Post by Moses on Nov 29, 2005 9:00:13 GMT -5
(This seems to apply to the Democratic Party)
Last resort
“Relying on celebrity spokespersons should be the course of last resort,” said Robert Passikoff, the president of Brand Keys, a New York market-research company. “It is basically a statement that we have no meaning, relevance or value of our own, but if we stand next to someone real close, maybe some of it will wear off on us.” Given that such celebrities don’t come cheap -- Sarah Jessica Parker is believed to have been paid $38 million for her three-year stint -- the likes of Mr. Passikoff aren’t sure why Gap has persisted in this approach.
The answer may lie in the success that the retailer experienced when it employed the same strategy back in the late ’80s. Such audacious ads as the one that depicted beatnik rebel Jack Kerouac in wrinkled khakis and a white oxford shirt, with the tagline “Kerouac wore khakis,” worked like magic for the retailer. [There is a difference between a dead literary figure and Sarah Jessica Parker, marketing people!]
Good old days
Not only did co-opting an anti-establishment figure help Gap brand itself as cool, but it -- along with the other stars of the 1988-1993 “Individuals of Style” campaign -- drove sales skyward. For three years from 1990, earnings climbed an average of 43 percent. And in 1993 alone, the Gap’s 1,200 stores posted sales growth of 30 percent. Not so anymore.
“They’ve lost their cool and don’t stand for anything anymore,” said Wendy Liebmann, president of WSL Strategic Retail. Mr. Passikoff added: “The Gap is now a category placeholder. It’s the name everyone knows, but aren’t real sure what it stands for anymore and there are other choices that mean more to consumers anyway today.”
www.adage.com/news.cms?newsId=46924
Last resort
“Relying on celebrity spokespersons should be the course of last resort,” said Robert Passikoff, the president of Brand Keys, a New York market-research company. “It is basically a statement that we have no meaning, relevance or value of our own, but if we stand next to someone real close, maybe some of it will wear off on us.” Given that such celebrities don’t come cheap -- Sarah Jessica Parker is believed to have been paid $38 million for her three-year stint -- the likes of Mr. Passikoff aren’t sure why Gap has persisted in this approach.
The answer may lie in the success that the retailer experienced when it employed the same strategy back in the late ’80s. Such audacious ads as the one that depicted beatnik rebel Jack Kerouac in wrinkled khakis and a white oxford shirt, with the tagline “Kerouac wore khakis,” worked like magic for the retailer. [There is a difference between a dead literary figure and Sarah Jessica Parker, marketing people!]
Good old days
Not only did co-opting an anti-establishment figure help Gap brand itself as cool, but it -- along with the other stars of the 1988-1993 “Individuals of Style” campaign -- drove sales skyward. For three years from 1990, earnings climbed an average of 43 percent. And in 1993 alone, the Gap’s 1,200 stores posted sales growth of 30 percent. Not so anymore.
“They’ve lost their cool and don’t stand for anything anymore,” said Wendy Liebmann, president of WSL Strategic Retail. Mr. Passikoff added: “The Gap is now a category placeholder. It’s the name everyone knows, but aren’t real sure what it stands for anymore and there are other choices that mean more to consumers anyway today.”
www.adage.com/news.cms?newsId=46924