Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Jenny Schmitt, PhD | BrandLab's avatar

The 80% reliable / 20% weird idea is such a good way to explain why some brands become favorites instead of just “good businesses.”

The reliable part gets you trusted. The weird part gives people something to remember.

But I think there’s a commercial trap in there too: brands can fall in love with being “different” and forget that weirdness only has value if it changes behavior somehow. Does it make people choose you, talk about you, come back, pay more, forgive a mistake?

Fallow works because the strange bits all reinforce the same identity. It doesn’t feel like random quirkiness pasted onto a normal restaurant.

That’s the bit I keep coming back to: distinctive is not automatically valuable.

Where do you think the line is between memorable weirdness and founder self-indulgence?

Gunnar Miller's avatar

Vans might not be the best example for "off the wall" being a great brand strategy ... it certainly hasn't helped the stock :-( https://www.google.com/finance/quote/VFC:NYSE?window=5Y

20 more comments...

Ready for more?