Loading summary
Transcript265 lines
- [00:00]
A
Ferrari's decision to go into the EV market in this way is hands down probably one of the worst decisions I've seen.
- [00:06]
B
Experience is the true new luxury.
- [00:08]
A
If somebody's brand has self destructed, it deserves to be talked about.
- [00:12]
B
Why would you get a billboard when nobody knows who you are?
- [00:15]
A
You get some element of success and then you get addicted to that success and you want to speed race it and then you just start stepping all over people.
- [00:22]
B
What Tesla has done is democratized access to speed.
- [00:26]
A
Gucci is doing too much. It's not world building, it's creating a solar system of tons of different planets. You don't know which one it exists on.
- [00:33]
B
At the end of the day, like, if you don't have a personal brand and you're not an advocate of your own platform, you kind of have to like, shut up and play the role.
- [00:41]
A
People see rich people in it and then they think it's good looking.
- [00:44]
B
It never made me check them out on Instagram. It never made me check them out on their website.
- [00:47]
A
These two books together are worth a hundred thousand in consulting.
- [00:50]
B
What a brand, what a brand, what a brand, what a mighty good brand. Say it again now. What a brand, what a brand, what a brand, what a mighty good brand. Welcome back to another episode of the Art of the Brand podcast. As always, we've got some hot topics that cover everything from the new LinkedIn algorithm. Update headlines in the news like the new Ferrari electric car and what we think this means for the brand. Gucci sponsoring Formula one.
- [01:19]
A
Blake Lively's ripping apart a few brands and as requested, probably a little bit more arguments on this one than some of the others.
- [01:25]
B
So definitely I want to start with, um, the brand of Sports Illustrated. So if any of you have realized that Sports Illustrated has become a bit more relevant and a bit more influencer esque the last few years, you're not wrong. And it's.
- [01:40]
A
I think it's become far less relevant.
- [01:42]
B
Well, so here's why I was digging into this, because I'm like, why are all of these legitimate influencers, not models? There's a few models that are on the Runway. Shout out to Molly Sims, who is our client, who is a model that was on the Runway. But there's a lot that are just influencers. And the question is why? Because Sports Illustrated sold its brand, so it's now a licensed name. So the people who run the magazine are separate from the people who own the license. So Jamie Salter, who owns Authentic Brands Group, he's also the family that owns the Marilyn Monroe likeness, Elvis Presley's likeness. They're also the ones that brought back Reebok, among other brands are kind of the, the family company that's known for actually build, buying the brand association and then using that association to basically get as much as they can out of the brand name. And that's exactly what they did with Sports Illustrated.
- [02:46]
A
Sports Illustrated was a magazine that was a center of excellence for sports journalism.
- [02:51]
B
Yeah.
- [02:51]
A
And then once a year it had a Swimsuit edition which featured models to cater to the mostly male audience. Yeah, right. But now we have a Sports Illustrated event, swimsuit event, which. It doesn't really make sense to me anymore. Like, why is it such. It's become way more important to females than to males because I don't think males actually give a crap about Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition anymore.
- [03:14]
B
Well, that's what's so fascinating about it is that they're picking these notable influencers that have ton of reach and awareness and then they're giving them these opportunities so that females can engage within the Sports Illustrated brand. But what's fascinating is before the walk, like before swim week, Sports Illustrated walk, they do this whole week of events that are ticketed and they're actually sold so that people can show up and can like come see the, the models for. So it's, it's interesting how media has become selling the likeness of these brands because Playboy's doing the exact same thing. Right. They're licensing the name and selling it so that people can buy into the brand's association and likeness.
- [03:56]
A
Look, you can tell me why it's important, but like, I don't, I don't know any man who's talking, who's even saying anything about this. Like, why has it become something that people are paying attention to and influencers are fighting to get into when it used to be something that showcased females for men's attention and now it's, it's doing bathing suit, you know, weak activations. Why is that relevant?
- [04:18]
B
I need the, the thing that's complicated is because it's now owned by ABG and it seems that there's like a siphoning off of likeness to make money. It's. But it's all closed off. So it's complicated to of get to the heart of this or root of this. So if anybody knows the core aspect of like how they're making money off of having these influencers. But it's clear that something about the business model has changed because I've seen it over the past few years, but it's they're getting a range of people that have followers who are not known to be models, that get in great shape, that do work hard for this week. And. But I. You're right. Like, where are they making money unless they're selling these seats and these people who are influential are paying for it.
- [05:03]
A
Like, I'm not, I'm not seeing a focus on like, branded bathing suits trying, you know, like Victoria's Secret's trying to sell its product. What is Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Week selling?
- [05:14]
B
No, it's not Sports Illustrated Swim Week. There's a, there's a fashion week called Swim Week. So it's where all the swim brands, they created their own week. So Sports Illustrated created an event so that the. So that their models could walk in
- [05:29]
A
Swim Week, but they're models, but they don't own bathing suits, which is weird.
- [05:33]
B
Yeah. So this is where all of this has become this, like, social media question mark. So it becomes this whole thing where they announce who the, the SI women are going to be. And that was like a few weeks ago. And it's in New York and they make them do all of these events. So you. It. It is an accolade. You get something big with it. But the kind of catches is you have to go to like, all of these events and they're mandatory events and the events is where they make money because they sell tickets to these events. So these people, I don't want to say creepy men, but these people can show up to be at these events because they're ticketed. And the, the draw is you have this talent and the talent.
- [06:15]
A
Now, I don't know any men going to that show. Like, you can, you can look at women.
- [06:19]
B
I hope you don't.
- [06:20]
A
But I'm just saying, like, what dude's going to pay to go to that?
- [06:23]
B
But it's also in New York City. Right. Like, there's probably a whole bunch of. Of businesses that would buy those tickets.
- [06:30]
A
Yeah.
- [06:30]
B
Interesting. But apparently it was kind of weird, the events, and it wasn't really that busy. But it's a, It's.
- [06:36]
A
That's what I'm. That's what I'm getting.
- [06:37]
B
It's an obligation, though, to be at these events.
- [06:40]
A
I'm just saying it seems like status for the influencers and models who get it that can then use that event to bolster their audience. But I don't see an audience of Sports Illustrated. Do you know what I'm saying? Right.
- [06:53]
B
That's why there's something weird about it. And I would like More insight. I, like, struggled to bring it up because I do want to bring it up because I'm, I'm investigating this weirdness. I think there's a lot of media that's shifting to trying to monetize social media eyeballs. So even if it's not profitable now, maybe the question is like, where is it going? Because if you have a platform of influence and it's predominantly, I mean, we also saw this recently with another big name that we were working with that has a lot of followers, but is like also predominantly, predominantly male followed. Like, maybe they're building up a business model that will proliferate in the coming years. I'm not sure, but there's something weird about it. But what I was trying to finish off is that week in New York where they have all those events and they make the announcement and everything goes out on socials. Weeks later they do this, the Sports Illustrated walk during swim week. And it's one of many shows that feature women in bikinis. So it's kind of where Sports Illustrated owns almost like an Oscar moment of this at swim week. Because otherwise it's. The thing is, is like they're just bikini brands that are putting on shows to feature bikinis, like going into summer season. But Sports Illustrated is like the show of the shows. So it kind of anchors the other shows because otherwise you're going to like Beach Bunny bikini, you know, fashion show, which like no shade to like Monday swimwear and like Beach Bunny. But like you're just going to bikini wear brands putting on a show versus Sports Illustrated has more cache.
- [08:29]
A
Understand it. The Sports Illustrated pick some people, they put on bikinis and that's more special than the actual swimsuit models. So I'm looking at influencers in swimsuits rather than swimsuit models.
- [08:38]
B
I don't know. I find it confusing too, because you also have this mix of like, people like Brooks Nader who are like legit Sports Illustrated swimsuit models. So you definitely do have those. I. If it doesn't make sense to you.
- [08:50]
A
Yeah, let us know in the comments.
- [08:52]
B
I don't really know who it's going to make sense to if it doesn't make sense to you as a man.
- [08:57]
A
Well, as a sports guy, it's, it's, it's interesting.
- [09:00]
B
Move on, let's move on. So, next topic. Ferrari has a new car design and it is completely electric. And the Internet is calling it the ugliest design that Ferrari has ever done. So let's break this down.
