Brand name beer, anyone?

Now that it appears that our economy might indeed be in recovery, there are many things that I suspect may never be quite the same in the wonderful world of marketing. Brand is one of those things.  Branding has always been dependent upon two very distinct influences: loyalty and frequency of impression. Think about it. The more you pounded that brand, logo, or positioning statement home, the more legacy a brand enjoyed. Think Coca Cola, AT&T, Allstate, Ford, General Motors, etc., etc. During an economic downturn however, an interesting phenomenon occurs: brands spend less money on “branding” and customers spend less on “brands.”

From a consumer perspective it just makes sense to buy a perceptably “lesser” brand that is cheaper. This also creates huge opportunities for new brands to sneak into the market and gain market share, and seemingly from nowhere become the new “established” brands (think Geico, Progressive, Hyundai, Skechers, and the like). At the same time, companies recoiling from diminished sales revenues and bruised stock values often (and rightly so) adopt marketing methodologies that are predominantly oriented around measurement and return on investment. So does that mean that one is better or more important than the other? Or does it simply mean that this kind of cycle is a natural process that helps to keep the collective buyer/company brand fresh and growing? Hard to say. All I know is that I’m not fond of generic beer. And among the many things I’m grateful for as the economy heads back north is that I can buy my favorite brand and that they can count me as one of theirs.