back to thinking

3

Comments

A frappuccino by any other name...

August 07, 2009 by Cody Griggers

If you've been hanging around our side of the office these past few weeks, you will have no doubt seen the open dictionaries, books of Roman mythology, lists of Greek roots ending in fricative consonants, web pages scrolling through poems in Esperanto and perhaps the odd Scrabble board. You may even have been privileged (or standing still long enough) to have been called into one of everyone's favorite agency meetings:  The Naming Session.

The Naming Session can at once make you feel exhilaratingly erudite, gratified for taking all those university electives ("I remember there were great words for 'flower' in my Early Modern Aramaic Poetry class!"). They can also make you feel hopelessly cliché ("But I really LIKE 'Jasmine'!") or just downright clueless ("Zam? We're actually considering Zam?"). Having taken part in these sessions throughout my five years at Keen, I have seen firsthand the months of brainstorming, researching, testing, competitor analysis, dissecting, linguistically mapping (who knew that class would actually come in handy?) and agonizing over the perfect name. That elusive one word – sometimes even a single syllable – that encapsulates everything a brand is about, forging that instant, lasting personal connection deemed so essential for success.

Coffee

Which is why I almost spit out my grande double-shot latte when I read this. 

Starbucks, you see, is apparently taking its cue from the likes of other simultaneously loved and reviled celebrities the world over – it's going incognito. And how does a multi-national coffee empire throw on baggy sweat pants, oversized dark sunglasses and a floppy hat when it ventures out into a new neighborhood so that it won't be recognized? It loses its name.

Starbucks Logo

That's right. The newest kid on the block in Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood, 15th Ave. Coffee & Tea, is drawing public ire for being nothing more than a Starbucks in disguise. Inspired by the original, small-scale coffee houses that put Seattle on the coffee connoisseur map (and which, ironically, spawned the birth of the Starbucks brand in the first place), this new concept appears to make every effort to distance itself from its parent, a brand synonymous to many with all that is wrong with globalization, and to some, with civilization itself. Menus are redesigned, drinks are "handcrafted" using high-end (rather than mass-market) machines, and that green logo you're used to passing at least 3 times on your way home? Completely hidden away, banished to a single fine-print tagline on the door: "Inspired by Starbucks".

Is this deception, as many have decried? Is it a further sign of the evil that Starbucks has inflicted upon life as we know it? We all know that spin-off brands are a dime a dozen in just about any market, and that some of the most celebrated of them – from boutique hotels to skincare products to seemingly niche foods and beverages – can trace their lineage to a parent often criticized for being a global behemoth.

As we rack our brains from our cubicles and meeting rooms to create brands that people will remember, it just strikes me as a bit sad that there could actually come a day when success may become more dependent on having them be forgotten.

QUO in Action

QUO CEO David Keen is speaking at the Thailand Tourism Forum - 2012 on February 2nd. Please visit The American Chamber of Commerce website for more information.

3 comments on this post.

Oratip Nimkannon - Concept Developer

I don't get it. Why have the "Inspired by Starbucks" line at all? There are so many independent coffee houses in Seattle that offer more satisfying "coffee experiences" and better value than Starbucks. And the majority of coffee lovers in Seattle prefer to get their daily shot of the coffee experience from these independent coffee houses. I probably went to Starbucks twice in my three years in Seattle. And there are probably more independent coffee houses in downtown Seattle (all of them supported by locals and all of which are financially successful) than the number of Starbucks in the whole of Bangkok combined.

So...it would make more sense to me to just stick to your own brand. If in Bangkok, maybe it would make sense. But in Seattle?? I don't get it.

That brings me to this conclusion. It's important to also think about the local context of where your store (or client's store) will be located. Then this 15th Ave. Coffee would probably never have seen the light of day to begin with, or better yet, have its own brand story to tell.

Cody Griggers - Editorial Director

That's definitely true. But..can't a spin-off brand actually have its own brand story to tell? And isn't that exactly what 15th. Ave is trying to do by burying its association with its mother ship?

I do get your point though about how bringing this "concept" to a city already quite content with its indie coffee culture does seem a bit strange. But behind its indie facade, what 15th Ave. has that all its predecessors don't is the backing of a multinational logistics and supply chain that could, theoretically, benefit consumers through lower costs, greater variety/sourcing options, etc.

All this being said, I'm also reminded of the other extreme here--something like McCafe, which, despite its faux-chic interiors and fancified menu names (and, according to some blind taste tests, even better coffee!) makes no effort to disguise the fact that it's a McDonald's. And people don't seem to mind at all when they can get their lattes for less. Different audiences perhaps.

Ron Edwards - Strategy Director

It's kind of like they're picking up on the anti-brand/non-brand model of MUJI and Bottega Veneta. Though I really question whether this Starbucks idea will be successful. There's such a backlash against Starbucks, particularly in Seattle, that this is more likely to make the detractors dislike Starbucks even more.

The company might attract existing Starbucks customers who want something a little more boutiquey. But convert the haters? No way. The reason MUJI and Bottega Veneta work is because they're good brands with very discreet or non-existent branding. Their success is based much more on authenticity whereas this Starbucks thing is just deception. Hopefully this one coffeeshop is just an experiment and not some Grand Masterplan of the Grand Marketing Guru of Starbucks.

Thank you.

Required fields are empty.

Message failed, please try again.

Please post a comment