- [09:13]
A
It's hands down, Ferrari's decision to go into the EV market in this way is hands down, probably one of the worst decisions I've seen. First of all, for $640,000, you're essentially getting the same capabilities as a Tesla. So why are you spending $640,000 that a car company that made fuel injection engines is now making electric engines, which they have no experience in? You're going to spend $640,000. What. What about the interior design of the car is going to be worth that amount of money? And I saw their advertisements. They're bragging about, you know, how fast it goes, what the torque is. It's the exact same as a Tesla, but it's $640,000. And it looks like a baby bug. Baby buggy had gave birth with a Prius. You know what I mean? I just don't understand why any human would spend that amount of money for something that wasn't designed beautifully. Like, why not take the old model, the gorgeous old Ferraris, and make that an electric car?
- [10:14]
B
So it poses a really interesting brand conversation, and there's a few different levels that we should get into. One, you bring up the problem on cost. So what Tesla has done is democratized access to speed, because that's what those, like, fancy sports cars were unique, is that you could only get an engine of that caliber if you went to a brand like a Ferrari or a McLaren or a Lamborghini. So now that Tesla has created such powerful electric engines, the problem on, like, speed and torque is kind of left. The conversation is kind of the first core issue.
- [10:49]
A
Yeah. I wonder about the F. The. The F1 that's electric. What was that? The Formula E. Formula E. I wonder if Formula E, if. If Ferrari is kind of leading in that. Do you know what I mean? Like, and that's where it comes from.
- [11:03]
B
Well, because you thought that that was interesting because Formula E actually puts. It puts the drivers more as equal because there's just such an unequal. Yeah, there's. There. It's. So that's not the case in Formula One.
- [11:13]
A
Formula one, there's tons of cheating.
- [11:15]
B
Right.
- [11:15]
A
Because there's so many specs, there's so
- [11:17]
B
much play and also different spend. More than also just cheating. Right. Like budgets for teams for what you
- [11:21]
A
can afford on the formula is more about the driver. But I think it speaks to a greater issue in. In the automobile world about design. Yeah. You know, and I think Ferrari said we can't make it like the old ones because there's not enough space. Even though Tesla made a roadster that looked kind of like an old Ferrari, but Ferrari had to make it look like a mini suv. So to me, it looks like they didn't invest the time in the design and they just wanted to get it out there. And maybe they're hoping, like Jaguar, which was the worst campaign of the century, that new rich people will want to buy this particular vehicle who are in the market for EVs.
- [11:53]
B
But I think when it comes to the branding of cars, though, like, we're at the precipice of a really interesting change. And, like, Naval talks about it, and it's a great book. The Almanac of. What is it? What is the name of the book?
- [12:05]
A
The Naval Almanac. It's written by. And it's written by somebody else. Just that's. That's collected his thoughts.
- [12:09]
B
And this guy is. Was a, among other things, a kind of tech ro. Venture capitalist that, like, built companies. But he became like a philosopher on Twitter, and he's become kind of more famous for his, like, simple insights that are just quite wise. Anyways, what he talks about, which is similar to what Elon talks about, is that design and automobiles became optimized for fuel efficiency. So that once they realized that you would get a certain shape for fuel efficiency, is when car design stopped mattering, which is ultimately what gave different car brands an edge.
- [12:46]
A
And it's. We had these conversations, and if you're. If you're interested in branding psychologically, take some time to think about this, because I remember you're like, oh, my God, I love the look of that car. I love Range Rover or Land Rover or whatever it was. And I'm like, okay, take a second and compare what it looks like to a Hyundai, like. And over time, all of the cars started looking the same. The brand had some legacy because we were told it was better. But if you were actually to put the silhouettes of some of these cars all together, it would be very hard to distinguish some of them from others. And you can see Genesis is copying Bentley, Kia is copying BMW. All of the cars look the same because they were all incentivized or felt that they had to be fuel efficient. And then once you had to be fuel efficient, they all had the same corners and you lost that unique taste in car design.
- [13:34]
B
Yeah. And you also talk about this too, right? Where it's so easy to copy car design. So back in like the 60s and 70s, when I car came out, like, that mold was so expensive and it was so impossible to mimic that. Like, the Plymouth was simply the Plymouth, you Know, like it couldn't be another
- [13:51]
A
car because if you made certain car designs, there was tons of engineering. You had to have weight bearing, torque, everything had to work together. But today you can put it into a program, an AutoCAD program, and with CNC machines, you can just copy a car in two months and have it on the, have it out very quickly. So it really made it less about taste in car design and more about marketing budget and what you were selling.
- [14:14]
B
But then based on that, wouldn't it make more sense that a brand like Ferrari moving into design based on electric is exciting and not, not something to be negative about because that will allow them to refocus now on design over just optimization for fuel efficiency.
- [14:31]
A
I think they're just playing into this luxury strategy which is like just have a very high price point and pretend people don't notice that there's very little design in the car that's unique. Like they haven't gone into the electric market and done something new. They've just used a similar platform as others, same performance as Tesla, and then made the inside extra fancy. It's very unusual. But I think, and why it kind of annoyed me is that the beauty of the electric car is that you don't have to worry about fuel efficiency. So you don't have the same constraints about trying to make it fuel efficient because you're running on electricity.
- [15:05]
B
Yeah.
- [15:06]
A
So why not go back to a more tasteful, innovated, innovative, unique design rather than just looking like, you know, the baby of a Prius and a Ford Escape? Like, I don't get it.
- [15:16]
B
So your argument is two pronged. First, it's if you had the opportunity where design isn't limited based on fuel efficiency, why wouldn't you make it less ugly?
- [15:25]
A
That's point one or more unique.
- [15:27]
B
Yeah, but then you brought up the issue on price. How can Ferrari maintain its level of status if the problem, if, if Tesla can just take out the like, like, like we have to have a brand
- [15:40]
A
conversation for luxury, we have to have an intellect conversation. And this is so in a vehicle, the most important, the most complicated, expensive thing was configuring an engine that could work in a vehicle that could provide the top performance of 0 to 60. And whatever there was, there was wires, there was electric, you know, like, sorry, not electric, there's gasoline. Like that. That 3,000 pound engine in the front of your car was the most expensive thing on an electric car. You have a battery, you have two drivetrains at the back and you're on a computer Software system. It's not that expensive to make, especially if you have the tech. So what you used to pay that money for a Ferrari because of the engine and because of the design. Now they're asking you to pay $640,000 when the design looks like an autocad thing that that's a baby buggy and a component system that's not anywhere near as expensive as an engine. So people are buying it because they think Ferrari is worth the name, not because they've invested material into the vehicle.
- [16:37]
B
The problem with these conversations is we're moving into an age and an era where what allowed things to be special before is what's is what can't maintain in the future. Right? Like with where technology, innovation, how do you maintain? I know this on a hundred year old, but I'm just saying like hundred year old brands when technology has just rapidly transformed.
- [17:02]
A
But compare this to Elon who invested hundreds of millions in having his vehicles be Uber vehicles so that he could develop the best self driving technology in the world. So now my son drives from Toronto to LA to visit us and doesn't touch the steering wheel over five days like that. What are you paying for in a car like that? Self driving capability is worth a hundred times more than a Ferrari logo on
- [17:30]
B
or a Range Rover logo, like a small suv.
- [17:32]
A
Like I have the cybertruck and I can tell you after a year I don't, I now think it's not cool to drive. I used to always want to drive, I loved good cars. But it's ridiculous to have to drive when you have a software that's superior to my driving.
- [17:46]
B
Well, because we're just not better at driving, right? Like no, just like with how many things are going on in your day to day, you've got someone talking in the back, you're distracted, like you're getting an email coming in like why? Why? When the machine is good enough to do it for you, it has way
- [18:00]
A
more data and it's got 16 cameras. So when a bicyclist is zooming by, you're not going to hit it before
- [18:04]
B
you do like it. Yeah, I know, I'm not going to lie. Like first when he got the cybertruck, I'm like, that's an abomination. You did not get my approval. But now I fucking love that thing.
- [18:13]
A
And somebody asked me why.
- [18:14]
B
Amazing.
- [18:15]
A
Somebody asked me why it looks like that. So first of all it was a design that was different. So everybody kind of attacked it. But it was ugly, but it was designed because that's the prototype that he wants to put on Mars.
