Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Brought to you by the founders of Chubbies (9 figure exit and 10-figure IPO) and Loop Returns, Tom Montgomery and Preston Rutherford have a single goal with this podcast: Give you new information, lessons and learnings, translated into specific tactics you can employ TODAY at your brand to help you build the strongest brand possible, which if you build that strong emotional connection, ALWAYS translates into more profit, if done well. It's our job to help you do brand building well.
You can expect 3 things from the podcast episodes:
1) share the best brand building knowledge from the best books on brand building,
2) talk with the founders and operators building the best brands today and
3) share share all our mistakes, lessons we've learned along the way.
After ever episode, you'll leave with 1-3 actions you can apply today, as informed by the best brand builders in the world (not us), our mistakes in building a brand that had an IPO, and founders of the world's best brands.
Preston Rutherford (00:00)
One, hello, and welcome to the Brand Builders podcast. Today, we are kicking off a series on Kellogg on branding. Now, if you're following every episode, you're probably asking yourself, haven't you already talked about one of the chapters before? And you would be correct. However, we thought it would be useful, given the foundational importance of this work of art, to just go through the whole thing sequentially.
Section by section. So that is what you can expect and today is part one of this journey What else did you expect? well, we are going to go through a high-level summary and then Tom and I are going to go back and forth talking about some interesting topics that we took away from this first section and We will discuss we will argue we will laugh and we will
cry. But the objective is that hopefully in that process, that roller coaster of emotions, that for you, the listener, you take away some actionable thoughts, lessons, learnings, things to try, new ways to think as you navigate this tumultuous yet infinitely rewarding world of building a brand.
day.
Tom (01:31)
You know what, I'm doing well. I'm doing well. I'm excited to talk about Kellogon branding. Kellogon branding was a very formative text for Young, Tom and Preston as we were starting Chubbies. And so it's fun to...
reconnect with it and then also see they've got the new version Kellogg on branding in a hyper connected world and yeah like We're hoping that this can start to become if we can be you know eloquent and do the authors the service of conveying some of the concepts here is Distilling down some of the kind of critical takes we've gotten from
these texts that are really important to us in our careers so that you can read them, but without reading them, you can still get some of the value from some of these really smart folks working on really important topics. And so this was kind of chief among the texts we wanted to start to dive into and kind of present a,
distillation, a connection to current operating, current brands, our experiences, so that hopefully there's actionable insights. Every time I read one of these or reread one of these, just like come out of it with so much that I'm eager and aching to do. And so hopefully that can convey over to anybody who has the time to listen.
Preston Rutherford (02:57)
Fabulous perfect context and with that why don't we begin? Why don't we kick it off with a? broad high level summary of Section one I can take a stab and then Tom handed over to you and then after that we can kick off with the interesting tidbits that stood out to us and
We'll just keep this, you know, high octane, action packed, high information density. And again, at the benefit of you, the listener. So section one, four chapters titled thinking strategically about your brand. Chapter one focuses on brand positioning, the foundations they say, and I would tend to agree of building a strong brand.
How do you think about positioning it, sustaining it, repositioning it, thinking about competitive factors or changes in the world or in the realm in which you operate, in the market in which you operate? Chapter 2, leveraging the power of brand purpose. So what really does that mean? How does it actually play out? I think we all know that it's important to have a purpose but outside of that surface level...
understanding that I think we all share, what does it actually mean? How does it play out? What are some examples there? Chapter 3, building a powerful brand portfolio.
There might be some things that we'll point out there that we can apply to folks in general. The assumption is most folks listening to this podcast are working on a singular brand. And it might not be, I mean, Bernard or Noah, if you're listening to this podcast, maybe we can teach you a thing or two that you can take away and apply to LVMH. But outside of that, we will make applications or extrapolations to those of you building singular brands as well. And then chapter four,
pioneer, fast follower, late mover advantages. Again, just in the context of a brand within a real-life dynamic competitive environment, how do we not only start with success but continue with success?
I'll stop there, Tom, hand it over to you as we think about summary. Any other points that we might convey to the listener or shall we just jump into point interesting point number one?
Tom (05:36)
No, let's dive in. Yeah, I think the most interesting piece is kind of the tactical takes, what actions we saw coming from this, how we thought about it. I think we'll try and also give moments when we disagree or when we have a kind of nuanced take, because I think there are a couple of those where I saw an opportunity to kind of add and dive a bit deeper. So I think that makes sense. I can kick us off.
Preston Rutherford (05:50)
Mm-hmm.
Perfect. Please.
