Category Archives: brand

Is your customer support a bit of a let-down?

Most businesses these days understand that they are driven by Brandships.  Many appreciate that Brandships are built on trust and few would fail to recognise that if their words and deeds are in any way inconsistent, either with each other or with their Brand Promise, they stand little chance of establishing the level of trust that success is built on.  So where is it going wrong?

Having acquired this wisdom, organisations around the world now devote a great deal of time and invest heavily in initiatives designed to represent their brand values consistently at every touch-point.  Getting every communication to say the same thing is the essence of integrated communications.

Because customer acquisition for all the reasons I’ve explored here in the past, is getting horribly expensive, Brandships are more valuable than ever, which is why businesses are increasingly seeking to improve their customer support,  a factor that is accentuated by the growth in e-tailing where the incidence of customer complaint is, as I mentioned last month, a bit of an issue.

I’m encouraged by the increase in the number of businesses who, instead of trying to make customers with a complaint feel like Oliver Twist asking for “more gruel”, have adopted a no-quibble replacement or compensation policy.  It seems that,  at last, the penny has dropped on this one (Although you’ll note from my earlier post on this subject that Halfords still don’t get it!).  However, you can have the best complaint resolution policy in the business, but it ‘aint worth a hill of beans if your customers have to navigate a maze of on-line and telephone obstacles to get to it!  There’s no more telling evidence of a genuine commitment to Brandships than an organisation’s on-line or call-centre process and it’s certainly taken by customers as a pretty good guide to brand values.  So why do so many businesses get it wrong?

My guess is that they simply don’t recognse what’s happening.  I’ve been advising senior execs lately to call up their own customer support line from time to time, rather than rely on the KPIs they get every month.  Whether your process is automated or not, the way you handle after sales contact with customers can be pivotal to the success in Brandships.  This isn’t just about damage limitation (because nearly all the calls you receive are going to be potentially damaging), many businesses have demonstrated that you can actually reverse the momentum, turning a potentially damaging situation into one that strengthens Brandships, if you handle them correctly.  For most this is nothing more than aligning the process to the brand model, which, sadly, few businesses do well.

In recent weeks I’ve experienced both the best and the worst in customer call handling.  The worst being the episode with Halfords that I reported on here last week and a more recent still, an encounter with HP’s customer dis-service process that starts with their un-navigable web site, designed to send you round in circles until you screw yourself!  Yes HP seem intent not to engage with you unless they absolutely have to, which is a pity, because if you can get around the system and actually manage to speak to the person you need, the response (in my case anyway) was exemplary.

I was also disappointed when re-visiting a brand that I have been happy to deal with for years.  I have never before had cause to complain about Polar UK, The local distributor for Polar, who manufacture heart-rate monitors for athletes, but I’ve called and spoken directly to their service people in the UK a number of times.  Such an old-fashioned process may have been a little at odds with their global positioning, but it was very reassuring and, overall, it worked.  Sadly, they have succumbed to pressure to automate their calls handling, but in their case the band-waggon has a wheel missing.  In fact, its possibly the most bumbling and poorly conceived process I have come across for a good while and the antithesis of everything that I have come to expect of the Polar brand.  This takes me right back to the principles of Full Effect Marketing – individual marketing elements, which because they are neglected, neutralise some of the brand building benefits of higher-profile elements that the business is investing in.  In other words … waste!

The up-side of my engaging with customer service processes has been a discovery I made of a business that specialises in designing models that actually contribute to brand development.  Brand Audio in Edgware, North London, will study your brand (even work with you to help you profile it if you haven’t already) and then bring it to life in navigation, messages and music.  Just what every business needs in fact.  This isn’t about hardware or programming (although I’m told they can provide that too), its pure brand development and while I am sure they are not alone in this space, it made me feel good to know that there is someone my clients can turn to for this kind of specialist help.  Brand Audio work with a host of leading brands who recognise the need to prioritise their customer handling processes.  At least, one route to great Brandships (and therefore a healthy business) is in the way you interact with customers on-line and on-phone and I recommend to every business to address this area of their marketing before its too late.

Footnote: Brandships, as it suggests, is the name I use to describe the relationships we have with brands.  Enter the world of Brandships at www.thefullblog.com or follow me on Twitter @thefulltweet.

