When Abercrombie & Fitch issued a tongue-in-cheek press release requesting that Jersey Shore’s Mike “The Situation” Sorrentino refrain from wearing its clothes, it garnered a lot of media attention and ultimately a lawsuit from Sorrentino. But the move also demonstrated that today’s brands often align themselves as much with those who endorse their products as with those who do not.
It’s much more common for a brand to invite or pay a celebrity to use its products than to ask him or her to stop using them, but there are occasions when youth brands will take steps to address what they perceive as a threat to their image. YMA looks at several brands that found themselves at the mercy of what they thought were anti-brand ambassadors, and how each addressed the, um, situations.
Mentos Tries To Recapture Coolness
It has been more than 15 years since Mentos featured youth-oriented advertising, and as a result, the mint brand had become “disengaged” from teens and young adults, according to marketing agency Curiosity 360, which was hired in 2011 to revitalize the brand.
Mentos has traditionally been known for its humor, but that strategy had grown stale, and newer brands, such as Smint and Oral Fixation Breath Mints, have increasingly grabbed market share from Mentos.
In order to “freshen” up Mentos and support its reintroduction to Walmart, Curiosity 360 focused on social media outreach and user-generated creative content, making the Mentos Facebook page the hub for all of its efforts.
In addition to regular posts from Mentos brand executives, downloadable applications, and a “Chewy & Minty” online comic, Curiosity 360 teamed with EepyBird, the two men behind the original viral Mentos and Diet Coke video, to introduce other filmed clips. [Those clips showed young people creating “geysers” by dropping Mentos into bottles of Diet Coke — an activity from which Diet Coke sought to distance itself.] It also worked with graffiti artists and musicians to develop original Mentos-inspired work that was then displayed on its Facebook page. Additional social media channels, including Twitter, directed users to visit the Facebook page. The effort resulted in Mentos “exceeding sales goals;” its Facebook fan base grew from 10,000 to 150,000 in 24 hours.
Tommy Hilfiger Expands, Then Retreats
Lifestyle brand Tommy Hilfiger has gone through several reinventions since its debut 26 years ago. In the 1990s, Hilfiger stepped away from its hip-hop consumer base, which favored, big, baggy clothes with large logos, to return to its previous preppy image.
In the mid-2000s, the company focused on international expansion and brand extensions, until the brand became diluted and overextended. The company sought to become the brand for the preppy lifestyle, yet it was being sold at discount retailers — a channel not frequented by its target customer.
As a remedy, the brand scaled back and signed an exclusive distribution agreement with a more upscale distributor, Macy’s. Hilfiger also simplified its array of offerings to solely convey a “prep” aesthetic. This included naming its latest perfumes, Eau de Prep Tommy Girl and Eau de Prep Tommy, as well as feature classic preppy designs in the Spring 2012 collection, Warholian Prep. It remains to be seen if this reinvention is successful; there are many other brands, particularly Ralph Lauren, Vineyard Vines, and Tory Burch, using the same preppy aesthetic to target a similar consumer.
Axe Stink Bombs
When Unilever launched Axe, its line of male grooming products, in 2002, the consumer products maker targeted young men and teens with advertising that relied heavily on sexual innuendo. These messages were so successful that by 2006, Axe ranked as the best-selling male brand in the antiperspirant/deodorant category, earning $71 million in annual sales ($50 million more than its closest rival Tag).
Unilever subsequently discovered that widespread popularity carries challenges. Among them, teen boys tended to overapply Axe products. As outlined by marketing executive Martin Lindstrom in his latest book, BrandWashed (Crown; September 2011), these users assumed that if Axe equaled sex, more Axe would equal more sex. As a result, several U.S. schools passed “Axe bans” forbidding students from wearing the products.
Unilever executives were tasked with a difficult repositioning dilemma. Sales were still sky-rocketing, thanks to the copious amounts of product boys were using, yet adults were reluctant to purchase Axe products because the brand had become closely associated with teens.
Unilever ultimately decided to forgo short-term profitability based on heavy use by teen boy buyers. Instead, they sought to (hopefully) ensure long-term success by reaching a wider age range. The company sought and received endorsements for the brand by older-skewing publications, such as Esquire, and distributed free samples to college students. It also launched a series of viral videos educating teen boys about how much Axe to use and advising them that dousing yourself with Axe does not substitute for taking a shower. While Axe is not as popular as it was back in 2006, Unilever has continually added new products to the Axe portfolio, and the company says overall sales remain strong.
Ed Hardy Tones It Down
Apparel and accessories brand Ed Hardy faced a situation similar to Unilever’s Axe brand when it achieved massive popularity through an unwanted association. In Ed Hardy’s case, the brand — which features ostentatious designs, rhinestones, and tattoo silhouettes — became synonymous with the style of male characters on Jersey Shore.
Acquiring such a strong association with a particular subculture isn’t always perceived as a danger to a brand’s image. Ed Hardy executives adopted the mindset that “all publicity is good publicity.” At the very least, Jersey Shore “Guidos” purchase a lot of apparel.
By 2011, however, sales had dramatically dropped, partly due to the economy, but also because the brand’s haters began to outnumber its fans. [Some of the sales decline may have also escalated following the 2009 acquisition by the Iconix Brand Group. The new owners most likely let existing licenses lapse in order to remake the brand.]
Ed Hardy needed to tone down its designs in order to broaden its appeal. Now, the adult collection features a more subtle aesthetic, consisting of dark and solid colors, small or nonexistent logos, and more-traditional materials, such as leather and canvas. However, it hasn’t disavowed its vibrant past entirely. The brand continues to introduce the flashier “classic” designs, primarily for teens and in limited quantities for adults.
Contacts and Connections: Abercrombie & Fitch/Hollister, Michael Jeffries, Chairman/CEO, 6301 Fitch Path, New Albany, OH 43054; 614-283-6500; abercrombie@abercrombie.com; www.abercrombie.com.
BrandWashed, by Martin Lindstrom, Doubleday, New York, 2011, Lindstrom, Signe Jonasson, Director, 401-441-5684; jonasson@lindstrom.com; www.martinlindstrom.com.
Curiosity 360, Greg Livingston, Partner, 221 E. 4th St., #2300, Cincinnati, OH 45202, 513-744-6000, glivingston@curiosity360.com; www.curiosity360.com.
Ed Hardy, Rena Marnani, Account Executive, 2829 S. Santa Fe Ave., Vernon, CA 90058; 213-748-1038; rmarnani@aol.com; www.edhardyshop.com.
Perfetti Van Melle USA (Mentos), Tracey Tapas, Marketing, 3645 Turfway Rd., Erlanger, KY 41018; 859-283-1234; tracey.tapas@us.pvmgrp.com; www.mentos.com.
Unilever (Axe), Christine Cea, Director Marketing, 700 Sylvan Ave., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; christine.cea@unilever.com; www.unilever.com.
© Copyright 2011, EPM Communications, Inc. May not be reproduced without written consent of publisher.