Brand Academy

 A commercial for Madonna’s clothing line for H&M features a young woman in a plaid skirt and black schoolboy socks – very Japanese schoolgirl as seen by Quentin Tarantino – entering the fashionista lair run by Madonna herself (armed with a leather whip), a set of her blonde and brunette clones in generically slick suits, and two flamboyantly obsequious designers mumbling in an indefinable accent. At the end of the commercial the girl emerges dressed exactly like Madonna. The latter pronounces “You made it” (“IT” having been the leitmotiv of the story) and the two exit handin-hand. It is a good commercial, which makes you want to become “it” as well. It does not show close-ups of the collection, for it does not sell clothes – it sells attitude.

In a parallel universe, another highstreet giant, Topshop, advertised it’s own celebrity designer, Kate Moss, in a slightly more subtle way : a word of mouth, a story in a fashion magazine, a podcast on iTunes (Kate bringing in her favourite wardrobe pieces to be copied by the Topshop design army), more stories and magazine covers closer to launch, and then the launch itself, with Kate showing up in the shop window as a mannequin.

Now guess which collection sold well. Was it M by Madonna – whose images graced all prime outdoor panels for weeks after the launch ? Or was it Kate’s line, aptly named “Duplikate” by the New York Post ? Madonna’s clothes hung in the stores wistfully, probably for as long as the adverts graced the streets, while Kate’s fl ew off the racks instantly, snapped by eager fans, some of whom queued up for over 8 hours to be the fi rst in the door.

Seems like an obvious answer, yet in many ways it makes no sense.

We are looking at two identical events : a celebrity capsule sold in the guise of clothes. Buy this capsule and you will instantly become that brilliant tough ragsto-riches woman, who makes her own style. Both collections were ghost-designed by professionals, while the stars provided inspiration with their own wardrobes and taste. Both collections were more than affordable, and announced as a limited edition.

One could argue that the age difference between the two women could be the key to sales – after all, most girls buying Topshop outfi ts grew up with pictures of Kate Moss, so it is natural for them to identify with her. Then again, I have seen women in their sixties line up for Lagerfl ed for H&M, so I doubt that generation gap is the issue here.

Various reviews argued that Madonna’s line did not sell because the clothes looked “cheap”. Well, have a look at Kate’s line at Topshop.com – not the ads with the supermodel wearing the clothes, but the clothes themselves, stiffl y lined up on the webpage – and tell me if they could possibly look “not cheap” in real life.

Vain as the subject may seem, I urge you to consider it, if you want to understand consumer behaviour in a branded universe. Branded universe, you see, is what we get when we have too much choice. Brands appear to simplify choice, then brands intertwine with brands : Omega with George Clooney, Migros with the Rolling Stones – some combinations work, others loose.

The key to the matter, I believe, is in the word Expertise – when faced with too many options, we have to be guided towards our choice by someone we believe to be an Expert. I don’t mean to say that Kate Moss is an expert in clothes and Madonna is not. But Kate Moss is a perceived expert in fashionable living and good taste, while Madonna is a perceived expert in Kaballah, Yoga and pop music. Ergo the sales results.

And, well, they are both perceived experts in getting hitched with younger men, but in that respect Demi Moore brand would outsell both.