B (5:03)

I mean Fergus, you worked. You worked for that.

A (5:05)

I work for that.

B (5:07)

You work for that.

A (5:08)

This is what I get paid this is what I get paid for being the official podcast Get Paid in Gold. I get paid in gold, man. It's actual Gold. Yeah, that's right. Proper gold, man. Proper gold.

C (5:19)

Who needs a 401k?

A (5:21)

Who needs a 401k when you got an FA? All right, so we are thrilled to have Lachlan Badenoch. He is the chief strategy officer of Carmichael Lynch. And if you don't know Carmichael lynch, you've been living under a freaking stone for years. Clock. Terrific agency. They do all of the Subaru work. I don't think enough people know that, but you need to know that all that fantastic love work for years. Lachlan has come out of Carmichael lynch in Minneapolis. And we are still. We've been on. This show's been around for five years. We are still trying to get you to get us on here with that show.

C (5:59)

Yeah, we still need to get that to happen, right?

A (6:01)

Yeah, we're gonna schedule that for 2029 or something, hopefully. But hopefully sooner than that. But great to have you here. Kelsey Carson is also here. Evp. He had a strategy at Tom Brass. Tom Brass is kicking ass the last couple of years. Actually, Kelsey has been on. A couple of weeks ago, we did an episode on Josh. They won a gold Effie. And so great to have you back. Welcome back, Kelsey.

D (6:23)

Thank you.

A (6:24)

And hey. That was too quiet. Come on, Kelsey.

E (6:28)

I didn't want to interrupt you.

A (6:29)

Thank you for the interruption. And we have our usual misfits. Matt Herbert is here, co founder of Tracksuit. And Vanessa Chin, SVP marketing for System One here in America. And great to have everybody here. Welcome back. We have a theme this month called resurgence. And I was actually thinking the other day, Vanessa, that we kind of already did a resurgence when we did Starbucks and JCPenney. But this feels like a different kind of resurgence. So Vanessa and I were talking maybe a week or two ago, and. And the idea of Gap came up. And Gap, to me, is a brilliant example of resurgence. And then I was thinking about Chili's. We've had Chili's on in the past. The past number of months, and they seem to really have a lot in common. So we're doing this not because these are two examples of resurgence being done in completely opposite ways. I see them as having a ton of commonality. Maybe the guys will disagree with me here, but let's start off by talking about the gap. I'm gonna give you some practical shit for a second. First of all, remember this from the 90s. For those of us old enough, it was sort of very classic, preppy style, 1990s, great advertising. It was just so original at the time. Coming ahead to today, when we look at the stock price, $21.58, a low of $16.99 in the last 12 months, a high of $29.29. Revenue growth. Even though there's a ton of talk about gaap, the revenue growth has been pretty modest. It hasn'. Chili's. Chili's is like 28% year on year. Revenue growth for the Gap is only projected to be 1 to 2% this year, but it's getting a ton of buzz and everything is pointing in the right direction. A new CEO in Richard Dickson, he was formerly of Mattel. A new designer in Zac Posen. A new CMO in Fabiola Torres, who was formerly from Nike and Apple and Pepsi. So a lot of new and a lot of energy and a lot of what seem may be strong strategic decisions. So I wanted to start off with a question for our strategists here. What do we think are the brand's challenges when they're trying to revive past glory? Kelsey, what do you think? What are the challenges they face?

E (9:01)

I think it's funny, we work on a lot of CPG snack brands at Tumbris, and we've seen a lot of kind of nostalgia for, you know, brands that have been around forever that you remember from your childhood. And I think when you talk about resurgence for brands with, with a history, there can be this real trap to say, like, let's show up the way that we used to show up. People clearly miss us for something that they experienced 20 years ago, and we need to repeat that to give them those feelings. And I think, you know, you see that so much from fans. You see it so much on the Internet. When I worked on Taco Bell, we saw a lot of this, too. That's like, remember the Taco Bells of my childhood and powerful emotion, but it's not enough. And so I think the question is, how do you take that and figure out what. What the world needs from you today? And I think in the case of a brand like Gap, you know, the, the moment when they were in their heyday in the 90s, we had a. We had a monoculture. You know, you could look really put together in something like khakis and a button down. And I think you look at this era in 2025, and we're coming off of like, 15 years of athleisure and this moment when everything feels really fragmented. And so I think they've been able to tap into feelings that people crave that were true of the 90s that are absent today. So it's not just, let's repeat the playbook from the 90s, but, like, what is it from that era that we need to bring back? And I haven't seen a lot of khakis in their work, which I think is an example of, like, not everything from the past should make it the present or the future. You have to be choiceful about what the world needs from you today.

A (10:48)

What do you think, Lachlan?