Tom (06:03)
Um, so I think the first, the first thing that we cover in the, in, uh, section one is all about positioning and repositioning and things like that. Um, and this is like orient, I think they generally orient this around, um, a positioning statement, um, that kind of defines, um, uh, a lot about your brand. And, and Preston, I think you've got, I won't steal your thunder on some of those. Um,
I think for me, one of the interesting pieces and positioning is related to your product, but it isn't necessarily your product. One of the examples they use is Blue Apron, where Blue Apron's product is meal kit, meal prep, delivery. You've got, you've got your recipe. You've got all the ingredients. Awesome. But then there's still the question of how do we want to position it? And I thought this was an interesting example where basically they say, Blue Apron decided to position.
in uh position themselves against kind of grocery right position themselves um against um kind of a classic um shopping meal prep problem of like well if i were to do this at the grocery store it would be a daunting task because i have to find the recipe then i have to go get the ingredients i have to make sure the ingredients are in the right portions all this stuff um why don't i just go with blue apron who's got the recipe got the ingredients etc so that's one way to position that
Another way that they, the example they gave of positioning Blue Apron could have been, hey, this is a more fun option than takeout, right? So then your competitive set turns into the takeout market and we're trying to go steal from Uber Eats, Store Dash, et cetera. And the positioning would be more like, hey, this is a healthier, more fun alternative than just sitting around and waiting for your food. Why don't you get up, make some good stuff?
as a family and have a laugh. I think like both like in terms of like jobs to be done, but also the thing that I pulled from this is like, there is a market determination. Even if your product is your product, there's a market determination there where Blue Apron by taking dollars from the grocery budget and going after grocery had access to a much bigger pie because grocery spending is much, much higher than takeout spending.
than if they went after this takeout market. I thought that was a really interesting framing of how positioning changes your market. I think like when we think about brand positioning and marketing and things like that, at least me last 15 years, like a lot of what I tend to hear is that marketing is kind of that like fluff on top, but it's not the thing that determines your market, like what your business legitimately is. And...
And I think there are various people who have different takes and acknowledge the importance of marketing. But I think like, for me, that was an interesting, um, thought is to make sure that you think about not just the marketing of like, how do I, how do I adapt the things that I'm doing to our current positioning or whatever it is, or what I believe is our target market. I need to take a step back and think about like, Hey, is there a way we can play in bigger markets with the same product? Um, by
positioning changes. I thought that was a really cool concept. And question for you, Preston, was like, did that resonate with you? How did you think about, like, can you position your way into a much bigger market? Can you think of other examples like Blue Apron where somebody kind of positioned themselves into a bigger market? Yeah, give me your, I would love your thoughts on all of those.
Preston Rutherford (09:47)
first that was like an awesome that was an awesome I think summary an example with Blue Apron where I have somewhat mixed feelings and I don't actually know if they're in conflict here or if I actually disagree with for instance the Blue Apron example because I guess here's my point like money first profit first business first versus
whether it be purpose first or problem first or need first is sort of the distinction that I'm exploring with my forthcoming thoughts. With the Blue Apron example, it kind of sounded like the positioning was picked because...
As you were saying, in those two examples, one, more fun than takeout, two, easier than grocery. They chose two, largely because it seemed like the financial opportunity there was more interesting. There was more dollars that they could steal or more spend share, or whatever the term is, that they could take from that positioning compared to takeout. Now, the reason why, and I'm just thinking through this live,
that might be is tied back to the need, you know, the problem to be solved, the job to be done to your point. So you know maybe they're they aren't in conflict at all but that was just something that I thought about where sometimes in my over simplistic naivete I poo-poo some of these frameworks from the perspective of
when starting thinking about building a brand, at least from sort of like a zero to something, let's say 0.5, you, and again, I don't think this is broadly applicable, but I think just my end of one experience, you are your customer, you have the problem, you understand the problem. The big assumption, the big leap that I also make is that,
the world is big and that because of that, fundamentally there will be a lot of people like you and positioning will just sort of naturally happen based upon the approach you think is best to take, how you understand the problem and how you view the solution. However, that if that even applies at all, that might only apply in a very, very small portion of
instances where branding is applicable. So let me just say those things getting those thoughts out. The
Tom (12:39)
So if I can distill down, you're kind of like, is positioning even a thing? Is there like strategic positioning, even a thing, or is it born out of your own experience of the problem as the founder and the positioning is organic?
Preston Rutherford (12:41)
Please.
That's what I'm exploring. But of course, at P&G or name your large brand in some ways, yeah, if you're working at those companies, some of the stuff I think we say could be applicable, but potentially you already studied all this stuff. So maybe most of the folks listening to this are in somewhat of a founder-led context. So yeah, I think in that.
realm, I do think there's an organic component, maybe let's call it bottoms up versus tops down. But I'm also now trying to tie it to the Chubby's experience and maybe things that I learned and what, if anything, we could have done differently.
Did we use any, did we use top-down approaches in a meaningful way? Anyways, I'm sort of having those thoughts, but yes, I think you summarized it aptly.
Tom (13:59)
Well, there's an interesting question. Like, like if we thought about like, what if the way we had thought about the problem that the, cause like at Chubby's it's, I have trouble thinking about the product versus the brand and maybe they're just go so hand in hand, there's probably like a more, a less comedy oriented, more kind of emotional, cool sort of mystique that you could have presented from a brand, like what problem does the brand now solve?
