Weekend Brand Interactions part I

Over this past weekend, the act of being consciously aware of the brands I came across showed me how many brands are put in front of me all of the time.  I will talk about two main outings I had over the weekend and the brands I came across.  The first outing to be discussed in this posting, was dinner out with friends and then a late movie.  The second to be discussed in a following post, was a trip to the outdoor shopping area in North Austin called the Domain.

The restaurant of choice was called Vivo, which is a modern and hip version of the typical Austin mexican food restaurant.  Just as any type of product communicates through presentation and other attributes, this restaurant did the same to attract a certain type of customer to it.  Since the restaurant itself is more of a service, I am not going to spend too much time discussing it, but wanted to point out a few things I did notice.  Austin is full of mexican food restaurants, and the choice of food is typically the same.  Vivo differentiates itself by appealing to a younger and more modern type of crowd, at least in theory.  There is a live DJ spinning tunes, a bar is the central focal point inside the restaurant, and the colors and artwork are very modern and edgy.  We actually sat at a large table that was hidden away near the bar, and the walls were adorned with photography of nude couples in various poses.  You would not find that in most Austin restaurants.  So while Vivo was creating a brand of it own by its look and modern appeal, the products that were offered there were typical of any restaurant.  The main interaction in deciding a certain brand was in alcohol choice.  Always one to try a margarita, I as faced with the choice of what tequila I wanted.  I ended up choosing to have Tito's vodka in the mix instead of tequila.  Tito's vodka is made in Austin, and my wife has a personal relationship with Tito himself through her job, so there is something very authentic to me about that vodka, and influences my choice to drink it.  Not too mention that we typically have a few bottles at the house because they were given to my wife for free, so again, the free factor highly influences brand choice.  Not being a vodka connoisseur, I am not partial to one vodka's taste over another, so I think I choose Tito's based on the personal connection and that it is a local flare not found in too many other areas outside of Austin (at least as far as I have seen).  It feels more 'authentic' to me, and thus gives me a different sense of ownership perhaps than a more recognized and well known brand of vodka. Titos has a higher brand equity for me in these respects.  It is also interesting to me, that if I had not come across it through my wife, I am not sure if I would have ever heard of Tito's.  I actually think I saw it in a bar once and just figured it was a type of Tequila because of the name.  This says to me that if my personal connection was taken away, then this brand would probably not be my choice of vodka because there is very little communication and awareness of the brand. 

Beyond the various alcohol choices, I did not come across too many other specific brands at the restaurant.  The movie experience presented other forms of branding, even in theater choice.  In Austin, as it is in most places, theater choice depends on what type of movie you want to see.  If you want to see a popular, blockbuster type of film, most of the big movie mega-plexes will be showing it.  Yet if you want to see a more independent type of movie that has a lower audience appeal, only certain theaters will show it.  I grew up seeing the major blockbuster at the Regal Arbor theater, but now that theater is the one that shows the lesser known films, such as the film Juno, which we went to see there.  My main focus of branding was during the previews for upcoming movies and noticing how usually previews really focus on the stars that are in the upcoming movies to sell that movie to the audience.  Since we were seeing a smaller independent movie, the majority of the previews were for other small independent movies, which focus less on star power and more on story and authenticity. This tells me that the marketers for these films assume that the audience watching a movie like Juno is more concerned with authenticity and story (or just less blockbuster themed films) and thus play down the brand power of big movie stars and allow the story and independent nature to be the main communication of branding for the films.  Yet, many of the actors that were in the preview movies were well known for their more quirky and independent types of roles, so their brand image was just as important as the brand image of a more mainstream star.  All in all, movies are selling an experience, and things like the plot, actors and directors sell different types of movies to different types of people and tastes, just as in any form of entertainment. Based on ingredients such as the actors or directors, people feel like they can then know what to except and that reduces their risks when it comes to spending money on a movie experience and possibly not liking that movie.  When it comes to seeing movies in the theater these days, I am very skeptical because of the price of a movie ticket and also because of the time commitment.  I was only convinced to see Juno after several people (who's opinions I respect) said good things about it, and because two of the actors in it were both in one of my favorite television shows (Arrested Development).  I liked the person who directed Juno (Jason Reitman, who also directed Thank You for Smoking), so I decided that this movie would probably not be a waste of money and not be a waste of time.  Authenticity also plays a large role in deciding whether or not to see a film when it comes to small independent movies.  When I see a big blockbuster, I know what I am getting into- the stories are usually cliche and predictable, the writing is generally average, and the big name stars usually are not the best actors- but I accept that going in and allow myself to enjoy the action and adventure and amazing effects without worrying about certain quality and authentic aspects.  But when it comes to independent films, I expect a great deal more in the quality (acting, story, writing) and in the authenticity.  Too many times have I seen an independent movie that was trying incredibly hard to be independent, or quirky, or witty, or edgy, that authenticity went right out the window and I did not believe it for a second (Down in the Valley with Ed Norton is a good example of this-  trying too hard to be quirky and show reality, that it comes off as completely unbelievable).