C (10:50)

Yeah, I mean, that's exactly right. And there's. It's one of those things where nostalgia, or not being true to yourself for a brand is always so important. But the trick is, how do you be, especially when you have that nostalgia from the past, how do you really be true to yourself, but also a current actor and culture and what are you contributing to culture rather than just reflecting back stuff? And if you can figure out that piece where it's definitely you and you're bringing something, something new, but something that's coming from inside the brand, I think that's kind of the magic. And it's so interesting looking at the current work, because on the surface, you're like, oh, my God. It's like it could be an ad lifted straight from the 1990s. There's so many surface similarities and then like, oh, actually some of the details and some of the nuances and, you know, when you look at the surround sound of the kind of the headline pieces. Yeah, it has all the modernity and, you know, also just the right choices, those little touches where it's like, oh, it's just the right music and casting on partnerships and all that stuff is super important too. But the fundamental is. And, you know, the staying true to yourself is kind of that classic brand management, you know, double S curve thing of like, oh, yeah, you were great back here, but how are you going to get your next growth of or wave of growth, Figure out what it is you bring forward and what it is you don't bring forward. And it's always gonna be a balance of the two.

A (12:24)

But here's the thing. I don't think it's nostalgia. I think it's nostalgia, possibly for Gen X and millennials. But nostalgia is not what this is. In my mind, it's creativity expressed through pop culture, because most of the people that were saying that this is targeted towards, but in this case, it seems to be built on creativity at a time when creators and creativity have massive penetration into culture.

E (12:55)

I think it's both, though, right? Like, if there's a big population, if you see any of that work it immediately takes you back to the 90s. And to your point, there are many people who don't have that memory, the younger generation. And I think, like, what was it a couple days ago they put out that spot with cat's eye.

A (13:12)

Yeah.

E (13:12)

They didn't use Cat's eyes music. They used Milkshake, which is a nostalgic song.

C (13:20)

My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard and they're like, it's better than yours.

A (13:24)

Damn right it's better than yours. I could teach you, but I have to charge.

C (13:28)

My milkshake brings all the boys to the yard and their life is better than yours.

A (13:33)

Damn right it's better than yours. I could teach you, but I have to choose. So, Vanessa, what do you think? What do you think of the work?

D (13:44)

Well, personally, I went down an absolute rabbit hole with the cat's eye. I. My tik tok feed is now 100% cat's eye. I know everything about them. They performed at the Nickelodeon Kids Choice Awards, but now they're trying to age up. Kind of like their Christina Aguilera moment. Dirty moment. The thing that I'm seeing, though that's a bit worrisome is branding. So even though we remember gap from the 90s, we remember this kind of, you know, the. The khakis and the jeans on a white sweep. That is not necessarily a construct that's instantly recognizable at the moment. So from an emotional reaction standpoint, it's fairly low in terms of performance on eliciting a strong emotional connection because it's not being recognized as gap.

C (14:33)

I was really wondering what you're. I'm assuming this is from testing it, what you're going to be seeing on that, because it's such a. I think for those of us who know it and remember it, it's such a strong, fluent construct. But if you were to map it on the kind of Orlando we'd like, you know, it doesn't have any of the, like, the really strong, fluent devices that are the sort of easy or quick wins there.

A (14:59)

But the white backgrounds, the clothing, I mean, it looks the same as it did in the 90s. The logo is pretty much the same. The high energy, energetic music and personality is the same. I mean, it does feel that those characters and the use of celebrity periodically is the same. You don't feel that that's there. Those cues are there everywhere.

D (15:23)

In one of them, there was so the holiday spot where they had the children all gathered around singing Janet Jackson, that did feel a gap. It was recognized as Gap and definitely elicited a stronger emotional reaction. But the remainder of the work, not much.

E (15:45)

There are times when I look above and beyond There are times when I feel your love around me Baby I'll never forget my baby yeah.

C (16:02)

Sometimes hear.

D (16:03)

You whisper pain no worries Will you ever.

E (16:16)

It's also interesting because those original ads were not very long and to your point, they were all shot on kind of the same background. And the new work feels more like content in the, like you can watch it for two or three minutes.

C (16:27)

Yeah. So music video the Cat's.

E (16:30)

Yeah. Feels a little less repeatable.

A (16:32)

So the big question, Matt, is how does this sort of track. And I'm most interested in pulling apart these cohorts, these age groups, because there's, there's almost, there's two targets here and it feels like I'm super curious how it's tracking if you're able to break it down by age group.

B (16:50)

Yeah. Well, let's break this down. So over the last 12 months, if we look at, we'll break down to a six month period. So from August last year until February, awareness was dropping off with 18 to 34 year olds. Awareness and consideration. Awareness went from 79 to 72%. Consideration dropped 48% to 36%.