- [18:25]
B
Yeah.
- [18:26]
A
So he's always thinking, he's like I'm going to put this on the road, right. And I'm going to be able to figure. And he encourages people to go off road for it because he wants it to be able to exist on Mars surface. So he's just, he understands that you have to get data to make good design decisions and that's what he did with the Uber drivers to get the best self driving.
- [18:41]
B
Well, I think you should explain that though before you move on from it. So one of the things that was so brilliant about why Tesla has such great self driving capability is that they literally gave away Teslas to Uber drivers in the US so that the cameras could just make millions and trillions of data points of daily driving so that the, the AI could learn how to navigate roads. So the amount of learning that it has because it had massive fleets of Uber drivers just has the best data capability for like, for driving. So it's a very good self driving system. Like it's actually better than humans. Like it's crazy. When you get in the car, it has so many cameras and sensors, it's unbelievable. It will even pull you into your driveway. Connor drove from LA back to our house and the car took them right into the driveway without touching the wheel once. It was nuts.
- [19:37]
A
So consumers have to have to at some point make a decision. What is luxury and what are they spending their money on? Are they spending it now to get into a Ferrari that they're going to drive around 640,000 bucks? When you can get into a Model 3 for $70,000 if you spend 20 grand more you can be just as fast as a Ferrari and it can drive you everywhere. Like it's an interesting angle, I know,
- [19:57]
B
but it's the same. But that's also what makes the world go round. Like if we want to talk about a Birkin 35, you know like a, a purse at Walmart can carry my laptop but man, I'd much rather it be a Birkin 35 like it. And that's always going to exist. Especially because tech is allowing so many more people to become rich that they're getting access to money that they want to buy brands to show people what they've achieved. So it makes sense for especially because I think Ferrari is, is speaking directly to all of these software engineers that just think it makes more sense to have an electric car because we know some of them and they're buying fer and they're Buying the. They're buying the electric ones. And go ahead. Yeah.
- [20:39]
A
Another point of contention between us has been the G Wagon debate.
- [20:42]
B
Oh my God, this is such a debate. Because I think the G Wagon is gorgeous. I'm obsessed with it. It is not optimized for aerodynamic speed. It looks hot, it's big, and that bitch drives well. Love her, want her. But it's. We have a lot of fights over this.
- [20:59]
A
We have disagreements because I'm corrupted a little bit because I drove the G Wagon as its original design while I was deploy overseas. No, no, it was the same design. It's a military jeep that was designed to be cheap. It was designed to have straight lines. It was never designed to go fast. It was designed to be able to go through the bush and it was designed to be cheap to make thousands of them. Right. And then what happens is a Lu. Mercedes was brilliant. What they did with the G Wagon, they take essentially kind of a crappy Jeep. Wasn't as good as the Range Rover. The Land Rover, they take a crappy Jeep, they now replace the engine. It wasn't built to have a high performance engine because it wasn't supposed to go fast. So then they have to recalibrate all of the suspension, all of the wheels, all of the torque. So they create a Frankenstein vehicle. And the reason why it's a luxury vehicle in a way is because they made the decision not to conform to fuel efficiently efficiency guidelines. So they paid a huge premium, the buyer on tax. So this is why rich people sometimes are a bit bit odd is that they think they're luxury because they're paying unnecessary more money for a vehicle that is deliberately not fuel efficient, not designed for the purpose it is. But they love their wood interior and then drive around and think they're special in a vehicle that's deliberately designed to be ugly and was never meant to be a luxury vehicle. And so why in the world you would spend 200,000 bucks on a crappy European Jeep when you could spend that on something that's way more tasteful. But it shows how brain affects the psych. People see rich people in it and then they think it's good looking.
- [22:34]
B
Like it makes me so annoyed when you go off on this topic because I do think that good design can come out of things without intentionality. Like when I, I compare this to the Prada nylon. Prada created an entire line of nylon that really took Prada to another level. And that was because Prada was made in Milan and there's an air base and the the nylon material is what the Italian Air team would use for, like, parachuting. And they reused that material and turned it into, like, what became, like a whole entire line, but, like the iconic backpacks and the RE edition. So you can have nice things that come out of utility. I'm sure there's tons of other examples, but that's the first one that comes to mind.
- [23:18]
A
I think that what gets you annoyed is that it's hard to argue with my. With my logic, but the product made a great thing that then translated into it that the Jeep was not made to be a luxury vehicle.
- [23:29]
B
The G Wagon was designed to be tweaked. Like, it looks way more luxury than when you were driving it out of the bush in Africa.
- [23:35]
A
It's the same crimped metal, straight, straight lines that run right into the wind. Because it's not supposed to go fast.
- [23:41]
B
But it's also a unique looking vehicle.
- [23:43]
A
Yeah, it is.
- [23:44]
B
Like, it's a unique. Like, when you compare it to. This is my problem. So I think that the Porsche Cayenne is gorgeous. Love the suv. Love the.
- [23:53]
A
Looks just like a Mazda.
- [23:54]
B
He literally tells me that it looks just like the Mazda and looks just like the Hyundai.
- [23:58]
A
And I'm like, compare the silhouettes.
- [23:59]
B
It doesn't. And he's like, you love the brand. And I'm like, I do. I love the brand of the gmo.
- [24:04]
A
You're a sucker for a brand.
- [24:05]
B
I am.
- [24:06]
A
And we all love it.
- [24:07]
B
I literally wrote the book. I show up every day.
- [24:10]
A
We're recording this on Sunday.
- [24:12]
B
Well, I'm getting this one out this week.
- [24:13]
A
The book's. Oh, what is this one?
- [24:15]
B
This is the Planner. It's coming out this week. By the time you've listened to it, I hope you've already bought the first 500, because this is a big deal. We're launching the part one and the part two planner this week and to only 500 because why we are building with you, my friends. The goal is to perfect these two because nothing like them exists on the market. So when you have an audience to work with with, why not leverage them? Because you all are so smart. Tuning in every week, getting feedback from brand, owning brands, working in brands, living your branded life.
- [24:44]
A
May I join in?
- [24:45]
B
Yeah, please join. Without coming at me for my taste in design.
- [24:49]
A
Well, this was actually a coloring book that you turned into a brand book. Like the G WAC and D Joker.
- [24:54]
B
So rude.
- [24:55]
A
This. These two books, honestly. And you guys know that I. I say what I. What I think.
- [25:00]
B
Yeah, clearly.
- [25:01]
A
I think these are the two most valuable books any business owner or marketer could own based on the work that's done. And it's not because we're, you know, incredibly, it's not because we're geniuses, but it's because you took the time to give a workbook for people. And what's missing, I find in a lot of industries is people can talk about the concepts but it's very hard to execute them. The reason why this book is so thick is you put so much work into having people work through the process. These two books together are worth a hundred thousand in consulting and you can buy them from you now you just gotta do the work. If you buy them and they sit on a shelf, they'll be pretty.
- [25:36]
B
I would like to correct you.
- [25:37]
A
You.
- [25:37]
B
I do think that we're geniuses and I don't mean that in a self aggrandizing way. So if that made you cringe, hear me out. I do think there's something to people who are hungry and do something and want to share their knowledge with you. Right. Like we charge and do this every day and we are. I literally spent two years to for you to not feel like you have to hire us so that you can work through everything, every single step to do it on your own. How, like how few experts can you listen to that genuinely want to give you every single thing that they would do if it was like if you were sitting down to pay them? And I, I think that that's true intelligence because intelligence is something that you want to share, not something that you want to keep and hold onto. And that's why I think the reason why I hope that you enjoy listening to this every week is we're coming in and telling you everything that we think, everything that we would be doing on our paying clients like and many of their plain clients even listen to this every week because they want to even be able to get more out of us like it. That's the whole point of why I think we feel connected to each other when with why you tune in every week is because we're sharing that knowledge.
- [26:46]
A
Well, you put your heart and soul into this. Honestly, I can tell everybody that the amount of work that was put onto this is incredible and it's at its price point. It's incredibly valuable.
- [26:55]
B
Oh, so if you're, by the time you're listening to this, the first 500 have already gone out. Hopefully they're sold out and if so get on the pre order wait list on the website. We'll be doing um, if you get on it, we'll be doing it that way.