James Bond – brand agent

There’s a new series on BBC TV called Faulks on Fiction, which in reassuring as-it-says-on-the-tin fashion is Sebastian Faulks taking an entertaining look at the world of novels.  This week his subject was heroes and featured Ian Fleming and James bond.

Faulks receives useful and well-informed help from John Hegarty, described in the caption as “Brand consultant”, with justification when you consider the part he has played in the development of so many famous brands, but better known to marketers, simply as the Hegarty in Bartle, Bogle, Hegarty – another great brand.  BBH, you’ll remember were, responsible for the Levi’s Launderette campaign , which I am sure I am not alone in believing, is the campaign that marked the coming of age of Brand Development.

Faulks hits the nail on the head in his analysis of Fleming’s genius in the creation of the Bond character, when he and Hegarty highlight the way Fleming defined Bond in terms of famous brands.  In a featured interview, Fleming himself confirmed that brands are a great way to define a person.  However, until Bond, this idea had never been fully exploited.  Bond is Rolex, Ritz Hotel, Smirnoff, Dom Perignon and a whole lot more.

Regular readers of this blog will be familiar with the theme.  I’ve explored, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs  a number of times in the past, in particular, the theory that we are all gradually ascending to a point of self-actualisation, but currently stuck at a point where our goal is the approval of others and the pursuit of belonging.  I have called this the “I am what I buy” or “I am what I wear” syndrome, which is represented admirably by this story and continues to be the heart of any well-founded brand strategy.

In fact, Bond matured to become an iconic brand himself, ironically adding substance to brands like Smirnoff and Aston Martin from which he was forged and many more besides in a kind of DNA cycle that is replicated in BBH – builders of brands that define their brand and the many other examples that surround us daily.  I can think of no better illustration than James Bond of what brands and branding is all about.

Brand Britain or Big Society. Could Cameron use some marketing expertise?

It may be another word for the kind of national service the countries of Central and Eastern Europe have only recently abandoned, but it seems to me that David Cameron’s “Big Society” idea is missing a basic ingredient for success.

Those who have followed my comments on National Branding in the past will understand where I am coming from on this.  I’m all in favour of a self-supporting society and a move away from the nanny state that far too many of us have grown to rely on, but are those who are driving the Big Society initiative seeing it as a step towards Brand Britain or reliant on it?  My feeling is that in order to get there you have first to nurture a feeling of belonging among the populous and, judging from the debates on the Big Society that are currently taking place, this just isn’t there and the media are doing their usual best to divide us still further.

I see there are a number of facets to the Big Society.  There’s the need for us to stand on our own feet as individuals again, there’s the need to cut the cost of the services and resources that have supported the lazy and over reliant among us and there’s the belief that by focussing on community and encouraging people to participate, society and our nation can begin to realise the many opportunities that a community mindset opens up.  However, government is missing far too many opportunities to “big up” British and Brits’ achievements and, as I have said before, this is a key component of any Brand Britain development programme.

If I am reading Dave’s agenda right, I can’t see anybody grabbing and managing this initiative nor can I see what is being done, apart from a lot of talk (which has its place, of course) to get everyone on the same page.  If the “Big Society” is, after all just a money-saving scheme, then David Cameron is surely missing the bigger trick?  Anyway, ultimately it won’t work, because the people who are supposed to be implementing the programme at local level have neither the skills or experience to make the right judgements or the motivation that a real Brand Britain campaign would provide.

Cameron and the Tories may have come closer than previous governments to getting this kind of campaign right, but we need a whole lot more internal marketing and brand-building to be brought to bear if the Big Society is going to be the really worthwhile initiative I hope and believe was the intention.

The wonder of Wilko

In what appears to be an increasingly grey and mundane landscape the occasional ray of sunshine is more than welcome.  My personal shining star right now is the retailer Wilkinson who seem to have suddenly awoken to become everything that Woolworth failed to be.  They are even doing it in the very shop units in which Woolies crashed and burned.

It’s hard to fault the new look Wilko.  Great new logo that manages to be both contemporary and friendly in equal measure, stores that despite their stack-it-high-sell-it-cheap approach to merchandising still appear orderly and inviting and whether it’s just my local branch or common throughout the chain, the staff are friendlier, and more helpful than those in many premium stores.

Their array of categories offer the diversity that Woolworth failed to cope with and rationalised away long before their eventual demise.  Wilko’s homewares sit better in the store than those of Matalan or TK Max and partner with decorating products more comfortably that Homebase.