A (17:12)

Okay, slow down, slow down. So I guess. Okay, wait, so 18 to 34 year olds, awareness went from 79 to 72% down during the time when they're doing that. How does that even happen?

B (17:24)

Down and consideration dropped 48% to 36%. So only 36% of 18 to 34 year olds were considering gay at up through January, up through, up through February. The good news is that awareness and consideration has improved significantly over the last six months. So kind of March through July. So it's taking some time to come in. But that awareness of consideration conversion has jumped 7 percentage points. And so now they're converting. 57% of people who are aware of gap are now considering them.

C (18:04)

And so it does feel like they're just getting their mojo back actually. Like they kind of. It started maybe last year to really find the groove, but even Parker Posey maybe. But the Cat's Eye one feels like a real step forward.

B (18:20)

If we're looking at the, at the, at the perception shifts of 18 to 34 year olds. This is where over the last six months it's been great. So trust has risen 8 percentage points and as a quality brand has also risen 8 percentage points. And so 18 to 34 year olds, they've stemmed the flow. They've also increased the amount of people that are considering them and they're also changing perceptions. So the campaign is revitalizing the brands, it's repositioning where it looks at that, you know, if we go 55+, awareness is trending in the right direction, but consideration hasn't really changed. And so again, it's just taking some time. But you break it down in the cohorts. Positive signs for 18 to 34 year olds. My question too, as I was looking at some of the recent campaigns in the work was what we just spoke about. If we compared all the Gap content with everything coming out from Abercrombie and Fitch, for example, or American Eagle.

A (19:19)

American Eagle, yeah, American Eagle.

B (19:21)

But if you lined up all the denim clothing kind of, it kind of all looks the same. You know, if we truly lined it all up against each other, it all looks the same. And so someone that you know, myself, not as familiar with Gap or didn't grow up with Gap as much. I was watching, I was watching the videos, I was going, what brand is this?

D (19:42)

It, I mean it's, it's a better music video truly. Because Abercrombie and Fitch did have a follow up to American Eagle. They did have gene content with better representation, you know, as a follow up. But the Gap work is the one who's getting credit for that. Even though Abercrombie did the exact same thing. It's a, it's, it's better, it's, it's just better content. But it's also has a shock value that the Abercrombie and Fitch work did not. Because a lot of the responses in the verbatims are about overly sexualized content. I mean we all know what milkshake, you know the song is about. So you know, Abercrombie do the same thing but without the shock value that Gap introduced.

A (20:26)

What about those teenagers? Are you guys tracking that at all?

B (20:31)

That's not something at tracksuit that we track. Everything's over that 18 years of age for all the categories and brands that we're tracking.

D (20:40)

So I did test the most recent Gap work for Gen Z versus Gen Pop and it was no different. And we saw on all the measures, yeah, we also similarly on Get Loose the spot I'm going to mess up the name of the influencer Troyan. He similarly, we tested it both ways and about this, I mean, marginally better for Gen Z, but a lot of the feedback was didn't know the brand, didn't know what they were trying to sell. It's long, very, very long and we did test them as digital videos. Very, very long, repetitive.

C (21:28)

But Gab's been sort of invisible, I think, even to those of us that grew up with it for, what, more than a decade. So they don't have those memories or the associations. But it does feel like. That's why I say it feels like they're at the start of a resurgence or getting their mojo back. And I would not be surprised if they get there. But they don't have that fluency today because it isn't strongly branded in a very overt way. You have to know the trope and the style, and there's lots of other people that do very similar things now. So it's harder, I guess, to establish that.

E (22:03)

But it is to that point what Zac Posen joined a year ago. We're still pretty new in this era. And I do wonder, just in that time, they've done three or four, four of these. All pretty timely, all generating tons of views. And it does make you wonder a year from now if that look will start to be much more.

C (22:24)

A lot of conversation with slightly different. Like the Parker Posey stuff got a slightly different audience conversation cat, but also.

E (22:33)

Right, because she was in White Lotus, right? So it, again, felt like it was doing that, like, younger thing, older thing, all at once in a way.

C (22:40)

That exact posing, it's got to help, too. But it's the old. I think it's a John Hegarty thing where he's like, oh, but it's always 80% idea and 80% execution and the nuances of who Is It? And the details of it make such a difference. And I think they've got it really right with some of the recent ones, I think the Parker Posey one, and for sure the Cat's Eye one. It really matters. It's the kind of thing where it's like, you can't animatic this. It has to be the. It has to be the actual music, the actual band. And those choices are incredible.