- [27:07]
A
You're signing each of the first 500 with a personal note.
- [27:09]
B
Yeah. And if you missed it on the first 500, send me a note if you get on the pre order list. Cause I'll make sure to write in yours too. Honestly, we. I just think this is a gift. So send me a note. I'm happy to write a little note in yours. Um, okay. Before we move on, Gucci is the first designer brand to ever invest in a Formula one sponsorship.
- [27:27]
A
I think it's brilliant.
- [27:28]
B
Gucci is sponsoring the Alpine Formula One team and it's starting in 2027, so we're not going to see it in this season. What's interesting is this was brought up to us and you made a comment on world building because you were looking at their sales and you said that you don't think that it's coming up enough based off of what they put in for the Gucci the tiger. And you use that kind of as an argument to me that world building doesn't work. And I want to talk about that.
- [27:49]
A
You didn't say world building doesn't work. What are you talking about?
- [27:51]
B
It's kind of low key, what you said at home.
- [27:52]
A
No, I said Gucci is doing too much. It's not world building. It's creating a solar system of tons of different planets and you don't know which one it exists on.
- [28:00]
B
I disagree.
- [28:00]
A
It's going through three to four creative directors. I don't know what it stands. It's just. It's out there, which is good. But I criticized its world building in that I did not know what world I was living on.
- [28:10]
B
Yeah, but what you were also reading though, too, Gucci has had a problem. And Gucci was cycling through different creative directors. People think that Demna might be the solution. Although Demna is kind of going back to older eras of Gucci, which isn't really reinvigorating the brand.
- [28:28]
A
You should make a style. Denman style, Demon style, like gangman style.
- [28:33]
B
Okay. All right. Oh, no. All right. Sorry. Fashion people that were listening to that. I'm sorry you had to hear that. To me, it ties to like the New Balance case study that we had talked about where it took 18 months for you to see the. The effects of them switching their strategy from being diversified through retail and through out of house marketing to going to influencer. No, but hear me out.
- [28:55]
A
It has nothing to do with new.
- [28:56]
B
It totally does it. I think it's a lagging indicator.
- [28:58]
A
It Feels it's over that there. What do you mean you're, you're coming out of left field on this? New Balance had a UGC platform where it invested 18 months on being off the radar, but investing in individual creators that then started to amplify the brand. Gucci is making crazy movies that were entertaining. Going through creative directors like no Tomorrow. There's no consistency. It's. I don't understand how it can be similar to.
- [29:21]
B
I think it's completely consistent. I don't why you're conflating. You're conflating talking about having three other creative directors over the past few years with what they've consistently been doing in the last 12 months and doing one movie, Gucci the Tiger. Like you, you can't say this out of both sides of your mouth. You know, when we're speaking with people, it's a lagging indicator. You have to be, you have to keep showing up and doing things in a compound.
- [29:46]
A
What am I saying out of both sides of my mouth?
- [29:47]
B
Well, on one side of the mouth when we're talking with clients, you're like, you have to compound and do it and you have to show up in a bunch of different ways to build a world. And then you're saying on the other side of the mouth because they've had three creative directors in the past five years that the brand is in a disastrous place. How about the last 12 months?
- [30:02]
A
I think you're putting things in both sides of my mouth. Like what I'm saying is, what I'm saying is you need consistent brand direction and you work at it for 18 months and it is a land. A lagging indicator. I don't know where they're going. I think they're all.
- [30:17]
B
How do you think?
- [30:18]
A
But I like the Gucci F1. I think that is, that is a very.
- [30:22]
B
How is that not consistent with them? Instead of doing a fashion show, creating a movie.
- [30:26]
A
The movie doesn't have anything to do with. With what? Formula one is high end, elite luxury experience. It attracts some of the richest people in the world. There's luxury all around it. Private jets, caviar yachts. It's brilliant to put your logo on one of the vehicles on one of the racing teams one because it gives females who go to these events just something more to pay attention to. So rather than having Gucci on a shelf at the hotel, at the Formula One, Gucci is on the racetrack and now Gucci is racing. So it's going to make some people cheer for that car who were never Even Formula One enthusiasts before it's going to make. It's a very good brand strategy.
- [31:07]
B
To me, the theme is showing up where their competitors are not. So what they did for the Tiger is that instead of doing a Runway show, they created a movie. Instead of competing at Fashion Week, they did it during cruise week instead of, like they're the first fashion house house to sponsor an F1 team. So what? The consistency in what they're doing is showing up and capturing attention where it's cheaper air quotes than where their competitors are showing up.
- [31:34]
A
I'll give it to you that they are disrupting a little bit on that point, but I do think, because their sales are down, I do think the Formula one will be something that will dramatically increase sales if they combine it with an elevated kind of brand offering. Like, if they're not trying to please everybody anymore and they're actually trying to be elevated because most of these brands are really targeting upper middle class people who want to feel rich. Gucci going to Formula One now, seems to be trying to move into that higher bracket now. And so maybe it gets their, their sales back up. But I think it's a brilliant move and I think within two years, you're going to see three or four. You're going to see LVMH on there, you're going to see other brands and formula.
- [32:13]
B
I'm actually shocked that it hadn't happened sooner. Like, when.
- [32:17]
A
So obvious.
- [32:17]
B
It's weird. It's so obvious. And it's also so obvious in a way that feels like very brand aligned. Right. Like they're already. Those brands are already doing so much. What's interesting is Louis Vuitton specifically has actually invested so much in like, rich but odd sports, like all of those, like boating sports. Like they highlight. Is that what they're called?
- [32:39]
A
No, highly. I remember that from Mad Men that where they were throwing the.
- [32:42]
B
Anyhow, no, these, like, what are the. I just showed you. They do it in Bermuda a lot. There's like huge, big boats and they like, race and it's super dangerous.
- [32:52]
A
Yes.
- [32:52]
B
Well, they don't look like sailboats, though. They're like hydroplaning boats. Yeah.
- [32:55]
A
Our version of Jamie has informed us that the drivers will be wearing Gucci stuff, which I think can create a whole new area of fashion.
- [33:03]
B
It's even more weird that Renault agreed to it because, like the Gucci pattern, the Gucci brand is like, so Italian.
- [33:11]
A
Yeah.
- [33:12]
B
You know what I mean? Like, like it's. It's so Italian.
- [33:14]
A
It should have been a Parisian brand. On Renault like and you could have made it national luxury brands on their national race.
- [33:19]
B
About time. Because with everything that F1 has done with getting into media and documentary, the spike is insane. It's been like an 8,000% increase.
- [33:29]
A
Burberry should go right now to the McLaren team, you know, and get on. People should.
- [33:34]
B
They're British.
- [33:35]
A
Yeah.
- [33:35]
B
Wow.
- [33:35]
A
Yeah. It also shows that we are seeing a dramatic increase in sports revenue over the last five years. Right.
- [33:43]
B
And you know why?
- [33:43]
A
Well, I do know why, but I'm going to give you, I want to give you an opportunity to sound smart
- [33:47]
B
now because experiential, like experience is the true new luxury is that being at an event and being seen at an event is where brands like Gucci and Louis Vuitton are going to have to compete. Because you can buy fake Gucci, you can buy fake Louis Vuitton, but to get Gucci tied to a specific event and being at the event is true luxury.
- [34:09]
A
The human being does yearn for something they don't control. Like, like at one level, give you a phone, you can entertain yourself. But when you go to a sports event, you're not in control of it. It's live. The experience is happening right at that moment. It's not controlled, it's not curated, it's not fed to you through an algorithm. So going to these sports events, we're seeing more and more events that are taking away phones that are taking away this stuff.
- [34:30]
B
I would even say though too, for how I'm feeling, I feel more inclined to go to in person events and experiences because the world went so digital after Covid and we made so many digital connections. But you can't like really bump into people in a digital fashion when you're all like creating your own content, you know, by yourself in your, in your studios. So it allows you, I feel more inclined to make these trips that I would have never seen as worth it, but now I do because we're investing so much in like a digital real estate.
- [35:03]
A
You know what I think is happening kind of like first like air travel, the first class section of transoceanic flights. The first class section is making more than 50% of the revenue on that plane. And so what I think is happening is more of these live events are going to be catered to VIP experiences who are paying 10x of just.
