Social networks can be the messenger that drives people and brands to interact. Product Design Specialists provide insight on how brands can maintain a long-term competitive advantage in a dynamic environment.
A recent article in Design Management Review (DMR) discussed authenticity and branding, and William Faust and Leigh Householder in Ology defined brand authenticity. They suggested that a brand should be clear about what it is and what it stands for; the right brand is built from the inside out rather than pandering to the latest trends, fads, or customer segments. Additionally, best practice branding is achieved through the use of a true story, a connection to a ground truth, and an appreciation of savvy customers.
On a recent visit to the Apple Store on Fifth Avenue and 57th Street in New York City, I was surprised to see the line of customers of all ages exiting the store onto the Fifth Avenue sidewalk. Customers (some tourists) were just as happy and excited outside the store as those inside. While inside, visitors explored the store, sampled products and shopped for some of Apple’s latest tech offerings.
This appears to be a typical scenario for customers at this store, and other store locations across the country also experience a steady stream of customers.
Next door (a 15-second walk past the GM building) is the world-famous FAO Schwarz toy store (now owned by Toys “R” Us). As Apple is now, FAO. it was once a must-visit toy store at 57th and Fifth Avenue.
It was recognized worldwide for its variety of unique and one-of-a-kind products, including toys, entertainment products, and movie and television merchandising. Its products reflected the brand’s dedication to quality that its customers had come to trust for nearly 150 years, but in recent years the brand’s image has eroded and customers notice the smell of blood in their water.
On this particular day, as on many others throughout the year, FAO was suffering from loss of customers and lack of interest in its merchandise.
What also surprised me was the huge difference in foot traffic between the Apple and FAO stores. The FAO was relatively empty, despite the fact that the streets were full of tourists looking for an air-conditioned and entertaining tent to cool off. Instead, they chose to stand in Apple’s long line, which stretched from inside the store, up the escalators and out onto the sidewalk in the hot 90-degree August sun. It was like waiting to get into a popular nightclub: no new patrons were allowed in until the others had left. And this was not a new product launch day.
Is Apple better at engaging its customers through digital and traditional media alongside its product launches? Let’s take a closer look at the current social media presence of these companies:
Apple:
Facebook – 628,516 followers
Twitter (50+ accounts) – iTunes account has 1,528,755 followers, follows 14, and has 692 tweets
Apple YouTube Channel –
Channel Views: 2,760,784
Total Upload Views: 14,444,703
Joined: June 21, 2005
Followers: 82,802
Cam Schwartz
Facebook – 4,779 followers
Twitter: 411 followers, follows 5 and has 11 tweets
Youtube channel:
Channel Views: 5,296
Total Upload Views: 24,626
Age: 42
Joined: Jul 24, 2007 (two years after Apple)
Date of last visit: 10 months ago
Followers: 53
Videos taken by a manager at FAO Schwarz in New York.
Apple seems to have a stronger presence on social media, even though the FAO has a 150-year emotional tie to people of all ages with its focus on classic toys and historical and current movie and TV merch. FAO was also a strong brand communicator before the rise of social media marketing, and the film Great cemented its place in the history of toy marketing. People of all ages also have a psychological attachment to FAO products dating back to their childhood memories. Its public relations and social media branding campaigns began long before Apple’s.
Is the FAO brand and its related merchandise not relevant in today’s entertainment market, or are its media agencies not working out of the box to connect with its customer base? (I also realize that big box stores like Wal-Mart are undercutting FAO’s sales through low prices, even though some of their entertainment products and special in-store service offerings are not the same.)
Apple and FAO (both companies market entertainment products globally) talk about the central challenge of social media, as Faust and Householder define it, “to create a social dialogue that engages customers and stays true to the core of the brand.”
But FAO seems to have lost that “thing”, as Faust and Householder pointed out, with which people inside and outside the company can connect and recognize each other. While FAO has suffered from poor management and ownership changes in recent years, that is no excuse for ruining a 150-year-old brand for lack of a good branding and marketing strategy. If money is the issue, the FAO could have hired several young digital strategists to create a successful campaign that is relevant to today’s younger generation.
People of all ages identify with Apple’s hip and trendy buzz in the media, design technology launches, and media campaigns endorsing its products.
Furthermore, Apple customers are willing to spend more (even in a recession) on Apple products than on similar products made by a competitor. Do people today prefer to see themselves as cool, smart, and socially up-to-date tech users in tune with the latest trends and fashions?
If so, Apple’s approach flies in the face of the current wisdom of some experts in the field of product design, branding, and sustainability, which states that branding is built from the inside out. Apple doesn’t always follow the latest trend, fad, or customer segment, but sometimes it’s because it creates them. Perhaps Apple is the exception to the rule of best branding practice that “for a brand to be successful, it must be clear about what it is and what it stands for, and add to it.”
FAO lacks a cohesive brand, marketing and social media strategy. You’re out of touch with your customers and prospects, you lack creativity in your PR process, and you don’t have an effective social media listening strategy. I do believe their products are relevant to today’s customers, but evidence of a weak marketing plan is visible in their in-store foot traffic levels and also in their search engine optimization (SEO) approach.
From a marketing (SEO) perspective, FAO has 1,067 external links to its home page from other sites (Apple.com has 1,336,191), and FAO’s parent company, Toys R Us, has 6,117 external links to your home page. This means that Toys R Us is cited as a stronger authority in the eyes of Google’s search algorithms. If Toys R US can improve their own SEO link strength, they can do the same for FAO’s. The parent company has a first and second page position in a broad organic (non-paid) Google search (without enclosing the search term “toys” in quotes). FAO appears on the second page of a Google search, fourth from the top of the page.
One strategy that Toys R US could start using is to spend more time on FAO’s organic search SEO force, which would give their customers better online store visibility. This could save money on online paid advertisements (PPC). Compared to FAO’s other online competitors, as of this publication, Fisher Toys (with a first page, first place) has 28,285 external links to their page, eToys (with a first page, third place), has 842 external links to their page, and KB Toys (with a first page, fourth position) has 42 external links to their page. (All search results were returned using the term “toys” in Google search.) Also, while KB Toys has fewer links pointing to its home page than FAO, it also does not have FAO’s nearly full page of Flash content, which can interfere with search engines’ ability to properly index a web page. While there are other SEO strategies that I haven’t talked about, at first glance these are some of the most obvious ones.
FAO’s focus on customer loyalty and marketing its products based on its one-of-a-kind products are no longer enough to forge a powerful connection with a brand that was once the toy store to beat. Today’s consumers expect to interact with a brand, and that can be done profitably through digital and social media.
Apple’s public relations (buzz), social media strategy, traditional marketing and advertising provide a very different consumer experience. Launched numerous products (including the iPod which proved to be the “game changer”, propelling the company from a computer supplier to an entertainment company. FAO can learn from one of the most innovative companies operating in today’s business market with an ultra-loyal user base.Over the past ten years, Apple arguably only had one new product launch that flopped, the Power Mac G4 Cube (phased out after its first year), while the jury is still out. you may be deliberating about the Mac mini and Apple TV.
Apple has promoted itself as a company that can solve your personal entertainment and business problems instantly; their promos tap into a basic human desire (for life to be easier) and the desire to be fun and cool, even if it costs more. They also say something more important about the core of the brand: that Apple is a quick problem solver. Often, that means not only thinking about what the customer would like, but also defining what is true to the brand. Toys will always be fun. But easy is fun and authentic.