Wilkinson, remarkably, was top of mind for me when buying a few stationery items today, even though in Newbury High Street, WH Smith are directly opposite (But I always think of Smiths as a venue for a wrist-slashing anyway!).  I bought de-icer from there a few weeks ago in preference to Halfords, and a few homewares items that I could have picked up from Tesco, had I been so inclined.  Admittedly there is a chasm between the old Wilko stores and the new smart format, but with a roll-out planned I’m sure it won’t be long before everyone will be able to experience the wonder of Wilko!  Even their web experience is good.  Frankly, I can’t see how they would fail.

Music – The High Street retailer’s secret weapon in the battle with e-tail brands

Is the shine wearing off the on-line retail gem?  Customer service has always been the Achilles heel of on-line retailers and it seems as though it’s a problem that’s not going away.

In November, Nick Robertson of ASOS and Mark Newton-jones from Shop Direct told delegates to the Skillsmart Retail Parliamentary reception hosted by the Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons, Nigel Evans MP, that on-line retailers need to learn customer service from traditional retailers.  On-line customer complaints are high and margins are stretched when the e-tailers try to up their anti.  However, this week Mary Portas has been taking the High Street to task for what she says is “crap” customer service.  So, like most things, it seems its not that simple.

What this boils down to is the age-old marketing fundamental of playing to your strengths.  Internet retailers are never going to have the same opportunities to foster “Brandships” that a high street retailer has, so if the traditional players fail to leverage that now, I for one, won’t be sympathetic to their future cries of “unfair” when their business is left in the dust of the smart young things of e-commerce.

The Internet is a cold and impersonal place.  You have to work much harder than you might on the High Street to achieve anything close to that warm cuddly feeling you get in your favourite store.  To a customer, feeling “at home” with a retail brand is everything (actually, feeling at home with any kind of brand is the key to business success) but achieving this requires the ticking of a lot of boxes.  Some of these boxes are purely practical, like availability, delivery, ease of use, customer service, which is where the Internet brands can compete.  Sure they are failing on customer service right now, partly because the business model that remains viable when the levels of returns and complaints that this channel is prone to has yet to be found, but they’ll get there.  Meanwhile, the “trads” need to wise-up and start polishing up the soft elements of Brand Promise that are tougher for the e-shops to influence.

I’m thinking environment.  Sure you can make an on-line environment comfortable and inviting to customers and it’s not beyond our capability to even modify the on-line environment of a single e-retailer to fit different customer types, but the trads definitely have more scope.  My readers will know that I’ve been focusing on in-store music recently and that’s because its one of those great untapped opportunities of retail brand building.

Shoppers love in-store music when its right.  Give them what they want and they’ll visit you more often, stay longer, spend more and tell all their friends, or so the gurus at MusicWorksForYou.com  tell us.  Retailers know they can influence behaviour of shoppers and staff with the right music and store staff say the right music makes them feel more energised, so you’ll take care of some of Mary’s customer service issues too.  Put all this together and you can’t fail.  But, the onus is on the words “the right music” and that’s where the work needs to be done.

It seems we all know music works, but the secret of quite how it does so are held by only a very few.  People like Bruno Brookes and the rest of the folks at Immedia Broadcast who have been creating bespoke live radio for some of the High Street’s biggest brands for the past ten years.  However, you don’t have to own a multi-million dollar radio station to add something extra to your brand or even drive sales, because with the right play-list a simple music stream will do both and that’s what Immedia are doing right now with their new Dreamstream offer.  Retail marketers need to disabuse themselves of the belief that they know what music works with their audience and hand the job over to the experts who know what “tailoring” really means, then perhaps we’ll be able to wave goodbye to the ubiquitous local radio station (that actually can do more harm to trade than good) or repetitive CD’s of nearly-bands playing covers and start hearing more in-store music that reinforces the brand and fosters real “Brandships”.  Then the High Street will really be able to show the e-tailers a thing or two about brand-building.

The things our fathers didn’t tell us

Did Wickes commission the Comcero.com survey that revealed that Britain’s young men lack DIY skills, or are they just promoting it on their web site?  Whichever, it may have “got Wickes name on it”, but it seems to me that this isn’t news to their competitor B&Q who have been playing this card for a few years already.

