A defining dynamic of the current luxury market has been its “democratisation”. According to the Boston Consulting Group, this refers to middle market consumers’ ability to access high-quality products which are available in many forms, at many price levels, through a variety of retail channels.[1] On one hand, experts argue that that democratising luxury gives leaders a new way to consider growth, profitability and the art of fulfilling aspirations.[2] On the other hand, some believe that the “luxuriousness” of luxury brands has been undermined by democratisation. The writer Dana Thomas believes that it has sacrificed the integrity, undermined the products and tarnished the history of luxury products.[3] Can democratisation and luxury be reconciled?
Strategies that focus on developing broad and global exposure amongst aspirational buyers suggest that targeting a narrow market of luxury buyers is no longer a sustainable approach in an increasingly competitive (and slowing) luxury industry. Brands’ social media marketing techniques, which has played a key role in democratising the luxury industry, reflects this. For example, fashion houses are increasingly employing Periscope to broadcast fashion shows live to international audiences over the Internet. Marc Jacobs recently broadcasted the Resort 2016 Collection enabling subscribers with Periscope accounts to access an intimate showing of the collection and an exclusive Q&A, as the designer described the inspirations, materials and details behind the collection – this is something typically reserved for high-priority journalists post-show.[4] This highlights that brands are determined to communicate with their audiences more directly, and are conscious of their purchasing power. This also suggests that wide exposure can encourage the wealthy few amongst a vast audience, who are familiar with a brand’s aesthetic, to purchase items.
The recent frenzy in response to the release of Balmain and H&M’s collection, which was significantly marketed over Instagram, highlights the effectiveness of targeting the masses through social media. Although some including Robin Givhan have criticized Balmain’s head designer Olivier Rousteing’s social media strategy, arguing that its recent collections amount to “vulgar” and attention seeking sharing fodder,[5] others disagree. The writer Kristen Chrisman-Campbell believes that Rousteing’s high-profile social media presence and efforts to popularise the brand has been a successful part of Balmain’s rebrand, which is now recognised by millions and has become a household name.[6] This suggests that a brand’s high exposure does not necessarily diminish its brand equity, as the popularity of Balmain x H&M’s collection highlights how covetable the brand remains. As Balmain’s CEO Emmanuel Diemoz has said, ‘so many people are now making money so fast, maybe the H&M customer will soon become the Balmain customer”.[7]
Of course, the saturation of a brand’s image can be very damaging. During the early 2000s, Burberry’s logo and trademark chequered print became infamously prevalent as the brand sought to broaden its appeal to younger clientele. It licensed its name, plaid and knight logo to other manufactures so that its brand appeared on everything from throw pillows to stuffed toys. Eventually, individuals associated with a ‘sub-culture prone to drinking and anti-social behaviour” hijacked the brand’s image, according to the Financial Times.[8] Nevertheless, Burberry has since reclaimed its identity, repositioned itself more firmly in the luxury market and is even integrating all of its brands (including Brit and Prorsum) into a single offering to consolidate its upmarket positioning. Moreover, it has led the way in democratising luxury, with a strong following of 5 million followers on Instagram and was first to broadcast a fashion show live through Snapchat. This has not compromised the luxurious appeal of the brand, which maintains high pricing points and a reputation for high-quality products.
The democratisation of luxury goods need not be viewed as paradoxical, as a brand’s equity is not necessarily diluted as a result. As the industry is affected by increased competition, the risk of focussing on a too-narrow target market that compromises exposure to thousands of aspirational buyers, is too high for certain brands. Democratisation of luxury need not be associated with vulgarity or saturation, but an intelligent response to enhance customers’ desire for products that strengthen a brand’s equity.
~
[1] BCG, ‘Trading Up: The New Luxury and Why We Need It’ https://www.bcg.com/documents/file13925.pdf
[2] ibid.
[3] H. Hurt, ‘Luxury and How It Became Common’, The New York times, 19/8/2007
[4] http://www.wgsn.com/blogs/marc-jacobs-gets-periscope-follows-in-footsteps-of-fashion-brands-burberry-dkny-rebecca-minkoff/
[5] R. Givhan, “At Balmain those aren’t clothes on the runway, they’re a social media moment” 2/10/2015 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2015/10/02/at-balmain-those-arent-clothes-on-the-runway-theyre-a-social-media-moment/
[6] K. Chrisman-Campbell, “Balmain: The Reinvention of a Fashion House” 11/2015 http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/11/balmain-the-reinvention-of-a-fashion-house/415440/
[7] ibid.
[8] H. el Habashy & C. LaCalle, ‘The Burberry Revolution” 3/9/2011; http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heba-el-habashy-and-charles-lacalle/the-burberry-revolution_b_833618.html
Luxuria 