Also in this report:
* Peer pressure a huge factor in success of brands, say experts: Youth market researchers David Scowcroft and Mike Farrell explain what it takes to hit home with young consumers p.29
* Nintendo takes aim at campus crowd p.31
* Levi’s strikes an attitude: Jeans maker rejuvenates brand image among young adults with images from techno, hip-hop and skateboarding culture p.32
* Classroom Connections chalks up school support p.34
Strategy has been running regular special reports on youth marketing for some time. Recently, it occurred to us that while we’ve published much expert opinion on the youth market, there’s one group of experts that we’ve seldom consulted: kids themselves.
For this special report on branding in the youth sector, we decided to solicit opinion from a few fairly typical teens. Stu Slayen, editor of Winnipeg-based What! A Magazine, offered to help by putting us in touch with members of his publication’s National Editorial Advisory Committee.
The high-schoolers who responded to our questions, via fax and e-mail, are: Karen Wong of Markham, Ont.; Lance Mattson, of Chester, n.s.; and Tara Williamson of Swan Lake, Man. We wouldn’t suggest that their attitudes be taken as representative of what all teens think about brands. But we do suspect that marketers could learn a thing or two from their insights.
Q. As a consumer, how important is a brand name to you? Does it matter to you, for example, whether a pair of shoes are Nikes or Reeboks or another brand?
Karen Wong: A brand name is fairly important to me – brand names usually signify exceptional quality. Actually, if I were buying a pair of shoes, between Nike, Reebok and Airwalk, I don’t see much of a difference. However, if it were another brand name that I’ve never heard of, I might not want to buy the shoes. I wouldn’t know the background of the company, and so I wouldn’t know the credibility and quality of the shoes.
Lance Mattson: I think it does matter if the item I’m buying is a certain brand name – I know I’m going to be getting quality (hopefully). Plus, chances are someone else will have that brand of shoes or shirt, and I can ask if it’s worth the extra money. But when it comes to [choosing between two recognizable brands], I’m not that picky. I just look for shoes of good taste that I can depend on to last more than a couple of months.
Tara Williamson: Brand names aren’t incredibly important to me É I’m wary of buying something just for the name, because it’s an expensive habit, and there’ll be something new that’s ‘cool’ next year.
Q. How loyal are you to particular brands?
KW: For certain foods and beverages, I am a very loyal customer. Sometimes the other brands just don’t compare. For clothing, I don’t really mind which brand name I buy, as long as the clothing is in.
LM: I’m not loyal to any kind of soft drink, jeans or shoes. The last couple of pairs of jeans I got were Levi’s, but that’s probably just ’cause they were on sale. I have Nike shoes now, but my last pair were Wilson, and the ones before that Adidas. I go for the best-priced brand name with the best comfort.
TW: Actually, I’m fairly loyal – like I prefer Coke to Pepsi. That’s not to say that that I won’t drink Pepsi, but if I have a choice …
Q. What, if anything, would make you drop a brand you’re loyal to?
KW: I would switch if the other brand had a better quality product. I might even settle for a brand that was maybe of a little less quality, but a whole lot less expensive. Otherwise, the only other thing that would make me change would be the reputation of the company. If I found out a company was testing their products on animals, then I might refuse to buy the product.
LM: There are reasons I would change brands. Maybe they support something I’m totally against. Also, if I had a couple of items in a row that were faulty, I might take my business somewhere else – which is what my brother is doing to Adidas.
TW: I would switch if somebody else convinced me they had what I wanted. That usually doesn’t happen through advertising – I’d have to try the brand out myself. In advertising, all they do is try to make the consumer feel pumped-up about the product with completely irrelevant messages, and I never find out what the product is about.
Q. Do you think that different brands have different personalities? Let’s take Nike versus, say, Reebok or Adidas. Do these brands all stand for different things?
KW: I think that different brands do have different personalities É Nike does stand out most among these brands. Its slogan (‘Just Do It’) gives you the impression that it dominates over others. Perhaps when consumers wear their products, they feel powerful and confident enough to take on the world.
LM: When I hear ‘Nike’ I think bigger company, bigger endorsements and more money, for some reason. I know Adidas and Reebok are both very big, but I just get a bigger feeling when I hear ‘Nike.’