- [35:23]
B
Do you think that's what we're going to do? Their spirit just make it a whole first class plane?
- [35:26]
A
No, no, what I'm saying is you're seeing these events. It used to be that you could take your family to the game and watch a Red Sox game at Fenway. Right. It's now becoming too expensive.
- [35:34]
B
No, it is too expensive.
- [35:34]
A
So they're now just making every seat a luxury seat. Because I don't want to go to a lot of these events and be in the chaos of it. All. Right. But I, I'll go if there's like, I can go into like a comfortable box and I can have an elevated experience and be at the event. But the madness of some of the crowds, like, you know what I mean? Like, we didn't want to go to the Coachella live events because they're kind of crazy, but you want to be at the event in a way that's comfortable.
- [35:56]
B
Well, that's actually what's. I think the most fascinating is that brands and advertising have made adjacent events to events. So because the event has become such a luxury experience. So even with us going to Cannes, like, everyone is saying, like, the can adjacent events are more worth going than to the Cannes events.
- [36:21]
A
Yeah.
- [36:21]
B
Because brands, can's Lions, they're putting so much money. But it doesn't matter what, like, honestly, whatever brand you put into it, like, even super bowl, like, we didn't even go. We literally flew out during the Super Bowl. But we were at all of the activations to the game.
- [36:36]
A
Like, and Coachella.
- [36:37]
B
And Coachella, like. But it's because is brands are all trying to create a moment because the Internet has just become this like 24 hour news cycle that you can just get earned media value, even. Go ahead. Yeah.
- [36:50]
A
If I was advising kind of industry moneymakers in Hollywood, after having been in Hollywood, I would say it's a good time to invest a considerable amount of money into bigger versions of amazing Broadway plays. Like have an imper. You know, movies are kind of dying and you're seeing AI, but what humans can't get are exceptional human performances that they don't know what's going on. And I think you should see, along with sports growing, we should see in the next couple years a growth in Broadway attendance.
- [37:21]
B
Yeah. I mean, but that's how we felt when we went to the Buena Vista Social Club, which honestly, if you're going to New York, a must see because it, it, I find when it comes to things like plays and this is an unpopular opinion, but I haven't felt that they've raised their, their bar and status to that second screen phenomenon. And the Buena Vista Social Club was so captivating, which is why you go to shows. It was, it was awesome. But on the talking about how media is changing, I want to talk about the Cleo Creator Awards.
- [37:55]
A
Yes.
- [37:56]
B
Because so the Cleos have. Which is if you've ever seen Mad Men, there's a scene where Don Draper episode where Don Draper wins a Cleo and it's a huge deal. The whole room loses it. And it's. It was a sign in advertising. It was the Oscars of advertising. And what's interesting is this is the first year that the Cleos are creating an award show for creators. So it's going to be called the Cleo Creator Award Show. And the reason why I want to talk about this and with the next segment is it shows you how even the industry is now looking at creators as worth awarding and noting because of how powerful they are for the industry.
- [38:39]
A
I love it because in the old days you'd be like, okay, where are we going to put our marketing budget? Tv, radio, newspaper or magazines? Now there is a legitimate other category in there which is creators.
- [38:50]
B
Yeah.
- [38:50]
A
And what is allowed. And the marketplace has allowed human beings to use their initiative to build up their own accounts and learn how to be creative so that they now they can make money and they're now a legitimate advertising and marketing angle that should be on every company's bottom line.
- [39:07]
B
Yeah. Well, it's so cool because the create. The Clio Awards were actually were created in 1959. So it was created during the time that like Mad Men, like began because by the time he wins it, it's like probably well into like the mid to late 60s. So it's been happening for probably at least.
- [39:23]
A
I think Madman started around 66.
- [39:26]
B
I'm just saying it takes you through different eras. So by the time he wins it, it's later than when it started the show. And what's interesting is that the Clios used to be. It was only for like, who was considered the real industry execs, like, so it was like agencies, the advertisers, the, the writers and then the people who would like shoot the commercials or do like the print scripts for magazines. I just think it's a really cool transition. And it was always considered the Oscars of advertising. And the Clio Awards are actually. The Clio Creator Awards are going to be held at the Dolby Theater, where the Oscars have been traditionally held in la, which is such a cool experience for creators press. We are. So we're going to be there in November. We actually also submitted for some of our content because if we're going to be there, why not you guys actually can't vote. So that's the other thing too is they have a jury like the Oscars. So it's like a panel of people that are voting within the industry based on a ton of different, different factors. And they're going off of a bunch of different industries and categories. There's like 16 of them.
- [40:30]
A
I think the Clio Awards will end up being more entertaining than the Oscars because the creative content that is being made out there, like all of these ads and stories and like, are actually more interesting than most movies these days. And I think people are more interested in the creators who are making content than the actors who are in these movies that have no scripts.
- [40:51]
B
What I think is actually, you're so right. And what I think is cool about it is that it's not. It's not like a fan based, like who, you know, who as a creator has the most number of fans that can vote. Like, it's actually going to be based on the art of creating, which is such a funny way of thinking about it. And I think this is a way that I do want founders to reframe is. Is so much of when you're. When we're going to talk about it actually in the next segment of how what your brand kind of needs in order to win right now. And there's three categories and one of them is UGC or creator amplification. But the problem is, is that people think that that is just created equal. Like as if you're just going to pay someone whatever their rate is, they're going to post about it and you're going to get, you know, a 10x return on your investment. And that's why I like that they're celebrating the art of creative because I, and I see it every day in the brands that we consult with a brand, will the. The creator really authentically love the product, did a post on it themselves and then later the brand out to be able to whitelist that, create it as an ad through the page because it wasn't a paid script. And like the effectiveness of how that worked was based on the creative. Now there's tons of other examples that wasn't like a perfect one. But my point is, is that it's not like a rinse and repeat of like when you give someone a product, you're just going to get the return.
- [42:13]
A
Yeah. Like if I wanted to be a creator because of how much I love the cybertruck, I just thought of an idea like I could rent a G wagon and I could Go to the parking lot and touch my phone and say drive to to me and then watch a G ragon just sit over there and not move. And then I could show the Tesla or I could get in the car and say drive to you drive me to LA and the G wagon doesn't move. And then I get this. You know what I mean? Like you can make kind of creative like that about a brand that, that a brand might eventually come and pay you for.
- [42:40]
B
Well that's a great point because the who it's for, who it's not for. So this is not for Micro UGC creators that are just getting paid to post content. It there's so there's two tracks, there's a brand track and there's a creator track. So there's for brands who want to submit their content for having the best creator content and then there's creators who want to submit their content based on it being creative. And you're right, I think that there's this, this leads to a different direction for where TV can go. So the, for anyone who wants to watch it, we've got some time. It's going to be in November. I will find out more details from from the Clio Creator Awards but it's going to be streamed live and it's going to be accessed on demand. But we will be going in November so we will give you guys the update leading up to it. Before we move on to talking about the new LinkedIn Algori, let's talk about the reality that influencer spend is officially its own media channel because influencer spend for brands just surpassed $44 billion industry. And the reason what I want to talk about this is brands talk about influencer spend as if it's an optional kind of box to check opposed to it being a core modality to your brand and business's success. And I was actually speaking this week with one of our clients clients and the kind of the components that you need to understand that are required for a product based brand are the following three components. You need to have extremely strong paid organic and feed content. So you need to have a strong social feed not necessarily as a way to drive business but to not lose business. I'll break that down in a second. The second component is a paid arm which often involves creators or additional people that are amplifying through paid that people love and are using your product. And then the third component is events activations and the three of these together is what equals world building. Because you need to have be doing things in real life, to have your community show up, you need to be capturing those and putting them on your in feed on socials so that you're attracting new people and keeping your community. And then you need to have paid amplification because. Because without paid, both of those things are a waste of time and money because you're not signaling out to new potential people to come into your world or your ecosystem.
- [45:02]
A
So where does traditional advertising spend come? Tv, radio, all of that stuff?
- [45:07]
B
Well, all of those things are determinant on what is your budget? Like, what is your marketing mix? Because once those three things are dialing in, you have so much space and spectrum to make money. So that's why when you look at a brand like, like Summer Fridays or Road, they're at the extreme end for what they're spending from like a paid events activation standpoint. But once the companies and the brand starts making money, that allows you more dollars to put into a more robust marketing mix.