A (23:17)

So when we look at this, when we look at this work, then why use almost carbon copy style creative from the 90s? And that's what I found intriguing about this. This wasn't a sort of a resurgence from a point of view of coming up with a different way of expressing this brand's identity. It was, in essence, you could be running the khaki shit from 19 and it's exactly. It's as strong as it was back then. And it. It. It is, in essence, the same. The same creative structure. Baby, baby, it looks like it's gonna.

C (23:57)

Heal.

A (23:59)

Baby, baby, it looks like it's gonna heal. You better come inside. Let me teach you how to drive. And we look. Oh, you better jump Diving, then you really got to jump driving. Then you really got to jump ji. Then you will. Then I look at you and the world's all right with me. Just want to look at you and. And I know it's gonna be a lovely day. Why do that then? If you have to rebuild amongst an audience, is it to capture those who know it and then hope that those.

B (24:58)

Who are younger will leverage it?

C (25:00)

That's still a lot of money there, right? If you can recapture the older and bring the younger group, fantastic. It's usually pretty hard to do both, I would say.

A (25:09)

Yeah, yeah. Is that a smart thing to do, though? I mean, because where else could they have gone creatively? Not creatively, but strategically. Anybody got any thoughts on where they could have gone? Because this seems like it was an easy choice to make and it seems to make a lot of sense for a lot of reasons. But are there reasons that it's not a good idea? Because I think we're sort of pointing to it now, which is fucking younger generation doesn't even understand it. They think it's. They may associate Troye Sivan more that worked more with Troye Sivan than they do with Gap.

B (25:42)

Well, I think it's. We see in the perception data that we're tracking at traxxas, the perception is shifting in a positive light for Gap. It's just taking a little bit. That doesn't happen overnight. And I mean, we can get into the nuance. But Gap has still got a hugely strong brand like awareness in the 90s consideration. Even his 80s. It's not a. It's not a brand that's been forgotten that needs to be revived or. Or a kind of a new birth of the brand. It just needs to come back into people's minds and drive that maybe is.

C (26:12)

That actually, I mean, not to pick on the word, but maybe it. Or my feeling is it has sort of been forgotten. It was never bad or negative.

B (26:20)

That's right. That's right.

C (26:21)

There was some point where we kind of got bored with the repetitive ads, especially in the day when it was just being forced at us 30 second commercial style. And then new competitors came along and the whole competitive landscape shifted and fashion shifted and it just kind of fell off our radar. But I don't think it was ever negative or bad to your point. So the revival is rebounding from a higher base, right?

A (26:50)

Yeah. Maybe that's part of what's happening with the projections for revenue growth. 1 to 2 percent projected in 2025 is not exactly a successful resurgence. And so maybe that's part of that, is that it's not connecting fast enough. Maybe it'll pick up as you guys are anticipating next year, but 1 to 2% isn't that strong. Although there's a ton of buzz.

C (27:15)

Does anyone know how much spend they've, like, what the spend levels have been?

A (27:20)

I haven't read anything.

C (27:22)

Yeah, they also wonder about their portfolio strategy because obviously they've got some of the athleisure stuff that's coming off a little bit. But I think, I think Old Navy's still or currently is their stronger performer versus Banana Republic.

A (27:39)

And they have. So they have Banana Republic, they have Old Navy, they have Athleta Atlanta. Yeah. Yeah. It's interesting. Okay, so I'm excited about the possibility here, but I kind of feel that I'm a little deflated after talking to you guys.

B (27:57)

Jesus Christ. What is this going the right direction?

A (28:00)

I don't want to hear facts. I want emotion.

C (28:05)

It is interesting, though, back to your point about building those brand devices and the kind of cultural connection and knowledge with a younger audience. I think if we went to, you know, the best learning that is coming from, you know, Vanessa and Matt and basically anyone that's doing research is like, yeah, that stuff actually does take a bit of time and there's the short term sales stuff, but you can clearly see they're leaning into trying to get back that brand mojo. And, yeah, that's going to be a slightly slower build, but if they keep doing it right and keep building on it, then potentially, yeah, I think we could be excited for them.

E (28:43)

They've been in a short amount of time.

B (28:45)

Yeah, they've got some good people.

A (28:52)

Were there spots that tested really well out of their worker? Is there any obvious reasons why one test better than another there?

D (28:59)

Yeah, the holiday spot from this past Christmas was like 4.6. Now the global fashion average is like, you know, out of 5.9 is 1.9. And that really is because 1.9. Yeah, it's very celebrity driven. There's a lot of changes that happen. You know, it can be a cold category where you're not really connecting. And I think the thing that I, you know, Gap is doing the right things in terms of creative consistency. However, they're kind of jumping around. Right. Like they're, you know, they're choosing Parker Posey, White Lotus, and then they're doing Cat's eye, you know, you are spanning multiple generational groups and they aren't universally appealing. And so how are they going to day in and day out, create emotional connections with, you know, where they're putting their money? They're putting a lot of money into these celebrity partnerships. And are they creating the value and the emotion with their audience consistently day in and day out, or is it one for you here, one for you there?