Preston Rutherford (14:12)
Mm-hmm.
Tom (14:28)
Um, and how does that position us? Right? Like Chubbies, maybe you could have gone with a pitch of like, um, surf, right? Like a surfy sort of, um, vibe, surfy sort of brand. You're in a different market. You're in the market with like Hurley and you know, Birdwell's in this category. And you've got kind of this broad competitive set. It's completely different than where we ended up, which is certainly more on the like J crew kind of. Um.
Preston Rutherford (14:37)
Yep.
Yep.
Right?
Tom (14:58)
uh, note, um, and I'm, I'm curious, like j. Crew vineyard vines, um, Lululemon, like not quite so surf. So if you like, Serbia is a very specific market. It's like California cool. And, um, there's a vibe you get there. And I went like, that would have been a different market with similar products, same product. Um, you could have presented it in a completely different way. And. You know,
Preston Rutherford (15:04)
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Tom (15:25)
had we all been surfers, maybe that's the way we would have thought about the problem. And maybe that's like the only way that brand would have worked. But there is something interesting around like, and then the kind of fineries, the nuances of what's the difference between Vineyard Vines and J.Crew. J.Crew and Lululemon, they're all slightly different sort of orientations and angles that you can even fine tune and enter into slightly different markets.
Preston Rutherford (15:28)
Mm-hmm.
Right.
Right. Well, one of the things that resonated when you just started responding was just the distinction, if at all, or the separation between product and brand. And when you were talking, where my mind started to go was thinking hypothetically about slightly different paths, was that. And I think particularly...
whether it even be surf or weekend or our take of the weekend or like retro weekend or whatever but having a looser tie specifically to an individual product as being a core component of the positioning of our brand company brand company.
Could that potentially have given us the right to introduce more products earlier on, have a broader assortment, the why there is potentially grow the business faster, become a larger, more impactful business faster.
if we had potentially been more about, to your point, maybe surf broadly, not necessarily shorter surf board shorts, maybe like what a bird well was primarily known as versus a hurley that I don't know if I necessarily know the history perfectly, but I actually don't know where they started. But in my mind today, kind of, at least I know them more for like board short first,
Tom (17:32)
I think custom Asa.
Preston Rutherford (17:38)
T-shirts, hats, other things are maybe secondary but supportive. So anyways, my mind starts to go there, just this exploration of brand and product, closely tied, not closely tied. I mean, my mind starts to go to like a Viori where they weren't...
Tom (17:42)
Yeah.
Preston Rutherford (17:59)
necessarily strictly tied to a singular product. Although if I remember a little bit like the joggers and the fabric were maybe a hero, but just Yeah, yeah
Tom (18:10)
I think they're a great example. I think that they were men's shorts too. I think that they were men's shorts through a different lens. And then when their business, and their business they grew steadily through wholesale, which I want to, let's put a pin in that. But then their business blew up as they got into women's. And they started to look way more like Lululemon than they looked like Chubbies, right? Like that was a big moment for them. And, and.
Preston Rutherford (18:22)
Mm.
Mm. Yeah. Right.
which is not always easy to do. It's just this whole idea of category expansion, particularly from a gender perspective. So it's just, I mean, fantastic respect for how they did it.
Tom (18:40)
Yeah.
So, but here's the pin, I'm gonna pull this pin out. So the internet, right? Like digital, really, like really powerful at building, like at Chubbies, we have the benefit of being really clear. And when you have a clear pitch, you have a brand association that starts to become really clear.
If you're associated with like a general vibe and a general energy and rhythm, I have a question on that. Like, um, I think that there have been excellent brands built like that, but I think that they, and this speaks to brand versus direct response probably in a really large, to a really large extent is you think about, um, single product companies, um, single product brands that are like really associated with one product or one category.
Preston Rutherford (19:19)
Mm-hmm.
Tom (19:40)
the internet serves them well because everything on the internet is like funnel them into the highest conversion path, the ads that are the best, get the spend, then send them to the highest current running places. If you're not doing that, it looks like you're leaving money on the table.
Preston Rutherford (19:48)
Right.
Tom (19:56)
And thus it's really hard to do category expansion when you're kind of single category, single product, as there are bountiful examples. But when you come out of the other way, what wholesale wants and what you have to have for retail is a broader experience, right? Like on the internet, shopping for chubby shorts, really easy. Like that's very specific and you have a need, I go there. When you're shopping more broadly, more generally, it's not like you're sprinting
Preston Rutherford (20:04)
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Tom (20:25)
the shorts you want, you're getting the hell out of there, you want a factory line of shorts, you're going to grab those and run back to your car. You're having an experience and you want to be surrounded by the energy and the vibe, right?
Preston Rutherford (20:34)
Right.
Tom (20:38)
It behooves you and you also take up more real estate in store and in wholesale with a broader assortment. And frankly, sometimes they won't even work with you unless you have a broader assortment. And then in your store, like imagine walking into a place that has just one single item repeated around. And there are pockets of this, right? Like there are shoe stores, there are glasses stores, sun glasses stores, things like that.