The fact that B&Q’s older shop staff are intrinsic to their brand DNA can’t be an accident.  These are the people who grew up in an era when you measured a man by the weight of his tool box and he could fix, build or re-model pretty well anything.  It’s just a pity that the big orange sheds haven’t done more to build “brandships” around this theme.  Maybe now Wickes have shared this with us, they will.

Its definitely a generational thing.  Back in my other home in Prague, where society, despite its desperate scramble to become Western and “up-to-date”, lags a few decades behind the West in many ways, a remarkable and endearing Czech character trait is their reluctance to throw anything away.  Czech men, even the young ones, fix things.  Its not always a pretty sight, but there are things in every day use in most households, that would have been thrown out years ago by a faddy, fashion-obsessed Westerners who legions of manufacturers exploit annually with the introduction of new product models.  My Czech neighbour, who runs a business on a vintage PC with Windows ’97  just doesn’t get it.  Why should he upgrade when the things he has still work (albeit slowly)?

The Czech government had to introduce laws to stop drivers running ancient Skodas with drum brakes and three forward gears.  Every urban street has a communal car ramp where residents for years have worked on their Skoda 120′s and even today my guess is most motorists do their own servicing without questioning it.

My Czech brother-in-law needed a house, so he built one – I mean, himself, on his own – bricklaying, carpentry, services, the lot!  But to him that’s nothing out of the ordinary in a society that’s probably forty years behind us in many of its attitudes.  In fact, when Britain’s older DIYers finally retire for good, maybe our DIY sheds will be able to bolster its ranks with young recruits from Central Europe, who still know how to do all the handy jobs about the house that our fathers did?

UK needs to catch up on in-store music.

I’m feeling guilty that I’ve been neglecting my blog for the last few months.  Time flies when you are having fun and I’ve been engrossed in developing a new offer with Immedia Broadcast, who lead the UK in the design and delivery of bespoke live radio solutions for commercial enterprises.

Having set the bar for the last ten years in the high-ticket radio  and TV solutions that have made them famous Immedia are keen to apply their skills and experience to the volume end of the market and I’ve been working with the  amazing technical, radio production and music psychology experts in Newbury in the South of England, to create what we have called Dreamstream, an off-the-peg music solution that smaller businesses can access for a minimal monthly subscription.  It’s still a work in progress, but take a look and let me know what you think of it so far.  www.dreamstream.co.uk

The journey has been fascinating and among the interesting processes we have encountered along the way, we commissioned a significant research piece that involved talking to 800 small store proprietors.  This as a bit of an eye-opener and maybe a pointer to why our small stores aren’t always realising their potential.

While I’m used to retailers in the US and elsewhere, who, regardless of their size, already recognise the business case behind in-store music, their UK counterparts definitely need help joining the dots.  There’s research everywhere (and its a fundamental of my “Brandships” principle) to establish beyond doubt that music, that reinforces and reflects your brand will make customers feel at home.  It also shows that as a result of this they stick around longer in the store and return more frequently and we all know that once you have achieved this you’ll see an increase in sales.

There’s another angle to the in-store music argument though and that’s the impact it has on employees.  Those of us who have worked with this tool will know that store staff are responsible for a lot of the complaints about in-store music.  It’s also often the employees who exacerbate the problem by messing around with the content and volume in the stores where they work.  However, retailers that get their music right will find that their employees are energised and more enthusiastic about their work and this in turn increases productivity and sales.  Its pretty conclusive – increased customer propensity and greater employee engagement and there are case studies on the Internet where retailers have shown increases of 20% in sales just from music, without any announcements or commercials.

Sadly, some UK independents remain sceptical.  Our research even found a few who believed that in-store music actually had a detrimental effect on business.  The reason for these opinions can only stem from their experience of some of the absolutely awful in-store music that we hear in the UK.  I think there’s a major education challenge facing the sector and, with current challenges of the new economy, and the drift towards “clone towns” we need to get cracking on this quickly.

It beggars belief that a cash-strapped shopkeeper will pay more than £300 each year on PPL and PRS music licences, only to waste it by playing local radio or worse still the dregs of their own music collections.  Music that works is the product of the marriage of science and art that you can only get from professionals.  These small businesses need to understand that the DIY approach is a recipe for disaster and local radio is not going to do it for them either.

UK independent retailers have a long way to go to catch up with their counterparts in the US and until they understand how to make the most of the opportunities like in-store music that are definitely available to them, their self-pity and claims of a market biased toward multiples aren’t going to receive much sympathy.