- [45:35]
A
Maybe you can break it down for the listeners because to me I see kind of three categories. You have purchasing in stores, you have Amazon and then you have direct to consumer.
- [45:47]
B
Y.
- [45:47]
A
Right. And like what I find on Amazon is when I want to go buy something on Amazon, like the. I'm not really picking by brand. Amazon is kind of offering up what seems to be the cheapest. When I go into a store, it's different. And then direct to consumer is. Isn't. Isn't that what's complex about the industry is that you kind of have to create your own formula or recipe of using all of these platforms to speak to the audience in which you're selling your product.
- [46:11]
B
Yes, but that's also what makes all of this so complicated is that Amazon requires a robust and dedicated marketing spend because you need to kill it on Amazon. Just to get a listing on Amazon is like literally a fraction of the battle that's ahead of you. And you have to actually hire Mark. Like there's marketing services and enlisted Amazon marketing agencies that allow you to be more successful on Amazon. Amazon. What's interesting about what you brought up though is what complicates Amazon further. So 87% of purchases in the United States begin with an Amazon search because of how robust their catalog is and how easy it is with the one click buy until like for prime for it to be sent to you the next day. So a lot of brands will list on Amazon once they're past a certain success threshold because they're just losing business because they can pull the data of how much searches are happening on Amazon that they're not able to get. The problem is once you list on Amazon you need an entire like marketing spend and approach so that not only are you showing up and winning those searches, but you're also being suggested by Amazon if someone's types and those are entirely different beasts. So even there's like SEO to Amazon. It's not called SEO, but I'm explaining that there's like, it's, it's like being optimized so that you show up on the top or the page. So the thing that's complicated is when I'm speaking about these things, you have to figure out where you fit within them. But if you're a brand that's doing sub 5 million where you can really perfect to take yourself to the the 5 to 10 range is doing having extremely strong organic socials that build a funnel. So having content that's top of funnel, mid funnel, bottom of funnel. So that's content that's both bringing new people in as well as converting and maintaining your inner cir consumers. So that's your tribe, the community. Because when you're doing anything like an activation or an event, that's how you're telling your followers that you are legit and you have a tribe. Because that's the biggest thing that's missing right now online is it's so easy to create these phantom brands with like AliExpress dropshipping and like upwork and fiber branding. Unless you have a community. Because if you have people prepared to sign up and go to your popup or like stand in line, that shows that you have a legit tribe. And then the third is paid ads because you need to get people into that world, into that ecosystem. And the only way you do that is through digital billboards. So you need to perfect those three things. With that will come increase in sales, increase of lift, increase of awareness. So that when you're spending money on anything else like traditional, like why would you get a billboard when nobody knows who you are? A billboard only works when people know you, so they keep thinking of you. It's why McDonald's billboards are extremely effective. It just keeps their brand top of mind.
- [49:08]
A
Or if you're local logo or if you're local, what a billboard is for. The billboard is for signaling to people that you can afford a billboard.
- [49:16]
B
True.
- [49:16]
A
Right. Which makes you a more reliable product. Right. Because other service providers, yeah, your competitors can't afford one. The inference is that they're not successful enough to have it. So it's Got a psychological impact.
- [49:27]
B
I'm so glad you brought that up because there's two boxes for billboards. So if you're a professional service provider, a billboard is a great way to, to signal success and longevity in market because. And to also be top of mind. So yesterday we drove by a bench billboard and it was for painters. And I was like, ah, perfect, I need to get the house painted. I better call them. And I worked through my brain of what can I teach the people who tune into art of the brand every week. I already had the need that my house needs to get painted. When I saw that billboard, it shows me that they have money and they're probably successful because they can afford to do a billboard. And when I'm looking for a painter and I don't, I don't have a friend that's a painter that allows me to make that conversion. So what you're saying is true. A lot of lawyers in the US buy billboards because if you have a billboard, it probably means to the average person driving by that you're successful.
- [50:20]
A
Or a jewelry store, or a jewelry store shows you that.
- [50:23]
B
Or if you're an injector or if you're, if you're a service provider. But then the other thing that's complicated is I'm finding more brand owners that own products see billboards as like an egoic way to post on socials. But that only works if you have the rule of seven digitally. So when we were in la, it was like all of these brands. One of them was this like hair care brand. I can't even remember their name. It was like Baobo or Bobo or something like that. And they had this really bad billboard and it was like for hair oil. All I could think about is how much money that could have been better spent when they have no penetration on social media and they're spending it on this billboard and I'm driving by, it never made me check them out on, on Instagram. It never made me check them out on their website. But when we were just in San Antonio and we walked into the, the
- [51:12]
A
Emily, I think it's right in San Antonio. It's super cool. You guys would know it. It's an old brewery. It's one of the coolest hotels I've ever seen.
- [51:18]
B
So cool, so southern industrial. So cool. But they had that hair oil in the gift shop.
- [51:24]
A
Oh, wow.
- [51:25]
B
And it did. Made me think, pick it up kind of. But, but not. But, but here's the thing, and I think this is an important nuance. I'M someone that thinks a hell of a lot about this stuff and was thinking about using it. It's true. I was thinking about using it as a case study. Anyways, you can move on. So let's Talk about the LinkedIn's change in the algorithm. LinkedIn just changed the algorithm to focus on good content.
- [51:52]
A
Hallelujah. Because LinkedIn has sucked.
- [51:56]
B
It's.
- [51:56]
A
I just cannot take any especially in my profession. Lawyers. Lawyers make me want to vomit on L. LinkedIn. So honored to be nominated by my peers as top like it. Just shut up if you're not going to say anything interesting.
- [52:09]
B
Well, and you think marketing's any better? No, the marketing content on well, so this is.
- [52:14]
A
Oh my God. Marketing on LinkedIn. Who drafts those emails? Hey Philip, just thought I might ask a question.
- [52:20]
B
This is what makes you crazy is that so many of those accounts have like 452 likes and like 75 comments per post. And you're like. And then your brain thinks this is what people want on LinkedIn. So this is why LinkedIn changed it because. So I'm gonna talk about first the change so that it's relevant to you and then let me give you the tea on how these people were hacking the system. So the new LinkedIn algorithm is called 3Sixty Brew and the algorithmic change focuses on quality of content and caliber of engagement than based on reach. Because the LinkedIn algorithm pre previously was was focused on reach. And it's why all of these marketing people or sales people would max out their connections per day so they'd have like 15,000 connections on LinkedIn and by virtue of how many people they had is how far their content would go. And LinkedIn wanted to change that because nobody's engaging with content on LinkedIn anymore and it's a useless fest of nothing. So they brought in this new algorithm that's more similar to TikTok and Instagram so that if you put on good content, good caliber content that maintains retention that people are actually watching, clicking and engaging with, that is what will get reach.
- [53:39]
A
But not only that, what I thought was brilliant is, you know, and what they were telling people is if you have a specialty, you can't just say I'm number one in this and then not post about it after. Yeah, right. It's not going to go out to all of your followers that you're saying you're number one in this. You actually have to. And this is what we would recommend is pick no more than three things and post every day about only one, two or three things. And then LinkedIn will see, yeah, you're the only one posting every day about marketing for medical spas, you know, claims for this. And once LinkedIn sees that you're posting for it, it's gonna share you. Not based on followers, but based on the fact that your content actually looks like you are that expert.
- [54:21]
B
Exactly. So that's exactly what you should be doing, is focusing on a niche expertise and then creating content only on that niche expertise where. In which your profile is optimized for. So what people were doing prior is. And it's actually a really fascinating trap that people weren't talking about. You could pay into these closed groups on LinkedIn and they cost like a crazy amount of money, like 2 to $5,000.
- [54:49]
A
An engagement pod.
- [54:50]
B
And they were engagement pods. Exactly, exactly. So what would happen is you would. Your job is to be in the pod. You would have to engage on. They would basically indicate in the group when they posted and the entire group would go out and engage. That's why these like shitty pieces of content would have so much engagement on them. And it was based on the rule of reciprocity. So because you would do it, you would get it in return.
- [55:14]
A
Essentially, it was a whole bunch of junior marketing people just commenting on their, their employer's stuff. The actual, the actual creators weren't bullshit.
