
Consumers’ desire to trade-up
is a key to the rise of a number of mass luxury brands in the last
decade. From Starbucks to Victoria’s Secret, retailers have found
value in taking an ordinary product and imbuing it with high-end,
experiential qualities.
Last month’s interview with Chip Conley has gotten me thinking about a countervailing trend: trading down. Dunkin’ Donuts
is in many ways the anti-Starbucks, and not just because the two chains
compete head-to-head, particularly in the Northeast. If Starbucks is a
bespoke experience, Dunkin’ is unabashedly a fast-food vision of
coffee: drive-through, pre-defined servings of milk and sugar, donuts
in a baggie. And customers from across the economic spectrum love the
brand.
There’s something about a low-end brand that offers a
sense of authenticity, particularly among those who feel jaded by
traditional advertising. Hipsters have rallied around Pabst Blue Ribbon
as the beer analog to thrift-store clothing- anti-consumer in its
consumption. And you only need to look at recent electoral history to
be reminded that working-class cultural elements (jeans, trucks, beer)
are still equated with the Real America. Standard advertising for
these products is essentially all about how down-market they are.
It’s a mistake to assume that only luxury brands have a self-expressive quality. For every Endangered Species Chocolate buyer, there is someone who’ll stick with Hershey’s, thank you.
What other examples can you think of consumers trading down?
Misha Cornes

F1 vs. Nascar
Barneys vs. Thrift
Porsche vs. Hybrid
These are good ones. Maybe more like Porsche vs. the beater you leave at the train station when you commute to work.
Another obvious one used by hipsters:
Chuck Taylors