Credibility Gap?

The failure of the Gap’s new “branding” exercise isn’t the only recent demonstration of how even big organisations still don’t “get” brand #101, but its a good one.

For those who aren’t up to speed on this story, Gap invested big money in a new logo, that their customers don’t like and in one of the purest forms of customer power I’ve seen, they responded by forcing the retailer to put their plans into quick reverse, abandoning the new logo and all the cash and energy they had invested in it’s development .

This is failure on a grand scale.  Apart from the fact that their customers clearly have a better appreciation of design than the Gap execs (The new logo design is pretty shoddy), on the most basic level its a major cash hit and therefore just plain inefficient, which we all know is simply not an option in today’s competitive environment.  These days you simply don’t get to score below 100% efficiency and survive for long.  Then its plain bad judgement, that can only be the result of a tragic customer disconnect – How could they not know what their customers would think of the design or how they would react?  Even I could see that one coming and I haven’t been in a Gap store for at least ten years!  The thing that worries me most though is that a business like Gap, with its heritage (Haight-Ashbury, the Hippie movement, record albums, jeans and all that) could fail to recognise that their brand,  undoubtedly an icon (until now), is a product of and belongs to their customers.

Nobody could deny that the old Gap blue square and serif font was due for an update, but it was exactly what a logo should be – a reflection of the business, which could definitely benefit from a face-lift .  However, you simply don’t change anything about a brand like this without involving your brand community (customers, employees, partners etc.) in the process.  If you are daft enough to try, the very least you would do is research the result, but the really, really criminal thing about this is that whoever drove and approved this change clearly didn’t understand that a logo is a product of the brand, not the other way around.  Gap may feel the need to be current, but having a logo that meets that criteria doesn’t do it.  Newsflash – If you want people to think you are current and relevant, you have BE current and relevant.  The logo design comes later.  I can only guess that like a lot of other businesses, Gap considered up-dating the logo was a cheaper option than actually addressing the issue.  However, it might just turn out to have been a dam-site more costly in the long run.

What Gap have attempted is the retail equivalent of a comb-over.  But you can’t kid a customer and to try to do so can only have one outcome – loss of customer trust and your own credibility and integrity.

The cost of Gap’s error won’t just add up to the bill for the design work and signage, it will undoubtedly cost them customers who are right now questioning their relationship with the brand (brandship).  This represents a serious plight.  You don’t easily win back customers who feel betrayed.  Its certainly many times harder and more costly than acquiring customers in the first place.

My guess is that Gap lost their brand community a while back.  They failed to maintain the brandships their business was built on.  Remember, Gap was a ground breaker in retail brand building, so this is all the more sad.  A brand development initiative could have been just the ticket to re-engage its community.

Are retailers raping brands, or are our brands willing victims?

We all like a bargain and, as always when the squeeze is on, there has been a surge in the fortunes of retailers who can pander to that need over the last few years.  TK Maxx built their UK reputation on the mountains of liquidated stock, over-orders and manufacturers over-production that were accumulating across Europe, but these days we are all more frugal and surplus stock is a rare sight.  Walk around you local TK Maxx these days and you’ll see stuff that is clearly straight out of the factory and looking suspiciously like re-specd versions of mainstream branded products.  It’s a bit of a let-down by the retailer, but what is this doing for the brands?

It’s understandable that, faced with a shortage of supply in certain categories, retailers like TK Maxx would go looking for alternative sources to support their “Designer labels for less” claim, but for me, at least in some departments, they are failing.  They’ve never been too strong in the footwear department for instance, but, I guess, having staked out their shoe pitch they probably feel its incumbant on them to protect their claim.  Unfortunately that seems to mean introducing minority brands or “brands” that nobody has heard of (because they are just labels that manufacturers slap on to inferior product to help them hood-wink the odd independent retailer into a purchase and not real consumer brands) and it seems to me, even ordering production runs in inferior materials to get the price down.  This might keep their shoe racks full, but it’s not even close to where TK Maxx have in the past tried to persuade me they stood.  It won’t be long before this development is acknowledged by enough consumers to represent a concern to the people running the business.  Somebody said to me only the other day that TK Maxx was a con, but this practice won’t only damage their business, it will reflect on the brands that have stooped to re-engineering their products to meet the retailer’s demands and even those legitimate brands that have constituted the genuine bargains that TK Maxx was built on.