TW: Personally, I don’t think companies stand for anything much more than profit. But when I compare Nike to Adidas, I feel that Adidas is much more focused on the athletic part of the industry and is trying to appeal to athletes, while Nike is more commercial and doesn’t care who buys the product, as long as it sells.
Q. Which brands would you say are currently considered cool?
KW: Brands that I would say are considered cool include Club Monaco (cmx), Gap, Calvin Klein, dkny, d&g (Dolce & Gabbana), Nike and Roots. They’re considered cool because of their quality, style and comfort. The price, I think, also makes them cool – only certain people who have the money can buy them, which makes them seem rare and unique.
LM: Airwalk. And any brand-name shoe that’s not too expensive, is comfortable and doesn’t look retarded. Pepsi or Coke? Both are always cool, ’cause they’re the best colas around. Mountain Dew also has growing popularity. Levi’s jeans and clothing. And Nintendo, Sega and now Playstation. They’re cool because they’re fun.
TW: Nike is huge because it looks cool. It gives everyone a jock look, but you don’t have to be a jock to wear it, and it’s black and white.
Q. What’s your general reaction to most of the advertising that you see – positive or negative? Why do you react that way?
LM: Most of the advertising I see is good. Companies have to compete. But the way they do it sometimes goes a little too far – with the sex, the cute puppy dogs or superstars. Some of it gives me a negative feeling. Sex practically sells everything – even things it has nothing to do with.
TW: I don’t usually react strongly to advertising but when I do, it’s negative, because advertisers must think that consumers are stupid. I can’t stand when [the advertising] has nothing to do with the product. There’s this one ad for shoes in a teen magazine, and there’s a girl sitting on a toilet reading a magazine. She’s not even wearing shoes. Explain that one. All I want to know is what the product does, and whether there are any bonuses to using it.
Q. What do you consider good advertising?
KW: I think good advertising is true advertising. I hate ads that show a juicy, big hamburger, but when you finally get the product it doesn’t look anything at all like it did on tv. I like ads that make the consumer think and act: for example, ‘How do they get the caramel into the Caramilk bar?’ Ads that are simple and involve normal, average people can get my attention. Famous people who advertise products are a bit of a turn-off, because I sometimes feel they’re just trying to sell you the product because they were paid to, not because they really believe the product is good.
LM: Good advertising, uhmmmmm É big subject. Good advertising could be selling a product without being manipulative, or it could be selling a product by being manipulative. They both do the job. Good advertising is smart advertising.
TW: Any ads that are straight to the point. I don’t care whether or not Michael Jordan likes to drink it. Will I?
Q. Do you think much of the advertising that targets teens really works?
KW: I think much of it really does work. Most ads give the idea to teenagers that if they buy the product, they will be cool. Out of all the age groups, teenagers are the ones who have the greatest need to feel like they belong in the crowd and to be popular.
LM: [Some] of the advertising works. If someone sees something in an ad, they might say, ‘That’s cool, I want one.’ I’ve heard it, and probably have said it myself. Although today, attitude plays a key role. Some teens know what they want and it doesn’t make any difference who sells it – they ain’t buying it.
TW: Advertisers assume that teenagers are looking for things that are about the opposite sex. ok, so that may very possibly be a big component of our lives. But give it up – I’m not buying a brand of jeans because the hot guy on tv told me to.
Sidebar: What What’s all about
Founded in 1987, What! A Magazine published its 10th anniversary issue this past September.
Owners Doug Martin and Nancy Moore originally set out to create a publication just for Manitoba high-school students. Today, What! is distributed free to more than 1,000 schools across Canada, and boasts a readership of more than 650,000.
‘It was felt there was a way to deliver good information, in a credible package that teens would trust and respect, in the school environment,’ says editor Stu Slayen.
Schools must request the publication in order to receive it, and What! renews its distribution list on an annual basis. Advertisers include the likes of Nintendo, Cover Girl, Sony Music and Nestle.
Slayen says the What! A Magazine National Editorial Advisory Committee was created to generate ‘brutally honest’ feedback about the publication’s style and content – which runs the full gamut of teen interests, from entertainment to education to computers – and to give readers a sense of ownership.
‘They validate 99% of what we do,’ he says. ‘But it’s that 1% that they challenge us about that really helps us learn.’