A (30:12)

So here's another. And here's another example of this. This is Chili's. We'll switch the Chili's now. So when we talk about Gap, they took a lot of the iconography from the 90s. They've sort of translated it into this year 20s and into 2024. Chili's has done a similar thing. They've taken a lot of the iconography and wallowed in it wonderfully. Now, they could have gone for a modern interpretation of Chili's and so less than nostalgic, but they dove in 100% into taking the old and just presenting it today as nostalgic. Purely nostalgia.

C (30:55)

You don't like it, Fergus? That's what I'm feeling.

A (30:58)

No, no, no, I do like it a lot. And. And it's had huge impact. Now, there's a couple of things behind this. So, you know, Brinker International owns it. Mischief is the creative agency. A terrific guy called George Felix is their cmo. He came from Tinder, he came from kfc, he came from Pizza Hut. Also Kevin Hockman, the CEO, he's kfc, he's P and G, he's Pizza Hut. And he's worked with George Felix, Jesse Johnson, former Wieden Kennedy. This is the marketing and management team in there who've done a phenomenal job. And I think when you look at growth, 22% year over year, share prices up, I think 126%. What do we think of this in terms of its revival strategy?

E (31:46)

I think the work has been really great. But I think it's also important to talk about the three for me, which I feel those things go hand in hand in it.

A (31:57)

So three for me is the 1099 meant a huge value that was. That's a critical strategic component. 10.99. You get a burger, endless bottomless drink and a drink and chips or whatever. Fries.

E (32:10)

Yeah. And that price point is about what you'll pay for a meal at a QSR restaurant. And so they've obviously kind of switched their frame of reference to say, look at what a better value we are relative to these qsr. Brands. And I think that just gives you so much more to work with. And you've seen all the great work that their creative partners have done, being able to like, have a new enemy and talk about value in fresh. And so I think they had this toolkit of things that made their brand distinctive and they've deployed them, but they have a really exciting new promotion that they can do it again.

C (32:42)

I think that's really the key on this one for me. And it's not that Gap didn't have that the Zak Posen component and you have to have the clothes and the fashion, but this is like that times 10. I think they really sorted out their core marketing, if you like, in terms of the product and the price value point and the restaurant experience and investing in the right places. It reminds me of like an old client I had at H and R Block used to always say, you can't out message reality. And like, if the reality, the reality is bad, there's not, you know, no message is going to convince people otherwise. And, you know, they really sort their stuff out. And then in some ways the creative then is. Which can be a good thing. For the pure creativity of it can sometimes be a bad thing. But you have a real thing to talk about. And to some extent you just need to. You're putting a light on top of that core proposition or shining something that catches its attention. But really the core message is really well defined and you don't want to stray too far away from it. As the old sort of like, if you have a rocket ship that goes to the moon, the headline says you can go to the moon. And the work for good and for bad is like very straight at that most of the time.

A (34:04)

And what do you think of the creative work? What do you think about the decision to wallow in the iconography of the past? Because that's what's really distinctive for me. Because you can have that great proposition now. How do you bring it to life? I mean, the partnerships with that cowboy boot company to make Chili's boots boots, I mean, come on, that's genius and fun. And it's also, it's not walking away from the past. It's actually embracing it brutally, brilliantly. Right. And why, why, why do that? Why do you think they did that?

C (34:37)

My gut taken again, this is where, not having grown up with Chili's, I probably have a slightly different take. So I don't quite get there. Oh, yeah, you know, bringing back all the stuff, which is probably true, but I, I don't have that immediate reaction, but they're just having so much fun around it. And I think that just the energy they bring to, like, let's do the boots and let's do this thing, and let's have, you know, fun with not having a mascot on the. It's. It's. And they're not overthinking it. Again, it's like they're saying the thing pretty straight in terms of the offers, but then they're surrounding it just with fun cultural stuff that's very heavily branded and has energy and life to it. And, you know, that's pretty smart.

E (35:17)

How is this chili's three for me only 10.99 when fast food is so expensive.

D (35:22)

Could be because we don't have to pay for any mascots.

A (35:24)

Please. I was born for this. Please. Never gonna happen. Wait, wait. I knew the song. I want my baby back. Baby back, baby back.

D (35:33)

He doesn't work here.

B (35:34)

How good is a jingle, though? A jingle in a song, Right? That's why, again, like, you. Look, I haven't grown up with chilies, but as soon as I watched that, I was like, the baby back ridge. I have heard that a lot the last 12 months, and it's been, you know, really well celebrated. And then I get in there and I'm starting to listen to a country song about the different. Was it a margarita or something that they'll bring it out like, this is great.