Preston Rutherford (20:43)
Right.
Right.
Ha ha ha!
Tom (21:01)
But generally, by and large, you're surrounded by the vibe and the energy. And you want to touch a bunch of different things. And that's like the way that Viori grew, probably a lot more amenable to a broader, a broader market set, broader category expansion, and probably a little easier to then jump over into women's because they haven't established a single lane so heavily from a brand perspective digitally.
Um, and I think they've also just done a great job of product, um, that makes all things easier. Um, but I think there's something interesting there of like how you've grown and what can you stomach as a digital brand? Like when you've got a hero product and a hero winner that like any adjustment away from feels like you're not putting your best foot forward, but then you're not expanding categories. You're not kind of finding that next step.
Preston Rutherford (21:35)
Right.
Yeah, so interesting. And then, so one example that I would just throw to you is a counter example-ish, Everlane for instance, where starting digitally, but less, maybe I'm mistaken. Like maybe it was like the men's Oxford, I don't remember exactly, so maybe I need to be reminded. But.
online first. Potentially product...
core to brand, but mostly it was this notion of transparency of the factory, innovation seemingly in terms of, I don't know how much, maybe true innovation. Let's leave that over here. But just this general idea of on a product page saying, hey, here's like how much it costs and how much it costs to ship it and the whole idea of eliminating the middle person.
Tom (22:46)
Hehehehehehe
Preston Rutherford (23:02)
the middle man, and seemingly, and again, I don't have insight into their business, so I could just be totally off, but it seems like they were able to do, to a certain extent, what Viore did without having the wholesale component, but I don't know, I'd be curious to get your thoughts on that front.
Tom (23:23)
I don't know. I know nothing about the mechanics of that business. I know that like we were a lot of respect for Michael and the team there and they've done some great work. I would be curious like how critical retail was to their expansion given some of these things. And Everlane was a part of like, you know, this kind of Ecom 3.0 or whatever where...
Preston Rutherford (23:27)
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Tom (23:49)
They were just early days, as were we, in the field of like Bonobos, Chubbies, Us, Warby. There were some people, and they probably got most of the press coverage, like a very PR-able brand. Most of the press coverage. This is something we've talked about. Press for Chubbies was not, that was not something. We were not getting any news coverage. And when we got it, it was like, oh gosh, this is not high quality. And so...
Preston Rutherford (24:03)
Mmm. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Good point. Ha ha ha.
Yeah. If anyone is listening and wants to know or get a feel for what we mean, yeah, just Google Chavvies, then click news. And yeah, I mean, some are good, but I do not interview well is one thing I would say.
Tom (24:25)
Look at all the articles. Anyway, yeah. We were plagued, but... Yeah. Well, and also just no one wanted to write about nice... They didn't want to write nice things about us. They wanted to not. They wanted to... They wanted to get after us. But anyway, Everlane completely different, like resonated completely differently with journalists. And...
Preston Rutherford (24:36)
Right.
it.
Hehehe
Yeah, totally.
Tom (24:53)
And so I think there's an element there, but I also think that retail was critical to them finding scale. Um, but I don't know that, um, but they, they got store proliferation. Like, you know, if, if Michael's a smart guy, like that's the thing, if they're expanding stores, they're finding success with it, um, which backs that play, right? Um, backs that kind of category expansion sort of play.
Preston Rutherford (24:57)
Yeah.
Yeah.
Totally.
Totally, totally. Well, why don't we, on that note, why don't we transition to maybe a second interesting topic? So we've talked a little bit about positioning. One of the things that I thought was just something interesting that stood out was just, and I think there's a bit of, you know, tactical application here, is just this idea of testing your brand positioning statement. So.
How do you go about doing that? What are the specific ways that you might approach it? One of the things they call out just very simply is test for clarity, credibility, and distinctiveness. Okay, so what does that mean and how do you do it? So all they're basically saying is just start talking to people, talk to your friends, talk to your family. When they hear it, can they name situations where
your brand would be used, why it's superior to others and why they believe these claims or assertions to be true. And then it just very basically says if people outside your company or your immediate sphere cannot grasp, then it lacks clarity.
if they don't believe, it lacks credibility. And then if you were to replace your brand name in this positioning statement with a competitor or someone else, then the statement, if it seems reasonable, lacks distinctiveness. So those are sort of three specific questions you could ask yourself as you're going through this process. And the general idea, just simply being if you fail any of these tests, it indicates there's more work to be done.
