One of my favorite streetwear brands at the moment is called Badfriend. The irony being my philosophy is that the best brands behave as best friends. They are honest and complex, but most of all, they are reliable and consistent. Which, is why I don’t think it’s a coincidence that as social bonds are fraying, the power of brand is simultaneously deteriorating. Much of this can be attributed to the reduction of both to products and information. If a brand is a friend, then its heartfelt conversation is its good. But if you can extract the part you need in that moment (e.g. A.I.), deliver it within 48 hours for cheap, then does it really matter who you are getting it from?
This discussion has been waging for quite some time now in the consumer marketplace. In 2014, the Harvard Business Review cited the seminal Information Rules by leading information economy thinkers, Carl Shapiro and Hal R. Varian. “The book predicted that the power of brands would shrink as people had access to more and more free information.” A separate HBR piece noted how the historical purpose of brand was to parse out large swaths of product quality and usefulness. But that role would erode as the Internet served that information directly to us.
Ten years later, we’re seeing much of this theory actualized in the decline of streetwear. Big brands like Nike, Louis Vuitton, and Supreme are slowing, making room for other entrants like On and Hellstar. The market is increasingly fragmented because the way you’re finding out about these companies (media, marketing and advertising) are also fragmented. And as brand aura dilutes, product emerges as king.
NYU Professor of Marketing, Scott Galloway, talks extensively about the “End of the Brand Era.” Today, it’s all about targeting the consumer with product, not the halo lifestyle or culture of a brand. Galloway uses Apple as an example. The tech giant once relied on “brand-based advertising.” Today, its ads are nearly “all product-based.” Galloway continues:
Well, if you think about traditional brand building from 1945 to kind of 1995 to the introduction of Google, the primary algorithm for creating shareholder value was: have a mediocre product, a mediocre shoe, salty snack, car out of Detroit, and then sugar drink, and then wrap it in these amazing brand codes—youth, European elegance, American vigor, sex, paternal, maternal love. We'll take 20 cents a tooth of peanut butter paste and turn it into $2 maternal love because choosy moms choose Jif. … So, the brand used to be this weapon of diligence. It was always a seven or an eight Four Seasons or the Mandarin Oriental. But now I can find the nine for me with these new weapons of mass diligence called Google TripAdvisor. So, quite frankly, the brand has diminished in power. And it sounds very passé. But product is the new black again.
Many fashionistas are being targeted with disjointed, non sequitur pieces on Amazon, SHEIN, and Temu, rather than investing in the holistic look and pricier cache of a brand. Yesterday, Business of Fashion published an article on “How the Streetwear Customer is Evolving.” No longer married to labels, Luke Fracher (of secondhand store Luke’s) talks about how the customer is more educated and sophisticated now, less intoxicated by brand names and more enticed by specific product. “They used to come in and just buy a random $100 Supreme or BAPE tee. Now, people want certain items to complete their fit.”
As a founder and brand owner, I’ve wondered whether the End of Brand is inevitable, if not justified. It wouldn’t be the worst thing. As brands get too heavy, they dominate the conversation and their weight dictates the narrative. This can lead to monopolies, unfair competition, waste and glut. The toxic side of capitalism. Business aside, big brands play into a monoculture where we consume, watch, and listen to the same things. Personally, I appreciate the individualism and creative expression that comes with niche splintering.
But brands, when played right, do help tell a cohesive human story that can’t be absorbed from product alone. Much of the reason why brands are dying is that they’ve forsaken this vital element in pursuit of scaling and optimizing sales. There have always been companies that find success in producing generic products. The reason why we preferred brand names, in the past, was that they were associated with higher quality and storytelling. That’s why designers are integral to the health of a brand. They establish human connection and a hero’s journey.
Consumers, whether conscious of it or not, track with brands because they are following a person’s life. It doesn’t matter if the founder is visible, the staff is public, or there’s a celebrity face guiding the persona. Effective brands emote, communicate, and entertain in the theater of consumerism. Products are a vessel of that experience, a souvenir you take home from the gift shop.
I’ve written a lot about the loneliness epidemic. Half of Americans have less than a handful of friends. 1 in 10 have no friends at all. Although sad, it’s easy to see why. Investing in casual friendships takes 90 hours. “Close” friends requires over 200 hours of energy and investment. We’ve allowed little space in our busy, distracted lives to accommodate such sacrifices of time. So, instead we reduce human friendships to digital transactions online. A “heart” instead of a hug. A voicenote instead of a coffee. We’ve reduced people to products.
And still, most of us yearn to immerse ourselves in more substantive relationships. We know that the DM is not enough, the bot exchange isn’t fulfilling. But, they are convenient and serve us. This is only half the story. This is a half-assed life. And the results are unsustainable, unfulfilling, and short-lived.
It seems like consumers are also seeking more out of shopping. “Underconsumption core” is a TikTok trend that responds to the relentless onslaught of cheap, disposable products. One TikToker remarked, “we’re just constantly bombarded with stuff.” Purging their hauls, shoppers are falling back on tried-and-true, quality product. Purchasing product to product, especially of poor quality, has become untenable. Especially because it lacks meaning.
I’m not suggesting that brands provide meaning, but I believe human connections do. And the best way to deliver that to a consumer within product is wrapping it with a thoughtful and robust brand experience. Even Galloway admits that storytelling is still critical to a brand’s success. But “all this money has been taken out of traditional branding, gone into direct response (Facebook, Google) and into product itself.” Meanwhile, young consumers are telling us that these transactions feel vapid. They’d rather fall back on product that is reliable, quality, enduring, and consistent. Just like a best friend.
Damn Bobby, this is one peaks. 🏔️ So Epic. Great insight.
Amen