C (35:57)

This is great. I get margarita.

B (35:58)

I'm not even in the US Right now.

D (36:00)

Now, a jingle and a fluent device are the top two strongest vehicles that you can use to elicit an emotional.

C (36:08)

Response, a gap in terms of the brand, how they've gone about the branding, and the fluent.

B (36:13)

More jingles.

A (36:14)

More jingles, please.

D (36:16)

But they're using so many. I mean, the amount of distinctive assets that they're using. They're not just using the chili pepper. They're not. They're using the restaurant. They're using the booths. You know, they're using the. The meal deals that you're, you know, that you're familiar with. They're using, you know, the jingle and, you know, and Boys to Men and some of the nostalgic music. I mean, it's. It is riddled with distinctive assets. And. But this is a tough category, so fluency is very, very high for the entire restaurant. Kind of QSR category. You know, 85% typical recognition. But this work is like 90 80s. It is. Someone knows exactly what it's for. But, you know, for us to mention what you were talking about, I've been excited about Chili's since they did a Bravo partnership. You know, like, I watch Vanderpump Rules, and they're connecting with me through that. You know, it's so much more than the baby back, you know, jingle. I really feel they've connected, you know, with me, who I think I'm their target at the moment based on, you know, all the Wall Street Journal articles that are written around Famil returning based on the value that they're receiving. Yeah, they're connecting in so many different ways.

A (37:35)

Yeah. I mean, it's almost the perfect nostalgia play. This one, to me, is the perfect nostalgia play. Like, I look at JC Penney and we talked about that in a previous episode. They pulled little aspects of their brand identity into the current work, except the practical fact of value. And here we see, and I think, well, probably with both with Gap and with Chili's, a complete, completely different direction that they've gone in. I mean, immersing it in 90s stuff, as we said.

C (38:05)

It's a great point. I mean, I think I talked about this on Gap as well, but just knowing who you are and then really following that through, even to the point of, was it 25% cut in the menu?

A (38:19)

That's right.

C (38:20)

Really focusing on, who are we, what are we about, what are our distinctive assets? And really embracing that is always such a. A, an important thing. And if you're truly. There are moments where you have to really step away and maybe make a radical change. But if you're truly stepping away from the historical equity and fluent devices and things, oh, man, you might as well be a startup in some respects. You're kind of starting from zero. So I always feel like those should be much bigger and harder taking decisions than they often are. I think brands quite often step away from their past and who they are too easily because you're just, you know, you're starting from zero.

E (39:03)

I would have loved to be a fly on the wall when they're discussing the baby back ribs jingle in particular, because at least from what I can tell, some of the work they've been using in it isn't to advertise baby back ribs. And I. I assume that's a jingle that started for a product campaign and now has. Has become really a brand jingle. And so I'm sure there. There are lots of reasons not to use it. To your point, Fergus, about if they had used a different strategy, it's not really what they're talking about, you know.

D (39:30)

Like, they have three.

E (39:31)

For me, even the Products in. It doesn't feel like that's really the product they're promoting, but it kind of still works because that's what people know the brand for and clearly it's been effective for them.

A (39:40)

And, you know, because I think as a strategist, I can imagine that an instinct of a strategist or many strategists would have been, okay, well, what can we do that's new? How do we make it energetic and cool for a younger audience or even for those young families that they're sort of targeting? But it was kind of ballsy to just say, no, no, we need to stay exactly in the frame that we're in. We just need to sort of make old cool again because there's no attempt to run away from it. Which is kind of what I always said to Jeff McCrory, the CSO of mischief. It's like, holy shit, you didn't run away from any of. And I mean, was it Tiffany Thiessen from 90210? A lot of the drink stuff are taking some of these celebrities from the 1990s. I can imagine that many strategists were going, no, Jesus. That's the risk with this is that somebody trying to be different leans towards the.

C (40:41)

It does suggest that. Well, maybe two things come to mind, one of which it does suggest maybe the. Their. Their audience on like where they know they can get the value is slightly different even from what Gap's trying to do and does skew a little bit older and its families and like, that's where you get your big checks and all the rest of it. And then also, like, I think to some degree nostalgia is sort of cool with younger generations. Right. Right now in a way that they're not quite rejecting.

A (41:13)

Retro is. I don't know if the nostalgia is. Retro is.

C (41:16)

Yeah, right. It's not even nostalgia. But they're not overtly rejecting. In fact, they're quite kind of embracing some of that. So the risk is right now, at least the risk of doing retro nostalgia stuff for younger audiences isn't like it was. I feel like in other eras where you would really alienate.

