Scaffolding for building brands

Among the classical precepts of a 'brand' is that it inspires trust and provides reassurance.

But then, I saw something strange on my TV screen the other day that led me to wonder about this supposed self-evident truth. (No, it wasn't anything as disturbing as a certain Mallika S. starring in and as a snake. That would have led me to question not just the meaning of brand concepts, but whether life itself had any meaning.)

But returning to my TV set, what I saw looked like a commerical, but there was something odd about it. It took me a moment to realise what it was: the lady waxing eloquent about a biscuit was pleasant but not as good looking as the viewer expects a model to be. Enlightenment dawned as I understood that it represented a "faux-commercial" (a term I just invented). It is built on the premise that credibility must be plain-Jane and wear an attitude of sincerity, while appeal must wear lip-gloss and exude pulchritude.

Actually, it was representative of a new phenomenon: brands which plug other brands. Its as if brands are acknowleging that, "we fear you may not trust us sufficiently, so let another brand endorse our brand." If brands need someone else to vouch for them, what is one to make of the original brand's trustworthiness? (A kind of Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - "Who will guard the guards themselves?" conundrum.)

But to return to the plain Jane. She was plugging the aforementioned biscuit on behalf of something called 'Brand Power.' The two-word unit appears in a corner of the screen, apropos of nothing. It has placed two words together in an order which suggests deep meaning, but is actually about as deep as "Ingredient Potential" or "Product Energy."

So what exactly is 'Brand Power'? It is (in their own words), "a unique advertising vehicle that's quite different to many of the other ads you'll see on television". What it does is, "produces television commercials, campaigns and flyers that inform consumers of the features and benefits of products - in a very clear and easy to understand style". Of course the lay viewer may not know that it "is an advertising vehicle sponsored and paid for by leading manufacturers." Ah so.

'Brand Power' is not the only example of marketing prosthetics; brands that exist to support other brands.

There is also the notion of 'Superbrands'. This places itself at the Nobel prize level of brand-aids. The title is granted by a process that begins by getting online voters to score brands. (Online voting for masalas? painbalms? inexpensive detergents?) Anyway, brands shortlisted through this mechanism, are put to a Superbrands Council of marketing professionals, to arrive at the final list of 'SuperBrands.' Selected brands can use the title of 'Superbrand' for a certain period. Does one pay for this? What do you think?

Offering yet another example of this phenomenon is a new entrant called, 'Voted New Product of the Year'. How does this work? Well, you pay a certain amount to 'enter' your brand in a survey. And a nationwide survey reveals -among paricipating brands - the 'Voted New Product of the Year' winners. Of course you then pay a certain (larger) fee for using the 'Voted New Product of the Year' logo in your communication. This caper rests on the assumption that Mrs. Kulkarni, our quintessential consumer, will believe that this democratic process of "voting" will separate the brand wheat from the chaff as it were.

Given how difficult it is to build brands, its not surprising that we now have brands whose only purpose is to be the 'scaffolding' to help build other brands.

Sounds like a way of making money by helping others to make money. Reminds me of an author who wrote the apocryphal book, "100 tips to become a millionaire" that became a best seller, as hordes of people tried to find short-cuts to wealth. But nothing is so simple. They didn't realise that the author had left out tip number 101, the only sure-fire trick he knew... Tip #101 to become a millionaire: Sell a book titled, "100 ways to become a millionaire".