Introduction
Weber opens with an anecdote about brand distinction among premium vodkas, which is a curious problem because the ideal qualities of a good vodka is that it is odorless, colorless, and flavorless. So if the product is made properly, there is absolutely no physical distinction between one brand and the other. The only difference is the brand. Moreover, the two brands he compared were targeted to poseurs, young men who wanted to be recognized as having good taste and being affluent enough to afford the finer things in life - but who didn't actually have much money and who were buying a product that was literally tasteless.
Investigating the market, the buyers could not explain why they had a brand of preference. Their answers were that "It's just the one I like," and the fact that they could not distinguish the two without seeing the labels did not dissuade them from expressing a strong preference for their favored brand.
When they got away from the product and began talking about the emotional qualities of the brand, they noticed a stark difference. One brand promoted itself as being elegant, fancy, and refined whereas the other brand used aggressive masculine imagery in its advertising. One was a brand that you gently sip, the other was the brand you "slam down." So the difference had nothing to do with the product, but the manner in which the drinker wishes to be perceived (and even to feel about himself) as a result of the association of the brand to its advertising imagery.
The author uses the term "brand fantasy" to describe the feelings a person has about a brand that have nothing to do with the product, a "messy network of associations" of which a person may not be deliberately and consciously aware. It's a gut feeling toward something that has no rational basis, a belief that is held without knowing where it comes from, the source of which has become concealed in the murky depths of human memory. To the consumer, the brand embodies his aspirations - he wants to be, or become, the kind of person who uses that brand.
So back to the vodka, whether an individual chose one brand or the other depended on whether the brand was associated in his mind with the kind of person he wishes to be: a gentleman of refined tastes or a rugged he-man who takes what he wants.
There are a few random bits thrown in - that because the product was often consumed in bars, most of their subjects could not even describe the packaging and some of them weren't even able to spell the name properly. They didn't know where the product was made (one is French and the other made in Holland, but most believed it was Russian or Polish). Ultimately, they didn't care about these things - they had a vague impression of the brand's personality, and were attracted to it regardless.
The distinction between "brand fantasy" and "brand positioning" is that a brand position is consciously recognized and can be described in specific terms, whereas the brand fantasy tends to be vague and ineffable. A person may describe a brand position as being less expensive, more durable, higher quality, environmentally responsible, etc. but the brand fantasy is something they struggle to explain - they say "I like it because I like it" or "it just suits me better" but cannot (or will not) say exactly why. When pressed, their language becomes vague and emotional - they talk about their feelings rather than the qualities of the product itself.
There is an ongoing debate about exactly how rational customers are - whether we make practical choices or emotional ones - and the suggestion that even when we deliberate, our emotional reactions tend to interfere with our attempts to be objective and logical. The degree to which a given person in a given situation uses emotion or logic varies. Where reason rules, then marketing a brand by its positioning is the better choice. But where emotion takes over, relying on positioning can be a big mistake. Moreover, as products become commoditized, the functional differences between one brand and the next are diminished and in some instances quite negligible, and the emotional portent of the brand is of increasing importance.
It's noted that "our feelings serve as shortcuts." To save the time and effort of thinking, we go with our gut - and when it works out for the better, we follow the same pattern to avoid decision-making every time. We become attached to choices that succeeded in the past, and are afraid of taking a risk - even when some new prospect seems the better choice, we prefer to stick with what is known even if we suspect that it may be substandard or inefficient. It is safe, which is to say we feel less anxiety when we follow established patterns.
Another example where consumer choice defines logic: generic drugs. There is no functional difference between a generic and a branded pill - in fact, it is often the case that a single factory and production line turns out the manufacturer's brand, a store brand, and a generic version of the same medication. Except for the packaging, the product is identical. And yet, manufacturer's brand products outsell both store brand and generic products, and at significantly higher prices. There can be no rational explanation - it's just the feeling that one is better than the other.
Yet another example: luxury brands, which he leverage fantasy better (and more profitably) than standard brands. As with the example of generics, the luxury brand is seldom much better than the standard brand in terms of the product qualities, but there is a certain "feeling" that comes with owning and consuming a luxury item. It is a sense that consuming a superior product makes one a superior person, so people pay a great deal more for a product that is only marginally better in terms of its physical qualities. (EN: The author uses "luxury" where he likely means "premium," as the difference is even more stark than he presents here.)
But even inexpensive brands are built on fantasy, and the strongest brands have the strongest fantasies. Think of Coca-Cola, which anyone can afford. It has long been listed among the very strongest international brands, and customers have great affection for it even though there is no functional benefit to consuming carbonated sugar-water, even though in blind taste tests they often prefer a different brand. In their mind, Coke equates to happiness and pleasure.
It might be said that brand fantasy is a matter of perception, not reality - but from a psychological perspective, perception is reality. We are motivated to act based on what we believe, regardless of whether our beliefs are true. And even our basic perception is filtered and shaped by our experience. The customer who is loyal to one brand of vodka believes it tastes better, even though it is flavorless. The consumer who purchases a Coca-Cola to make himself feel better does in fact feel better. And for the most part, the benefit we get from using a specific brand of a specific product is purely emotional - we could have achieved the same functional outcome from any of a number of brands.
Consider the metaphor of the brand relationship - which is the way a person feels about using a brand. It is not entirely rational, just as human relationships are not rational. People cannot fully explain why they like or love another person, and it is impossible to argue someone into loving you. There are instances where people married for logical reasons, or where people pretend to be friends because there is some functional benefit in their association - but these are seldom very satisfying relationships compared with genuine friendship and genuine love.
And finally, there is the reminder that brand exists in the mind of the customer, and that the emotions that exist for a brand originate in the mind of the customer. Advertisers can attempt to position their product in a way that make it lovable, but it is up to the customers as to whether they fall in love with it. Moreover, such advertising often thinks about emotions in the wrong way - it's not about convincing people your brand stands for happiness, but instilling in them a gut-feel reaction to the product that makes them feel happy about consuming it and being associated with it.
To do that, we have to consider emotions at a deeper level, and this is what the present book is intended to do.