And the reason why I thought this was interesting and potentially applicable to listeners is one, potentially, and maybe speaking to my earlier rambling about this sort of like organic
creation of or manifestation of positioning just simply as a result of you founder having a problem or seeing an opportunity or having some story or event that happened in your life and you simply make the product for yourself because you see the gap whatever that might be. But
over time what can sometimes happen, and I think we'll get into some of this with repositioning or operating in competitive environments, etc., or just as the business itself grows and you get maybe further and further away from the reason the business started in the first place, or as you get more people, just like the realities of growth, to a certain extent a brand can lose some of those things.
pulled out of this is that like if you're listening and your brand is maybe 20, 200, 500 million, whatever, billion, however big it is, but you've seen success, there's also just a process of checking back in on this positioning statement. Does it pass the tests of clarity, credibility, distinctiveness? I think that's a solid lens through which to view.
this stuff and sometimes it's sort of like, these positioning statements are kind of BS. It's just something they got to teach you in business school fair, but sometimes it just is.
essential to write some of this stuff down. To get it out of your head as the founder or as the head of marketing or as one of the leaders so that the other people who don't have all the context that you have, and this is something I really struggled with over time, that Chubby's was just like, I might feel it. It might be super clear in my head, but I was pretty piss poor at...
Conveying it in an articulate fashion. It took a lot of work Maybe improved to a certain degree of time. So I guess the point here on testing your positioning statement is
Here's a clear approach for how to do that. Doesn't only have to be done right when you're starting the thing. Maybe it's an annual thing, maybe it's every three years or something like that. But just seems like a tactical useful thing to do as you check in on your positioning, your market, what has been changing, what are other people doing, how is the customer changing, how are you changing as a founder, as a leader? So, you know.
What do you think? I mean, what are some of your thoughts on that front?
Tom (30:01)
Yeah, I tend to think like take it farther, right? Like I think my qualm with the positioning statement is it's like easy to write, easy to kind of sound like, I don't know, either sound cool. Yeah, it's easy to do that, but like hard to understand do you have something.
Preston Rutherford (30:05)
Mmm.
it passes all of those tests.
Tom (30:27)
until you go deeper, right? And like, I think that's relatively obvious. Like we can write positioning statements all day, but execution on that is the most important thing. So like the way I think about it is not just have a sense of positioning, put that behind the scenes is my take and go build content, go write, go storytell. And can you provide that context in that way? Like, are you good at that? Because like, you know, you and I both are not the best at like formal business presentations.
Preston Rutherford (30:28)
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Yep.
I'm gonna go.
Tom (30:57)
somehow had a proclivity for, I think, changing that context of like now I'm building something for lots and lots of people to try and digest and like let's make sure that this is fun and creative and interesting. That I think is the important lens and what it takes is more work, but like not that much more.
Preston Rutherford (31:11)
Right.
Mm-hmm. Mm. Mm-hmm.
Tom (31:20)
Um, and particularly with the state of like creative tooling and where all this crazy stuff coming out of open AI, hugging face, you name it is going. It's like, um, if you're a storyteller and you have, um, You're coming from a place of problem and you're coming from a place where you feel it viscerally. It's not just like, write a positioning statement. It's like, how can you convey that feeling? In.
Preston Rutherford (31:28)
Right.
Tom (31:50)
some sort of content or some sort of vehicle that then you could put out. And how can you do that in a really low risk way? And my take is like, go build a creative, like pretend like you've got the brand, pretend like you've got the product and start to build the creative and what does that look like? And yeah.
Preston Rutherford (31:54)
Right.
Yep. That's what Michael did from, Michael from Liquid Death. He didn't even have a product. He just started making videos and started getting a bunch of free reach without having anything.
Tom (32:12)
Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Exactly.
That's exactly it. Yeah. Because then you're testing like what content can I get to move? And that's probably the most important piece of this. And it's just like not where we've come from a business school perspective. And this is maybe one of my gripes with Kellogg is like, um, couched in like.
This isn't science, this is opinion in a lot of cases and really smart opinion, right? Like I think that's awesome, great. But there's a new world where the way you explore concepts is just gets to be different and it gets to be because content production costs are coming down because platforms are welcoming of low production value content. People are looking for stories, they're looking for, they're eager, they engage digitally, they respond with how they behave, very much so.
but there's just a lot of different ways you can go appeal to people. One of the ways is product, right? Like you can build the product literally and go see if people enjoy that. And that's awesome. I would recommend that if you have that proclivity and you can basically be that scrappy person who's making the first products. Like that seems great. And it just tends to take a little bit more money and a little bit more time. Content wise, if you've got that proclivity or probably most important,
feel viscerally about this problem that you're working on, get it. Start recording content today. Like start getting that out and start honing your storytelling. Because the thing about a positioning statement is like, I go show that to 50 people. Okay. I've showed that one statement to 50 people and maybe I showed it to 10 and then I refine it and then I showed it to another 10 or whatever. The content like we could put out all sorts of different things and experiment with different pockets of people who've never seen that content before digitally. Um, and, um,
And you know, that's how I kind of lean is like, go test your muscle as content creator, brand builder, building a brand around the problem that you're trying to solve and then let the product fill in. Again, like I think there's a few ways to do it, but I guess my point is it starts with creativity, creative execution in some way, shape or form. That's where I think it starts.