- [55:24]
B
And it's why, it's why LinkedIn people feel like it doesn't work and they don't like being on the channel, even though it's one of the most underleveraged social channels. Because it's, it's not a social media channel, it's a work channel. And where LinkedIn makes its money is on job, job postings. So LinkedIn wants to keep all of the job people on it because people are accessing LinkedIn during the workday. So it's a great place to get B2B contacts.
- [55:47]
A
So if you're making content on LinkedIn, try to put it in the content context of people who are working. How do you help people who are working improve their lives? How do you help businesses improve their lives? Like, there's so much opportunity there we could talk about.
- [55:59]
B
Okay, so next headline, Blake Lively. Blake Lively's brand, Blake Brown is on the fast declining edge of killing itself. And it's the third brand that she's had that's been not successful. Now, in case you didn't know, Blake Lively was caught up in some pretty hot drama with Justin Baldoni, her co star and producer of the film this. It ends with us and the launch of Blake Brown, which is her hair care line, coincided with the launch of it ends with Us. And I think it's simple to say that, you know, the Justin Baldoni drama is the reason why the brand failed. But it's much larger than that. And I think that we should break this down and make this our Meghan
- [56:42]
A
Markle 2.0 look and just disclaimer please next episode bring out a guy that I can rip apart because people are always like, who's this man ripping apart female brands? But I think if somebody's brand has self destructed, it deserves to be talked about. Blake Lively's egoic misguidance has resulted in in a career that was on the right trajectory just being now in the toilet.
- [57:06]
B
Totally. I want you to speak to the why you think it is and then I can break down because like I have some stats. I'll give you some stats to set it up. So Blake Brown was Blake Lively's hair care line. It was launched exclusively in Target. The first three months it did $20 million in sales. It was projected to do $100 million in sales. Its JV partner, which is a incubator brand house out of Milan, is trying to get out of this deal because it is now was the most successful launch in Target is now at the bottom of all hair care products within the Target universe, doing less than 90,000 per week with a very over 40% of complaints tied to her hero skus of shampoo and conditioner being dry, brittle and just not a great product. And then people were ripping it apart online because the products marketing around the shampoo and conditioner is, you know, language like nourishing and strengthening and people's hair is like brittle, dry and like breaking. So it outside of the Baldoni stuff, which I think we can also talk to as well, the product isn't living to its claims.
- [58:18]
A
Well, you can't, you can't disassociate it from Baldoni because it is the icarus story of somebody. 1. There's that relative deprivation I talk about. Her husband was crushing it. Ryan Reynolds and was an A list actor. She had come up through some kind of scary movies. Gossip Girls.
- [58:36]
B
Gossip Girl, which she's most famous for.
- [58:38]
A
Yeah, Gossip Girl was great, but she had come up. But then she's getting into movies and as good as it gets was supposed to be be her big moment. Right. And I think what happens one, you need good advisors like whatever you're doing,
- [58:50]
B
as good as it gets or it ends with us.
- [58:52]
A
It ends with us. Sorry.
- [58:53]
B
Okay. I was like, what movie was that?
- [58:54]
A
It ends with us. Is what ended her career. I, I will say I think hands down because it was, I think a
- [58:59]
B
lot of people are saying that.
- [59:00]
A
So there's kind of an Icarus story. Ryan Reynolds is killing it. She probably wanted to get to that same point at the same time, which is a relative deprivation point. So she thinks it ends with us, is going to be that this movie. But the other Baldoni writes a script, he's supposed to direct it. She comes in as the main star. And I would guarantee you that she was done an incredible disservice because she hired advisors who wouldn't tell her to settle down, to get a grip. And whoever you are, you get some element of success and then you get addicted to that success and you want to speed race it and then you just start stepping all over people. And she didn't have people said, look, you're in this role, you're lucky because you're like maybe a little too old for this role in this story. You're now taking over the whole set. You think you're gonna make this movie now into Barbie to launch you at that status that gets you close to your, to your husband. And you just burn so many bridges without any self awareness that you become a laughingstock. And she's having parties about it ends with us, which is about domestic violence where she's promoting tequila. There's brand incongruence there. Like she was trying to throw everything into one pot at one time and she wasn't, she wasn't self aware enough to know that like this is a great, great movie. Let's just play the role of the movie and let other people make me the champion rather than try to force that on the industry.
- [60:15]
B
So if I was to say back what you just said, if I was to explain the issue, it was to me it's less. There's definitely Icarus components to it, but I think she was more drinking the Kool Aid that it's clear that you need to commoditize and brand whatever you're doing. Which is what Ryan Reynolds has done very well because. Because she's incubating and launching brands as Ryan Reynolds is buying things up like Rexam and is making TV shows about it. Like you're seeing her husband, who's so dialed into marketing and branding and owns a branding agency, start trying to do in her own way, her own thing, but without fully using his brain and knowledge and intellect. Because to your point, so the two other brands that didn't are that are no longer successful but were initially was her first company called, um, Betty Buzz and it was a non alcoholic beverage. And at first it did well. It did like $5 million in sales. But it was at too high of a price point. So people weren't repurchasing. Which is if you're going to sell in like the canned drink space or in the food space. Where you really make your money is once you pay your marketing people keep buying it like they keep buying like 12 packs because. And because the price point was so high, people weren't repurchasing.
- [61:31]
A
So her they were buying it as a. No. Novelty.
- [61:33]
B
Yeah, novelty. Well, she'd get this. These great opportunities of being on like British Airways, but then like nobody would buy the product when they saw it in store. Plus she had a ton of criticism because why is a non alcoholic brand called Betty buzzed when you're not getting buzzed? So then she goes and launches afterwards Betty Booze. So she goes and takes the same name and makes it an alcoholic drink when the whole movie is tied to. To domestic violence. So it's like the wrong time to be promoting like an alcoholic beverage drink. It doesn't have the right brand. Then on top of that, it ends with us. She tries to barbify the movie because she asks fans to dress up for the film. Like she's trying to get people to world build with a pretty dark concept.
- [62:25]
A
Yeah.
- [62:26]
B
Like it's not quite like Barbie. And on top of that, then you have all this drama coming out that she's repurposing a narrative.
- [62:35]
A
Like she took a story and tried to make it all about her and that's. And people want to see people like that fail. We saw it with Amber Heard who. Who thought she was so big that she could like take down like that Anthony Bald Balducci.
- [62:49]
B
Literally. His name is Justin Baldoni.
- [62:51]
A
Okay. Justin Baloney. Like that is crazy. Justin Baldoni. Like when you see the clips of them engaging and how she's flirting with him and all this stuff. But then she makes these outrageous allegations against him. People get delusional when they get too obsessed with themselves and they make outlandish claims and then people want to see you fail. Ryan Reynolds was also reported to have been a complete prick who came on the set and threatened Baldoni. Got it right. Who threatened Baldoni. But he was big enough to survive that. But because she was on the way way up, she overstepped. Like she did too on the way up.
- [63:30]
B
Blake Lively is a big actress.
- [63:32]
A
She was not an A list actress.
- [63:33]
B
She totally is an A list actress.
- [63:35]
A
There's nobody would have listed her before that movie as an A list actress. That movie did well.
- [63:40]
B
I think you're right.
- [63:41]
A
This, this was her breakout movie that was going to move her into A list. Before that, she was in the shark movie. Like, she was in some cool movies that I liked. She had a vibe.
- [63:50]
B
But she's also someone who was an actress. Like Gossip Girl was so big. She was married to Rylee Reynolds. She was always present in the media. She went to all the red carpets. She was, she was an American, like an Americana starlet. Like, she had that very American, objectively,
- [64:04]
A
not an A list actress. This was supposed to be her breakthrough movie role.
- [64:08]
B
I would say that she was an A list based actress by association because she was always ever present and she was in movies and films. So she was a big name. Okay, well, I mean, ladies, let me know if you think I'm wrong. But what is interesting though about this from an argument, why not men?
- [64:27]
A
Now they know if you think you're wrong. This is not just about gender. It's just different opinion.
- [64:32]
B
I guess so. But you're not also someone that's consuming as much of like celebrity pop culture.
- [64:38]
A
But I watch more movies than you and I'm addicted to amazing movies.
