Despite the term’s overuse, some Western brands are genuinely ‘iconic’ – the graphics and structures they use to represent themselves act as symbols for deeper brand values that over time we have come to understand. In the west we see Tiffany teal blue and we think Audrey Hepburn with a croissant and coffee. We see a red chevron and a thousand images of cowboys pop up in our heads.
So it’s interesting to see how much value certain brands have when stripped of these cultural associations as they introduce themselves to China, which with less recognition of western references, lacks the cultural shorthand usually utilised to imbue these designs with further ‘meaning’. In a recent article exploring the sale of high-end fashion to a culture that experienced the Cultural Revolution, the editor of Vogue China told The Guardian “You need to explain swinging London, Mary Quant, The Beatles, and why these people made a difference. If you don’t explain, they’re just clothes”.
In the same piece, The Guardian quoted a forecast that more than 44% of the world’s luxury goods will be sold in China by 2020. Many of our own clients believe that if they can win a comparatively small fraction of China’s brand share it will put their domestic sales figures into a cocked hat. Still, these are early days, right now only 2% of the population buys top end brands.
Should these predicted figures prove to be even close to correct this would create not only an opportunity but also a paradox of sorts. Here is a relatively un-jaded, economically flourishing market but a market which, owing to the same forces it owes its very existence, may require a whole new marketing approach.
So here’s my question: do brands simply transfer their global campaigns to this new market and assume that the new market will pick up the plot mid-story? If so, it will show that ‘icons’ can exist free of meanings and nuances that often took decades to build, that the status conveyed by a head spinningly high price tag and a western provenance is enough. And I guess most brands are betting on this. But it will be interesting to see if any of the superbrands take things back to basics and invest time in explaining what it is that makes them special and what their iconography is representing in terms of product quality, ethos, and heritage. All of this is doubly challenging as Beijing has banned billboard luxury goods advertising for the time being.
My guess is that without investment in
building meaning, the brands will quickly become interchangeable (if
high-end) commodities. In which case, their popularity will be short
lived and much like the carriage clocks gifted by European ambassadors
to the Emperor’s court a couple of centuries ago, the brands mechanics
will be stripped down, understood and rebuilt along alternative Chinese
lines in short order.
Currently, Chinese Vogue is experiencing incredibly high demand for
advertising space and if these pages of beautiful yet undeniably
interchangeable photographs of handbags with prominent logos cut it long
term, then that will be illuminating. However, if the caché of being an
established Western brand proves ineffective in creating enduring
success, it may turn out that throwing media spend at the opportunity
was not enough. Perhaps investing in establishing a deeper meaning in
these early days might be a vital part of winning the race to be a
long-term leading brand to a culture seeing you with fresh eyes.A recent piece in the Financial Times notes that Burberry is making great ground in China by branding itself as both the quintessential ‘and only’ Luxury British brand, with fashion shows importing UK cultural talent to support this impression. Here, I guess, is a brand defining its point for a new market, rather than simply rolling out the established iconography to a new market.
Source: http://www.jkrglobal.com/design-gazette/establishing-luxury-brands-in-china-2/
Design Gazette / Mr. Silas Amos