It’s a simple concept: First, create the brand. Second, create the product. Third, associate the products with the brand.
But when is it taken too far? When does a product make its brand lose meaning, instead of gaining?
These are just some of the questions that came to mind when I came across this article. In essence, Condé Nast is furthering its recognizable brand by launching magazine … restaurants.
Take a second. Pause.
Where’s the print in this? In short: There’s none, at least not that they’re sharing. According to the WSJ article, “[t]he effort reflects a growing openness among magazine publishers to try and capitalize on their brands beyond print…”.
In the ever-changing world of media, I’m all for moving beyond print. That’s where the iPad digital-magazine craze has come from, and almost everyone in the print world has moved his or her work in some way to better parlay itself into online content. And with all the wannabe techies out there, this makes perfect sense.
But it’s still based off of print. Though menus have yet to be made, I’m wary of how this translates back to the core value of the print medium.
Putting your name on something means that it should reflect back to the origin of that name—in this case, an internationally recognized company that produces quality magazines. A move like this is little more than attaching a name to a baseless product.
The WSJ mentions Elle making its move to television with Project Runway. Television is still a form of communication, and the basis of the show (hello, fashion) can be traced back to Elle’s roots as a highly reputable women’s fashion magazine. Restaurants and fashion shows are like oranges and apples.
Speaking of food, the first magazine restaurants will be based off of Vogue and GQ, set to open in 2011 in international locations. (Last I checked, Vogue and GQ weren’t my go-to choices for foodie trends.)
I’m curious to see how this will turn out. Smart gamble, or desperate times call for desperate measures?
[image: myklroventine]
If you liked this, try:
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Are we sure magazines are tied to “print” or are they tied to “experience?”
It’s my estimation that people don’t go crazy because they are seeing words on paper in text format, they are going crazy because of the make-you-feel-cozy experience that comes along with it.
And with that line of logic, a restaurant fits right in (this is the same society that pays $4 a cup for Starbucks coffee because of the “experience” that goes with it).
I think as long as the brand stays true to the experience it promises, then the brand is doing well by the brand, whether it’s in the form of a paper magazine, a digital magazine, or even a restaurant.
I think the idea could be fun. What about a Rolling Stone restaurant for rock fans or a JazzTimes or Downbeat restaurant for jazz fans? Most restaurants fail so many of these magazine restaurants will fail as well, but some may make some money and give their readers and fans a fun experience.
@andrew, I don’t necessarily agree with the Starbucks analogy. Personally, I go to Caribou or Starbucks because their espresso tastes much better than office coffee. I care not for their adult contemporary music and faux-hip atmosphere. And I think magazines are tied to both “print” and “experience.” Other than Wired, the mags I read rarely make it into my daily online routine.
@chloe, this may actually be a worse idea than Planet Hollywood. I share your skepticism.
I think it’s about tapping into the emotional connection that people have with a brand.
For instance, check out this New York Times item about Kellog’s launching a Pop Tarts storefront in Time Square: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/business/09poptart.html.
I’m both intrigued and repelled ;p I think it tugs at me a bit because the Pop Tarts brand grew up when I was growing up. There’s the emotional connection. The Kellog’s driver: Can they get me or people like me in there with my kids to keep promoting their brand for them??
I think done correctly, just about any brand can do any kind of marketing. The owner of the brand has to be intimately keyed in to who it’s trying to connect with and engage — and, ultimately, why. What is the hoped for outcome?
Extending a brand is a natural occurrence in business, how you do it, when you do it and is there a logical connection between the extension and its core audience is the key. I suppose it’s not a new idea, Playboy tried it back in the day.
Maybe Conde Nast doesn’t remember Cosmo’s low-fat yogurt attempt or BenGay’s aspirin or Smith and Wesson’s mountain bikes. Anyway, restaurants are only as good as the food, the service and the experience, the name above the door doesn’t really matter. Unless of course all three were bad.