(Continued from Spock vs. Gump.)
We usually call rational marketable qualities USP, the unique selling proposition. And the brand’s emotional qualities we know as ESP, the emotional selling proposition. But the contextual, cultural connection is still unknown to many, so let us provisionally call it ASP, the affinity selling proposition. It is understandably the group, social network, culture and background that determine how a lot of things are interpreted.
If you have your head screwed on, you will notice that the brand goes through an evolutionary change. First comes USP, then ESP, and after that ASP. The USP is generally regarded as dead. The ESP is familiar and has been for a while, whereas the ASP is still largely unknown to many, but it is definitely something that we must give great consideration to in the future.
Can it be true that many have become stuck in the brand’s first stage of development, despite indications that many should be on the edge of the second and third stages? Is it possible that many still persist in describing and presenting their brand from a one-sided product perspective, despite the fact that most consumers seek emotional gratification from the brand with support from their tribal brotherhood?
In which case, the consequences would be disastrous: The brands’ descriptions are too narrow. They are objectified and reduced. They are not able to reach out and touch the consumers. Their patter falls on deaf ears and they die from a lack of relevance. Communication is too expensive. Profitability decreases. Many have started to complain that advertising doesn’t pay.
What many brands need is an integrated comprehensive view which doesn’t exclude any of the three dimensions.
As far as Camitz Sparkling is concerned, they are lucky enough to be blessed with all three spheres. The vodka’s tangible qualities, such as the carbonation, the bottling, the cork and the bar-dispenser, are a world’s first. The emotional benefits are evident for all to see: the visual impression, the sound of the hissing bubbles and the spontaneous effect contribute to a trump card that is exceptionally difficult to copy.
As for the cultural aspects, such as those moulded by the principal characters in the story, their fight and their network is naturally their own with a personal touch. But the creating and building of a strong brand requires much more. The three dimensions are, despite everything, just an expression for something else.
At the base there must be a good story to tell. A brand story.
You have just read the Camitz story. If you haven’t already noticed, let me refresh your memory, it is a typical David and Goliath tale – about the rebel who took on the huge establishment.
So, how does your story run?
Read the next chapter, »I’m Dirty Harry. Who are you?«, here.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
I’ve read the article 3 times now, trying to figure out what the initialism ASP stand for. Am I blind?
Andreas, affinity selling proposition.
Thank you! I’m now wondering how I missed that in the text
I just had to respond to this post.
Firstly, the headline did catch my attention and I had to take look – I was intrigued!
Secondly, I had to smile at the title of the blog – minegoestoeleven. Anyone who knows the movie ‘This Is Spinal Tap’ will get the joke – it involves being One better than everyone else! …..this is pertinent to the issue being discussed.
In response to the blog, I accept that ASP is an essential component and would be interested to hear how people are incorporating it into to their brand development activity. I would suggest that the ‘culture’ and ‘context’ are being embraced in many sectors, and in some cases it can even be the play between the brand’s cultural heritage versus the cultural environment in which the brand is currently being marketed. It’s often this aspect that causes the frisson which excites creative minds working on the brand, and captures the imagination of their target audience. You just need to take a look at some of the drinks brands such as Stella Artois and Peroni and how they leverage off the interplay between the brands country of heritage and the domestic audience – arguably this has happened for years. For local ‘tribal’ context look at the music industry niches – the imagery, product and content all resonate with their communities. Just go to the DontStayIn website to get a flavour of what the nightclubbing dance scene responds to re: events, music downloads, DJ’s.
I don’t agree with the rather linear thinking that when a brand ‘evolves’ from USP, to ESP, to ASP it dismisses it’s previous stage of development. I would suggest that a USP and product features/benefits continue to be valid at every stage, even once the ESP and ASP elements are up and running. Evolving and differentiating your offering proposition requires continued attention across all aspects, especially as the market flexes and competitors come and go with their latest offerings.
I would also add that there are quite a few absolute and dismissive statements within the blog, and little evidence to support some of the writer’s conclusions. He makes some valid points, however on reading I was left with the feeling it was a viewpoint that needed verification by third party endorsement/statistics/research.
Finally,…the Spinal Tap reference…. is a contextual reference… for me….. I get the joke! It’s an in-joke that people who like the film will know, and is partly a generational reference popular among teens, students, young people in the 1980′s. That makes me feel a part of a bunch of people like me. I like that, I want to talk to them, and feel I should share in their conversation and contribute. Coupled with the headline, the subject matter (brands engaging with audiences, which I’m fascinated and passionate about), and a chance to contribute and share with the professional marketing people on here – well, I was hooked in ….and that’s why I’ve posted this!