to the 19-year-old man, not Jeremy Clarkson. But there’s very little they can do about it,” he says.