The brand launches with nothing more than a soft-core porno and some intentionally protest-generating posters. The publicity machine is running; the panty raid is sure to ensue.

The problem here isn't the rehashed nudie ads (from 1950's pin-ups to "The Blue Lagoon" to Paris's full-frontal Britney to too many MySpace postings, we've seen it all). It isn't the rehashed arguments of "but it's a tasteful representation of where our culture is today." Thanks, but we have all seen Bruce Weber campaigns ad nauseum. It isn't even the child porn potential, discussion about which we will leave to those duplicitous spokescreatures honed by American Apparel and Calvin Klein, who are surely now on the line, begging to go "on background" so they can have both knee-deep and not-me status all at once. Crisis control that fans the flames?

Nope. The problem is how out of touch the brand is at a strategic level. As populations become ever more interested in authentic, transparent and socially driven brands, Abercrombie launches a thong from stage to audience, with all the "with-it cool" of Tom Jones.

There is no Gilly Hicks (though we appreciate the giggly/chicks and wiggly/dicks puns). There is no store in Sydney, though this is the backstory of the brand. This would be hot news 15 or 20 years ago -- sly marketers, clever creatives, pass me that Haagen Dazs! -- but today? Gilly Hicks is simply very old marketing. It's outdated upon birth. It's brand as window dressing. Did I mention there is an online movie? And nubile nudes? Yawn.

Where's the malleable identity? The narrative strategy? The playful participation? These are panties we're talking about, and chiseled buttocks, too. Shouldn't there be some sense of fun and youth? In short, why not create and launch a modern, relevant, enjoyable, conversant, engaged brand? The ennui of nipples is just so sad, really.

The target markets will see through this in less time than it takes that movie to play. These kids -- and yes, that is likely the porno-pusher market here -- will snicker, but not in a titillated way. They will see the old men behind the camera, trying to be naughty and sexy (and what kid doesn't want to see Dad stretch out the Speedo?). The voyeuristic quality of the movie is the most remarkable feature; Girls Gone Wild videos are more involved in their subject. Detachment doesn't build brand equity.

Mothers with less fortunate underwear by necessity will call for posters to be burned (not out of jealousy, we must insist), and the news media will have a "scandal" to cover. This might matter if traditional media were worth a thing to the target. It's not. Anyone at Abercrombie studied news viewership and other media consumption trends this decade?

This too adds to the uncomfortably boring, out-of-sync quality of the brand. We've been through Madonna, and those first Abercrombie catalogs. It's not gotten more interesting a quarter-century on. Could we have a hint more conversation and a nudge less pouting, please? You're starting to seem, well, silly. Like little kids who pull off their pants and run through the dinner party. It's OK at a certain age, then we grow out of it.

Abercrombie: Please, find something new to do. Your markets don't care, and Gilly Hicks confirms why. Too bad you took this path -- it clouds the near brilliance of changing the game for Victoria's Secret. But battling an old, tired brand with the same old, tired tricks just won't do it.

**to read more articles by this author, click on the name under the headline**

Comments (17)

Name

Title

Comment

Add Comment