Umair Haque on shrinking advantage of brands
In a nutshell interaction is becoming cheaper so the investment in the brand promise doesn’t have to be high, as people can just interact with the brand. Simply genius in my opinion. UPDATE - now embedded.
More from Umair on his blog post.
I agree with his conclusions, but I think his rationale is off-base.
If anything, having more information and more choices means brands are more important as ’signposts’ or ’shortcuts’ — who has time to discuss every low consideration purchase on social networks?
Plus, what does he mean interaction is expensive. It’s a well-documented fact that the most influential and frequent channel for influencing brand decisions is word-of-mouth — and I don’t think that interaction got any cheaper.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:39 pmHe said interaction was cheap not expensive. Spending on the brand, the expected value of consumption is becoming the actual value because people experience easily.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:43 pm