Just one of those random thoughts - you know when you have a great fling, and it starts out being fun and exciting. You really enjoy the novelty and intrigue for a bit - till you realise there's little substance/basis and it's not going to translate into a deeper relationships. And on the other hand, when you're in a real functional relationship it also starts out being exciting - over time deepens with a stronger emotional connection and some amount of rational thought (a future? a long term plan, values, goals etc)
so the thought was - there are some brands that we flirt with - they could be fun, so we'll try them but not necessarily stick to. And then there are those that are attractive but also offer some emotional security, with a certain amount of rational thinking ie benefit or belief. see where I'm coming from?
And the question is: what brands have you/would you flirt with? and which ones have you formed a long term relationship with? any why's?
(ofc flings could become relationships and brands we try randomly could be added to our fave repetoire... but generally speaking..)
Monday, January 15, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I would like to 'flirt' with Sony Ericsson phones having been faithful to Nokia all my mobile-life. I probably am resigned to returning to Nokia after a short fling. I have also lusted for MotoRazr earlier but didn't give in to temptation.
One of the reasons why Motorola and Sony differ (with respect to Nokia) is that all the gadgets I own are Sony - with the exception of my Nokia phone and my iPod. I even bought Sony digi-cams (not one but two!)
I believe Sony are getting much of their act right and I keep thinking (or is it imagining) that their phones will be cool too.
The difference here is that I am being loyal with two different brands at two different levels. So who am I flirting with and who am I going steady with?
Having attempted an answer, I must say I'm skeptic of direct comparisons between human-to-human and human-to-brand behaviour.
Blaiq - totally agree on the comparison thing. people are complex/ ever changing. brands are created by people. and modified by us too.
The reason I get off random analogies is that - we get a bad rap for taking things too seriously. and sometimes it's interesting to throw it out open and see if there's any relations. eg - i recently wrote a piece about blind dating and writing a great brief. i'll post it sometime but the underlying theory was its not pre requisitives and filling in boxes. it's a little magic that makes a ok date, great.. and a little magic (inspiration, insight, passion etc) that makes a passable brief really interesting...? thoughts?
btw interesting that with sony ericsson fones it's sony that gets the magic..
Nice post, and Wow! i'd like to see that paper somtime, fink.
On reading the OP, my first instinct was that i'm really not inclined towards flings, and that i like seeking out values, goal and whatnot. Cripes, i must be growing old.
Personally, i don't put too much of merit in the relationship marketing angle. True, brands are built of voilition, and i wouldn't put it above any random consumer to want to try out different brands. But...there's got to be the certainity of a strong benefit-support mechanism.
Hmm, looking back over just the last year, i've flirted and gone on to build relations..er, forge bonds with Motorola. Primarily because the form factor was irresistable, price points were decent. Interface was cleverly designed. I'd possibly even reccomend it to anyone considering a mobile handset (and even managed to convert a few folks!). Needless to say, the advertising was topical and engaging enough to work.
Others i've tried and lapsed with are a newspaper - lapsed usage because the content really went downhill for me. Sad, because print is always fun to hold and read.
nice post fink.
i feel brands as we knew them, grew up with, studied them. profess to know are DEAD...
brand surprises are more sought after than brand consistency...
brand flings are as important as loyalty(if there still is such a thing)
brand stunners/ quirks are often more important than brand heritage...
apart from marketers and advertisers who refuse to change tack, nobody believes in the brand talk the way we have always done...
brand cynicism is more rampant then brand love...
for me, brand authencity is more important these days than brand image!
what happens when you realise you start dating people who share the same personality as the brands you buy. Materialism or a mutal respect.
Speaking about Flings and Loyalty, over the years I've observed that consumers love to flirt with certain product categories while they remain loyal to others.
Eg. Fragnance - You are loyal to one particular brand while you fling with other brands
Cigarette & Alcohol - You stick to one particular smoke brand all through your life. In case of booze you may like whiskey (Chivas)or beer (Kingfisher) but you do fling with other brands when it comes to rum or gin or vodka
Apparel - You invariably end up having a fling
Snacks & Foods - Similar experiences
Soaps, Toothpaste, Cosmetics - You're mostly loyal to your brand
Probably, Manish's last point, Brand authenticity more than brand image plays a bigger role in this consumer behaviour. But I feel this is one point worth probing deeper.
i dont have any emotional relationship with any brand, unless it has a related memory (like gifted by a certain friend, bought with another, dads favorite brand etc). on their own, they are meaningless symbols of materialism.
am i being clear about what i am trying to say???
And what of the fling that you were just growing out of and then she changed her hairstyle/dressing style/outlook to life/lost/gained 5 pounds?
That's Saturn to me. I bought a used 95 Saturn 2 years ago, mainly because it was cheap, blue and looked strangely interesting. It was nothing if not a fling. Just as I am about to dump it for a new shiny better known brand, they come out with the Saturn Sky. What is a man to do?
Post a Comment