D (41:37)

I mean, I think the inherent tension in the fact that there was frustration with QSR and fast food where high prices, you know, food quality issues and, you know, here's Chili's making a big bet to Kelsey's point about the three for me meal and really getting behind that and providing families with some kind of significant value and. And the cozy nostalgia of an in restaurant experience is now relevant because a Lot of people are working from home, so they don't want to be home because they've been home and they want to go out. And it's like all of these things are coming together.

A (42:19)

Exactly.

D (42:20)

In this, like, magical pocket of, you know, effectiveness for Chili's.

A (42:24)

Why do we learn, Matt, on the data, what are they? How do they look compared? Because they're, you know, you've got Applebee's, Olive Garden, Texas Roadhouse, which is. Texas Roadhouse is the number one casual dining chain in the U.S. chili's is now number three. Behind. I think it's. I can't remember which one it is, but yeah, so there's a lot of competitors out there. How does it look for Chili's?

B (42:50)

Yeah, I mean, it's a competitive category. And when we look at all the brands, and this is casual dining, and we're saying you look at the US Population, nationally representative, most people are considering five brands in the category. Every other category, probably about three. But there are more people, there are more options, more consideration in casual dining.

E (43:10)

Super interesting.

B (43:11)

Chili's is in the fight. It's on par in terms of awareness and consideration with the likes of Applebee's, Outback Steakhouse. Olive Garden is the one that's, like, the leader right now in preference. 21% preference for olive Garden.

A (43:27)

And so it's bottomless breadsticks.

B (43:29)

That's basically my question to you is, like, what is driving that preference? Because Chili's is at 12% preference. If we have a look at.

A (43:42)

12% preference.

B (43:44)

Yeah. So let me have a look at the preference metrics where you've got Applebee's, Outback Steakhouse, and chilies all ranking second for preference at 12%, but they're trailing Olive Garden, who's at 21% preference.

A (44:02)

So preferences are really difficult.

D (44:05)

Consistent. It's like 80, 20 rule. Like, they. 80% of the time, it is breadsticks, it is all you can eat, salad, you know, all that stuff. And then they kind of introduce something a little bit new. But they are out there day in, day out with consistency and. And all of their work scores very highly in our database. And I think they just. They know their audience, they know what their audience likes, and they keep showing up day in and day out.

B (44:28)

The other interesting thing to look at is around the drivers of consideration and preference in casual dining when it comes to perception, around. Is this a brand? I love brand love. I mean, I'm not super sold on brand love being a thing, but in this category, it is. Right. It drives 4.2 times more likely to consider the brand if you love it.

A (44:48)

And the love's got to be associated with food, do you think? Or is it just the.

B (44:52)

It's a brand I love and it's a brand I feel connected. But shrimp people are loving it. So that's been quite interesting to see compared to it, you know, to a gap. I think Vanessa was talking about, you know, the love and the connection. Do people really feel that with clothing brands, where you go over to, you know, QSR or you go to casual dining and food and that love and that connection is such an important part of. Part of we are bringing the families into the restaurants there is that, you know, that. That whole extra connection that these brands have and need to fight for. I mean, Chili's is in the fight, but it's. They're also in the fight with the rest of the other brands.

C (45:28)

It's interesting again to like. So we've got the breadsticks for our Olive Garden, but. And it's not just the triple dipper and the value, I think for much like with the ownable assets, they've got a few really corporate, like they struck gold with the mozzarella sticks, obviously, unlike that cheese pool. And that was a little bit of, I think, lucky viral magic that they. They kind of got. But you know, again, that having those core things and for casual dying, that, that experience and the right products, it's very hard if you don't have those. And they got that right. And then they put a ton of money behind it as well. Like marketing here.

A (46:11)

Right.

B (46:11)

This is like such an interesting part where you go, literally the four P's in action, right?

C (46:16)

Yeah.

B (46:16)

And there's a strategy. The advertising is just one part of it. It's like, it's the price, it's the product, it's the. There we go, the four P's. All these fundamentals coming back out, eh?

A (46:27)

All right, so let's wrap up by going around the table and getting your sort of summary thoughts on each of these. Either something you see in common with them, something you think is different. Why don't we start off with Kelsey, since Kelsey has to run in about 60 seconds. What are your overall comments when you look at both of these brands and their sort of. Of reemergent strategies or resurgence strategies, probably.