Of course, there are a lot of brands with equity earned in the past that hasn’t been leveraged in recent years, often because the organisations that own them have abandoned them or shut up shop themselves.  SportsDirect is a retailer that has been quick to realise this and have built a very successful business on rebadging inferior Asian-made sportswear and equipment with famous labels from the past like Lonsdale, Kangol, Dunlop and Slazenger.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m all in favor of people being able to buy a pair of sports shorts for £5, but by sewing a Slazenger label onto them Sports Direct have surely done irreparable damage to this old brand.  Before long, consumers who have been reassured by the label will realise that all they have is a pair of shorts from a Vietnamese sweat shop and henceforth that’s the association Slazenger will have with everybody.

When its a case of retailers buying from independent manufacturers I expect they’ll excuse the practice with the claim that it’s at least keeping the a consenting manufacturer in business and I’m sure there are many willing victims, but when the retailer is buying the brands with the sole purpose of abusing them, it raises a whole new bunch of issues.  Sports Direct own Dunlop in the UK and you can buy Dunlop squash rackets for £30 in their stores that look very much like those used by the world’s top players who they sponsor.  However, the shop versions are just mass-produced rackets from an Asian factory and the similarity to the pro gear ends with the badge, as anybody gullible enough to buy one will soon discover.

It’s a neat route to a quick-buck for Sports Direct, but in the long-term, what they are doing is burning brands – squeezing the life out of them, discarding them and moving on to their nerxt victim.  I guess they have concluded that there are enough old brands with decent equity around to earn their founders the retirement they have their hearts set on and they’ll no doubt go on buying brands and squeezing the life out of them all the way to Dorset’s Sandbanks real estate, but I’m not so sure and anyway, I hate waste as much as I despise abuse and this practice smacks of large helpings of both.

If you want to belong, get a guide!

I happened upon a discussion on BBC Radio Four last week.  The question was ” In the era of the Internet, are guide books still relevent?”.

The pundit that I heard made a very interesting point.  Well, I found it interesting because it was a reality that I find myself highlighting all the time.  She said that printed guides would always be relevent because they do something that an on-line equivalent could never do.  Her point was that a traveller sitting on a train with a Lonely Planet guide (for example) instantly becomes a member of a community of Lonely Planet travellers.  The guide itself is a badge of belonging in a way that a computer or even a hand-held device could never be and in an alien environment, however fascinating and enjoyable that might be, the reassurance of belonging is even more attractive.

As someone who has travelled a bit I have first-hand experience of this.  Just carrying a guide-book in an exotic place is a license for other travellers to strike up a conversation.  Even the different publishers of the guides represent sub-communities – you can find that you become either a Lonely Planet or a Rough Guide member according to the guide-book that you carry and I guess there is even a hierarchy.

I’ve recently been involved in a debate over whether being a member of a LinkedIn group is an excuse for other members, whatever their reason for belonging, to send you unsolicited e-mail.  This is an off-line equivalent.  I even had a friend who, years ago, followed a girl who took his eye into a bookshop on Charing Cross Road (They’d call it stalking these days!).  She made for the travel section and after a little browsing bought a guide to Thailand.  He did the same and then followed her to the cash desk where he engineered one of those “fancy that” moments.  To cut a long story short, they ended up going to Thailand together, although, as many partners who go on holiday together, they came back with a mutual loathing!   Personally I have never been put-out by the unsolicited approaches of strange travellers on public transport, although I could imagine, in certain circumstances that I might be, but I am annoyed by e-mail spammers disguised as fellow network members.  Now I think about it a woman on the London to Warwick train a few months ago struck up a conversation with me on the basis of a Lee Child book I was reading. She presented herself as a fellow Jack Reacher fan, which seems to have become another brand community in recent years.  I suppose there could me a moral there – if you want to date buy a book!

Back to the guide books though, the badge thing definitely doesn’t only work while you are travelling.  How often have you turned up at someone’s home and found a bookshelf full of matching guidebooks?  OK, so maybe its just the company I keep.  We’ve also seen the guide-book brands being leveraged to create TV travel programmes, luggage and travel accessories.  Yes, every brand is a community and this guide-book thing has taken my interest.  I must add it to my presentations on brand development in the future, as an example of a brand type, alongside religion, football teams and pop groups.