The blunder of Woolies?

There is a lot being written about the current disaster at Woolworth – about what went wrong with the the brand. The thing that intrigues me however is that despite the various commercial mistakes, there is still a good deal of warmth and goodwill towards the brand.  I feel it myself and I’m unsure if it is just the place the brand has occupied in my history… in my narrative landscape.

I’ve talked a lot about brand damage in the past, but I get the feeling that the Woolworth brand can survive. Perhaps it is because the brand has really not disappointed its customers who had very modest expectations, but only failed its shareholders.  Or perhaps it is just the investment in the brand over 100 years that cannot be ignored.

So where does the value lie now: in a couple of hundred retail leases, dubious stock, or the Woolworth name and brand?  I know what I would be looking to buy at the fire-sale.

The psychology of brand choices in tough economic times

What brand choices have you made to cope with a recession, and how many are based upon economic logic – or to make you feel empowered and in control? For example, do we feel we are making more prudent choice by going shopping at a budget supermarket, than by buying the ‘value’ or generic brands at our usual supermarket. The cost may be little different, but we feel we are making a more important action and this sustains our psychological well-being.  I guess there are parallels with ‘green’ brands that we choose because they support our self image of caring for the planet, rather than really logically consider our choices.

In times of falling prices there would be a logic to suggest that in buying durables, we go for quality brands that will last longer. But will emotion drive us to budget brands that support or personal prudence image? Does it feel right to buy a Mercedes in a recession even if we can buy one for little more than the price of a Ford?