E (46:51)

Just because of where we ended up. I do think the. The product actually and the promotions are quite central to both. I think with Gap, it's going to take more time. I think the marketing is going to follow what's happening with the product, quite honestly. And, you know, it takes a lot longer to turn around a big ship like a Gap in terms of the merchandising and, you know, know what Zac Posen is making. And I think they're doing a nice job on the cultural front, but they need to be known for a few more kind of product things. And along with their advertising, I think they're headed in the right direction. I'm excited. Like I said, I'm a fan. It's funny because when I look at them both, like, and some of it is I have connections with both these brands. I'm from Texas, which is where Chili's is from. I think the impression to me is like, Gap is back, and you're trying to get it back to this place where it feels like an influence in culture for Chili's. It feels like I know they're using a lot of their old assets and, you know, the things that make them distinctive. But to me, I think they've really changed what people think Chili's is. And it. It's happened because there are such fundamental changes in pricing in both QSR and casual dining. But I think this has been a, Like, a really transformative. Like, I never thought about Chili's that way. And so even though they're using, you know, some of these old tactics or I guess, icons, they is a. A feeling of transformation. To me, that's coming from Chili's, which probably balances out the feeling of them being dusty or stuck in the past.

A (48:20)

Nice. Let's go to. Let's go to Vanessa and then we will go to Lachlan. Vanessa.

D (48:24)

Sure, sure. I'm just going to double click on what Kelsey was talking about, because I think it's really important and important part of this conversation. You know, both brands are doing actually a lot of similar things, tapping into nostalgia, using celebrities, you know, tapping into cultural moments and all of that. But what sets Chili's apart is an inherent deep value that they're offering through their product. And you're seeing. And that value of the product is showing through in the executional details that they're choosing to put in their work. And it's really working for them.

A (48:59)

Love it. Lachlan?

C (49:02)

Yeah, I think similar things. Both of them are doing that basic thing of really, they know who they are, are. They're focusing on that, but then they're being actors in the culture that's around them now. So they're not just hearkening back to the past or just leaning into old assets or old formulas. They're doing something very relevant and current in very different ways. And I think that's again where for me, like Matt was saying, it's like the core of, I think the success for Chili's is true 4Pmarketing across the board. And like to some extent I don't, and this isn't a criticism but the campaign I think is less a part of that or the, you know, the advertising quote unquote promotion is, is less central to that. It's having to do the job of bring attention and shine the spotlight and do something fun and interesting but almost not get in the way of that core marketing offer that is really right for the moment and then is capitalizing on, you know, a real moment in terms of value Valley and changed perceptions in dining. And then I think conversely Gap where you know, also there's a different frequency and how often you're going to go and buy a pair of jeans versus Etag. So there's so many different dynamics in the market but that one feels more, yes, the product there has to be but it feels more reliant on the campaign and they're trying to build longer term equity and revive the brand equity versus just getting the, their, their pricing and their product out there front and central which feels more like what, what Chili's is going to do.

A (50:45)

And Matthew, to wrap up, Fergus, when.

B (50:48)

You'Re talking about the leadership and management that Gap and Chili had, they've got, they've got experience at the helm, right? And both brands can be in the fight. And if we look at Gap, I think the learning that Gap has from Chili's is just, just tell me it's Gap. Tell me it's Gap earlier, right? Because they, they're changing perceptions and it's turning around in the right way. Awareness is, you know, the stemming of awareness, the ste. Consideration perceptions are going in the right direction for Gap when it comes to aiding the 34 year olds around trust and the quality brand like it is starting to turn. But it was also just let me know it's Gap because if you look at Chili's it's like I know it's Chili's and then Chili is what they're doing and what we are is like that's that, you know, it's the four P's it's the totality of the strategy and I think that's something that, you know, we get really excited about or I get really excited about on these conversations like the advertiser and the creator of the product like it's, it all contributes to the brands, but then also the brand to the business growth.

A (51:42)

I can never forget Austin Powers. Remember that character in Austin Powers called Fat Bastard?

C (51:48)

And he how could we forget?

A (51:50)

How could you forget? I'm. I'm going to drop that fat bastard singing baby back ribs into the. Into the beginning of all of this. I want my baby back, baby back, baby back, baby, baby back, baby back.

B (52:03)

Ribs I want my baby back, baby back, baby back, baby back, baby back ribs Excuse me. Chili baby back ribs.

A (52:13)

So we're gonna drop all the work in and for people watching it on YouTube or on our website, they can see it. We'll try. And I think a lot of it will work in audio only. So great to have everybody. Lachlan, Kelsey, Matthew, and Vanessa, thank you guys for being on the spot. I suppose this is our last episod of the summer. Because this will air in September. We're recording it in late August. Yeah, I know, I know, I know, I know. I just dropped my kids off my girls off at college, so I'm understanding that it's already fall, so.

D (52:48)

Holy PSL season.

A (52:50)

Yes. So thank you all and we will see everybody on the next episode. Have a great week, guys.

B (52:58)

Loved it.

D (52:59)

Thank you.

C (53:01)

Bye.