Preston Rutherford (34:12)
Yeah.
Yeah, right. That's a great point and that totally makes sense. And in some ways, it might segue to your next interesting topic, which, and maybe I'll try to make the segue here. But actually, maybe before doing that, one other thing I'd love to get your quick thoughts on. So we talked about Mike from Liquid Death creating content before he had a product. I'm curious, having not fully...
Tom (34:56)
And like read any freaking influencer brand ever. You know, like, oh, God.
Preston Rutherford (35:00)
Well, yeah, so that's exactly where I was going to go with this. It's like, how do you think about that? Let's use Kim Kardashian or any member of the Kardashian. They have been creating content for years and learning what to do, how to do it, what resonates, what doesn't, how to cultivate an audience, how to explore creativity. And then...
you just slot a company in there, you slot products in there and they go to the moon. And so could that be consistent with the point that you're making as well?
Tom (35:31)
Yeah.
Totally. Yeah, totally. And like, it is exactly the point. It's like, your content muscle is so freaking powerful. Like again, like your product muscle is as well. So like you're on a couple of ends of the creative spectrum and maybe you're.
Preston Rutherford (35:53)
Yep.
Tom (35:54)
Jack or Jill of all trades and can do everything under the sun, which is like perfect case scenario, but it's like effectively your resources when you're starting out are you. And so you've got to do these things and you've got to find the unlocks by finding something, not that you're like naturally awesome at, but that you can throw yourself at day in and day out, day in and day out, day in and day out. And I think that's the story. That's the story behind a lot of influencers these days, whether they're, whether they're in the, you know.
favor or ire of the public. I think there's a lot of really hard work that goes behind that. A lot of content, a lot of creative, a lot of creative misses that build up to creative success. And I think that's a similar process on the product side of things as it is on the content side of things. But I think influencers are just people who like have a proclivity on the content side of things. They don't have a product. They're just like, all right, let's make some of this stuff. Let's create, let's build. And Mr. Beast is a good example of that, right? Like the product is the content, but now all of a sudden he's got a, you know,
Preston Rutherford (36:32)
Mm-hmm.
Right.
Yeah. Right.
Tom (36:53)
businesses and all sorts of stuff. So that I think is exactly it. I think particularly as, you know, I'm interested in this like...
Preston Rutherford (36:56)
Right.
Right.
Right, yes.
Tom (37:08)
iterations like pace of iteration with all of the advancements in AI and things like that. I think there's just a lot of really cool stuff like that, that open AI video demo, whatever it is Soros pretty nuts, pretty sick for like somebody who's like, I don't have any resources. I just need to create like really sick content. Now, like we'll see how it does with humor, like that sort of stuff. But I saw one that was like a super not compelling Super Bowl ad. It was a guy in like a chicken costume.
Preston Rutherford (37:11)
Right.
Right? Yeah. Right. Yeah.
right.
Hehehehehehe
Tom (37:38)
We're in a business suit, we're holding a sign that just says wings or something, and just standing there. So that's just kind of funny. But anyway, I'm excited for that, because then it's like idea to creative, idea to creative, idea to creative, and you can iterate really quickly, and it's truly a contest of ideas, which is sick.
Preston Rutherford (37:42)
I'm sorry.
Right, totally. And then maybe, and then, okay, I'll try to make the jump now. Maybe partially starting with a little bit of a qualm with in general these sorts of things that are business school-y, let's just say.
As it relates to the positioning statement, if I'm maybe one way to sum up what you were telling me or the way that I'm digesting it is, yeah, in some ways they're claiming that by running this statement through these filters and putting it in front of some people that you're coming in contact with reality or with a customer, but it's really not, right? It's so indirect. Whereas to your point,
start creating content that is true interaction with the public, with people, with potential customers. And so I guess the takeaway there is do that. Start doing that. That's where you learn. You don't really learn by saying, I am this because of this and here's why you believe this and here's why we're different. Just telling that to your mom or whatever. But start doing the things.
it out there and start failing a bunch and feel that pain but keep going is I think one of the ways that I'm taking stuff away from what you're saying and then to segue it to maybe the next interesting point that...
that I liked what you called that. It's just this whole idea of target market and the potential dissonance between who we think we are, who we think we're selling to, and who we really are in the eyes of people and who we're actually selling to. Just these whole ideas that, or all of these ideas, excuse me, where the only way to actually start to uncover this stuff is by actually doing it, putting stuff out there and starting to learn. It's not writing documents,
presentations, etc. Sure, maybe there's some value there, but seemingly the learnings are happening when you start to get out there and create but Be curious what your thoughts are
Tom (40:13)
Yeah, I think the interesting piece that I saw, like that I was noting in this is like the positioning statement and maybe it's like all of this is like, if your alternative is you're going to do nothing or do these things, I would do these things for sure. Um, and so like, uh, but I, I think there are ways to go deeper and just things. Um, but there are ways to take these to kind of their, their next step.