- [64:42]
B
You. You do? And I mean on the movie. I mean, you're right. Like, if you look at it, and I'm saying, like from a cultural relevance stand, a lot of what people also say as a list celebrity is not, is also just how much is their outfit pulled and talked about. Because she had a whole thing too where she dressed herself. So she was seen in Hollywood as this, like, down to earth. It's why the Baldoni thing actually. No, let me finish my sentence. It was why this Baldoni thing actually so blew up is that her Persona was so this like, likable, kind person that like dressed herself, that didn't need a stylist, that like they had this real authentic relationship, they were actually in love and someone like that would never be a bad person. Or. And I also think despite the Baldoni drama and gossip, I think more to this is she. What you can learn from this is like having a name is no longer enough. Right? Like, she launched these brands. They weren't strategic, they weren't tied to her authenticness. When she didn't post about them, they failed the quality of the product, didn't maintain a standard because she wasn't creating it out like a true need. It was like JLo Beauty to me,
- [65:56]
A
it's kind of like the dog with the bone analogy. Like, a dog has a beautiful bone in its mouth, and it goes to the. To the bank of the river, and it looks in the water and sees a dog with another bone, and it drops it to grab that, and it doesn't have a bone. Like, she tried to do too much at one time by inserting. There was brand misalignment, because I agree with you. I thought they were the coolest couple ever. Before I heard about this movie litigation and what happened. I thought they seemed happy, happy, grounded. There was no need to rush. But then to get into a movie and to become an obsessive, like, Devil Wears Prada character demanding everything go her way, make it about herself. Like, it just. The brand misalignment is what led to the destruction of her personal brand. And since this movie, she has not been in a major motion picture since then.
- [66:41]
B
Well, and, I mean, a bunch of the Sony executives and, like, producers of films were like, you can't, like, at the end of the day, like, if you don't have a personal brand and you're not an advocate of your own platform, you kind of have to, like, shut up and play the role. And, like, that's what. What makes these things complicated. With all the work we were doing in Hollywood is there's a whole bastion of these celebrities that came up during an age in an era where it wasn't about their own voice. It wasn't about who they really were. It was about this perception and idea of them that was created through pr. And that's why I think it's fascinating to talk about it is when you compare this to, like, casting amigos, you know, like the George Clooney tequila, it's authentic because him and his friends love tequila. Cabo was around the corner. They'd go all the time. They wanted to create the best tequila. They didn't feel like it was on the market.
- [67:33]
A
Time. They didn't.
- [67:33]
B
They spent time. The branding is great, and it's a great product. If, like, when you. When you do that and you. You are a celebrity, it works. When you create a product just to sell because it's trendy. Like, we're. We all, like, with all the dollars we have and how many people are trying to sell to. To us, we don't want to just make another star more rich because they've launched another unalcoholic beverage that's way too expensive. And unless you have that piece. And that's why when you story the story, the realness and when we, when you started this segment, when you talked about how, you know, you're sensitive to people feeling like we're only coming after women. And one, it's hard because a lot of the brands that we cover tend to be in more female industries. So there you have more. Which is also a great thing though, right? Because we've wanted more women to be in business. There's a lot of women in business. And on one of the cases I want to share this with, with you listening, Philip was on a case and he, he spoke about, in this case, if you look at a hundred thousand people, if you were to pull a random selection of a hundred thousand people and there's just a percentage of those a hundred thousand people that would lie on their taxes and and then within that percentage that would lie on their taxes, how many would lie for $500,000 and then how many people would lie for a hundred thousand dollars and then how many people would lie for $25,000? When you start making these questions based on percentage of numbers, it's where we like, it's where it becomes complicated of. It's not like men are good and, or men are bad and women are good or women are evil and it's that we have to look at statistics of if there are 200,000 whatever they are female women in business, does that mean all 200,000 female women in business are going to make the best decisions, are going to be the most fair when it comes to business that are going to create the best branding and marketing decisions? No. And like that's how we also need to be thinking too about when we're giving constructive feedback of the people at hand is it's not about their race or their religion or their gender or their size. It's just about based off of what were the decisions they made and what do we think within those parameters?
- [69:49]
A
Yeah, you can really tell people too because they agree with you until you criticize their, the person they love. And then all of a sudden you, you're the stupidest person in the world. Like, that's what I find.
- [69:59]
B
That's also what I think Naval said so smart in that book. I can't recommend this book enough. He's like, I used to be a libertarian until I realized that I was having to defend like stupid libertarian views that I didn't agree with because I just felt like I was on that team. And like that's how I've had to reshape my mind. Like I, I'm a champion of women in Business. We deserve to be here. But I don't think every woman in business is making good decisions. And I think that we need to be able to speak freely about that. Than it just be like, we must defend women for the sake of defending women. Like, women are in business. If you're not making a smart decision, we should talk about that.
- [70:31]
A
I also, I think it relates to a theme we always have about putting yourself out there and saying something that you believe. Like having an opinion that's strong makes people trust you more because people aren't going to like you. And one of the things I advise when I'm life coaching people is ask yourself how many times you've been wrong and you've changed your opinion. I've changed my opinion multiple times. And I used to think certainly some things were for sure, right? And now I don't think that's the case. And I don't know if I'm right now or if I was right then. But what I can recommend to you is if you encounter somebody who you have a good reason to believe is smart and they say something you disagree with, your first response shouldn't be, you're a racist, you're a fascist, you're a communist, you're, you're a this or you're that, you should actually take a second to think, is there something. And I got that when I was reading Scott Adams book called Loser Think, because I always loved Dilbert. Beautiful, intelligent comics capturing the reality of corporate world. And then when he came out for Trump years ago, I was like, what's wrong with this guy? He's an idiot. And I just, I didn't take the time to kind of try to figure out why he had that opinion. I just made an immediate conclusion that he was wrong. And that's what I want to teach people as we get, especially in business. Because you got to be right in business more than wrong, even though it feels good to think you're right right away. So if smart people say something that you disagree with, ask yourself if there's a reason for that and try to investigate it.
- [71:54]
B
Yeah, it's cool you say that. I actually was pretty bold. I had a call with the head producer of CNN on Friday, and she, you know, wanted to get a female on for more of the booking slots. And she brought up, you know, the American Eagle Sydney Sweeney campaign. And she's like, I reached out to got a man's opinion. And like, if only I had contact to you, I would've reached out to you. And I'm like, well, I mean, I would. I mean, I would love to have the segment. I'd love that opportunity. But I have to tell you that I'm not going to say what you think based off of the echo chamber of thought that you want to have on the platform. Because for that instance, I think that we need to discuss is the, like, how big of a footprint American Eagle has in malls. And we're asking, asking elite, educated thinkers that don't shop anymore in malls to pass judgment on a brand and company who's probably going to reflect and enjoy that level of brash thinking. And American Eagle's been up, it's been successful, it's done super well. Instead of us just being shocked and be asking brands to do more when everyone is dying in the sea of sameness. And when I said this to her, you can tell that she was. She was like, well, I love that. I love what you have to say. And I'm like, but I don't know. I don't know. You might right now. But I need to make sure that you're prepared for this because it's not about having right or left thinking. It's about, like, we need to have good dialogue in level of the questions at hand.
- [73:23]
A
And that, ladies and gentlemen, as well, Camille Moore is my favorite person because it was a beautiful and very articulate answer. And you know, but that goes to our people because we had couple a client who was being told that they had to sign a petition. Right. That was political and she didn't want to do it and we advised her to do a post about it.
- [73:42]
B
No, we talked about this on the show and she reached out to me privately and she's like, that was the best decision that I ever made because now I'm more aligned and I'm closer with my patients and anyone that was half out the door if they've decided to not come back. I'm actually like in a deeper relationship
- [73:57]
A
with my patient and enjoying work more. Right. And I think if you make a
- [74:00]
B
political though like it was, she didn't
- [74:01]
A
make it political, but just said, you're not going to bully me into doing what you're telling me to do.
- [74:04]
B
Yeah. Well, I hope that everyone had a fantastic week and enjoyed our range of topics. We will have to bring up the FIFA one on. I think we'll talk about the FIFA this week on the lives and also the OIC topic of how Ozempic is
- [74:18]
A
changing fashion, revealing the hypocrisy that is Hollywood.
- [74:22]
B
Have a great week, everyone. We'll see you next week.
- [74:23]
A
Till next time, Hooa.