Preston Rutherford (40:18)
Yeah.
Yeah!
Low bar.
Tom (40:42)
And particularly with like modern tools where like even this was even the update to this book was written a while ago. Um, and I think the, um, the piece that I'm always thoughtful about with these like strategic orientations and target market and things like this, and this guy's goes in the face of, um, some of what I've said earlier, but it's like, um, oftentimes your target market is either so generic as to not be useful. Um,
or misunderstood. There are certain cases where like many people nail it. I think there are at least historically famous case studies of the one I remember is like Nike really pegging who in like literal human life everybody wants to dress like. There's an archetype there and if you can get that person wearing your product then everybody sees that person and then they um
Preston Rutherford (41:29)
Mmm.
Mm-hmm.
Tom (41:40)
adapt to that and that person's just so aspirational that and I think it was like the high school athlete because like the You'd like really successful high school athlete if they're wearing Nike Then you've got you know, you've got everything made because they become the college athlete and then once they're beyond So lots of people don't become college athletes from being good high school athletes
Preston Rutherford (41:46)
Mmm.
Right. Right? Yes.
Tom (42:05)
And so they're looking back on their glory days and they're like, Oh, that was me. Then what are the cool kids wearing now that I see myself in that? And that's this whole quadri of, of people. And then the younger kids are looking up to those guys, you know, they have access to them, they go to the Friday night football games and all this kind of stuff. It's like an interesting idea, right? Like that to me is an interesting thought process of target market. That's like acknowledging some of the things that I take objection to. Um, but it still has one glaring issue.
Preston Rutherford (42:23)
Right.
Tom (42:34)
which I'll talk to you, but like so I think usually it's like these generic or like these really esoteric persona based things that aren't rooted in some of that like orientation that Nike has I'm just like who would be cool to sell to sort of thing Or who how can I generally frame who I am? You know if I'm selling to myself in as big a way as possible like my target market is men 18 to 75
Preston Rutherford (42:50)
Mm-hmm.
Right?
I am a human! Billions! Literally billions! I am a human! Billions! Literally billions! I am a human! Billions!
Tom (43:04)
or a lot of them, what do you think about it? Let's do a bottoms up market sizing of that. Uh, ha
get out there and see who resonates with the way you think about things. Because you may think it's something, but actually the people who resonate with the way you like to speak is something completely different and who resonate with the things you like to talk about, is completely different. And that's, that's a fun discovery. Like, as opposed to it being jarring or whatever, like, man, I wanted my target market to be these people, but it's actually these other people over here. Like, that's cool. Like, that's fun. That's it. That's, that's discovery and learning. And so again, yeah,
Preston Rutherford (43:28)
Mm-hmm
Yeah.
Tom (43:41)
I think there is some value in understanding. I think one of the understandings that we had at Chubby's was like, we put a lot of content out there and I think generally we engaged our community really well. But also that so much of how people think about your brand, like I would bet 95% of it is the people wearing your product and who they, like that person and who that persona is. And when they're exposed to your product, for the most part Chubby's acquisition, the customer acquisition was
Preston Rutherford (44:02)
Right.
Tom (44:10)
massively driven by word of mouth, right? Like, and thus the person whose mouth is saying the words is really important, you know? And thinking about that lens of target market of like who's the influential audience and why and how do I know that? Probably powerful and interesting thought process. But yeah, I tend to always think about get out there, get selling, get moving, put your content out, who likes it? And...
Preston Rutherford (44:12)
Right.
Right.
Mm-hmm.
Tom (44:39)
who shares it, that's your target market. And whether you like it or not, that's who you're resonating with. Now, if you don't wanna resonate with that audience who you're doing things with is valuable, then maybe try a different content approach.
Preston Rutherford (44:55)
Mm-hmm, which is where I wanted to maybe throw a question out to you in the realm of, in some ways I think resonated with us in the whole kind of like fraternity thing. And so then the broader question is if, and you started to answer it.
Tom (44:55)
Yeah, what did you think about?
What fraternity thing?
WHA-
Preston Rutherford (45:22)
if you would like to change who is resonating, who is buying the word of mouth narrative, maybe let's say that.
Tom (45:25)
WAH
dog barking
Preston Rutherford (45:34)
You mentioned content, so we can maybe talk about that. Are there any other ways that you might think about it? I mean, something that comes to mind is, and maybe it's a big swing, super high risk, is maybe a big celebrity partnership or whatever. Something along those lines or like a big event. I don't know, Super Bowl ad would be like the prototypical example of like one massive thing, high risk. But,
And maybe we should even just question the premise of, do we need to do this in the first place? But I...
I know I felt it personally for a while and then we did some stuff and found, I think, a lot of success. But then it's also like, are we diluting or are we, you know, there are these questions. And so I simply ask this question because maybe other brand founders, marketers, et cetera, are navigating some of these thoughts right now as they try to figure out how to find more success in 2024 and beyond. So what do you think on that front?
Tom (46:45)
Yeah, I'd love to get your thoughts, because I think you, I like a lot of what you put down and some of the excerpts you pulled out here. So I'll turn this quickly back over to you, but high level, like there are examples of great repositionings in the past. I mean, generally being a student of some of that, like getting really familiar with what's worked. And there's a famous like Corona example that I always think about. Maybe it's just like related to what we were working on.
Preston Rutherford (46:53)
Mm-hmm.
Yep.
Right.
Such a good example.
Tom (47:16)
And, um, and effectively they went from being like the cheapest beer, like the natty light of Mexico. And thus, like, uh, very related to like college spring breaks, um, to being this kind of beach brand, find your beach sort of relaxed, um, anytime you're at the beach, sort of, uh, energy and like not.
not then the natty light of Mexico sort of thing. And anyway, so I thought that was a good example. But to me, I think the important thing that I don't know was like super well covered here. Maybe it is, I guess it's like frame of reference. So they talk a lot about frame of reference in positioning here. And so like that kind of defines what category you're in.
Preston Rutherford (47:56)
Yeah.
Tom (48:08)
Um, and so like frame of reference is like, okay, if I'm a beer brand, um, I need to make sure that, um, I'm hitting on the.
critical points of being a beer, right? And from a product and a marketing perspective to a certain extent. And so like their example was like, okay, if you're starting a beer brand, but you're not carbonated, well, you're not hitting a point of parity in this category. I think of the repositioning as a similar concept of like, you have to stay close. You have to be relatable to where you originally started. I think like, it's not a far cry from being like...
Preston Rutherford (48:35)
Yep.
Tom (48:45)
this kind of party beer brand down in Mexico to like being the beach brand that manifested from that. Like that's not a far cry. Whereas being like going from there to being, whatever, Sirac or like a luxurious like club sort of brand might be harder. But I'm curious your thoughts. Like what did you take from the repositioning examples?
Preston Rutherford (49:05)
Yep.
Yep.
Yeah, the two that stood out to me that, honestly, I didn't even know about were Miller Lite and Bud Lite, so Light Beer, and then the Apple Watch. So just quick summary, but...
Miller Lite was effectively the first light beer and the way they originally positioned themselves as such was less filling. And maybe it was like great taste, less filling, but less filling. And so that was the, I guess frame of reference as a beer and now it's light, lower calorie, therefore less filling. And then,
and Isaac Bush came out with Bud Light and that was their positioning was simply that this is just a
like a great, great taste, superior taste, right? And so now it's like, oh shoot, well now I'm competing against superior taste here, less filling, now I need to adapt. And I just thought that was a really sort of interesting dynamic where
A, there's an example of kind of just how things evolve over time, right? If you're sort of like the pioneer, the first mover in this space, and then you've got this competitive dynamic, which is natural and amazing. The way that you differentiate your position yourself evolves over time as the environment is dynamic. But I just thought that was interesting. And then on the Apple Watch side,
I guess just this whole idea that originally, you know, it was kind of more positioned as this fashion, fashion first item, you know, the band could be swapped out sort of thing. And then, and I guess I do remember this to a certain extent, like they were really pushing the version that was I think maybe a partnership with Hermes or something like that.
Tom (51:18)
That's why you've always worn them, right? The high fashion. Look at that thing. It's uncanny, it's the exact same color as your t-shirt. Look at that.
Preston Rutherford (51:20)
Right, I mean, exactly, look at this style. Look at that. And then over time.
Right? Fashion, both are Hermes. Yeah. And then turning it into more of this health first, like get data on yourself. Let's tie active health data together and this is the best product to get you there. So I just thought that was.
No, interesting in terms of how they position it. But the how, I mean I think to your earlier point, they just, new content, new communications, whether paid, owned or earned.
And they were able to sort of successfully, to a certain extent, to varying degrees, navigate some of these changes, dealing both with, gosh, sales aren't what we want them to be, maybe on the Apple Watch side, and then competitive dynamics maybe on the Miller Lite Bud Lite side. So those are some examples I thought were kind of interesting.
Tom (52:28)
Yeah.
The other thing that I always, like with the Apple watch, the other thing that they had to have, and I'll ask you this on the beer one too, but the Apple watch is more clear. They had to have the product, right? Like if they were like, check out this fitness app. It's like, just not very good for that. I'm like pretty terrible or didn't even have a fitness app. That's not positioning. That's like, they had to build a sick product there. And I think they did have a really good product. Like
It's one of the reasons that I got an Apple watch is like, it was the only way to kind of stay connected to the internet while surfing, right? Like there's not a lot, like maybe that's, maybe those are like counterfactuals, but like, but if I needed to get texts from my wife because I needed to communicate in some way, shape or form, I had to wear the Apple watch. Like there was no alternative. And it was pretty good at that. It was like, it was waterproof in a really,
Preston Rutherford (53:00)
Right.
Tom (53:23)
powerful way while having all of what I wanted and tracking and every time I got in I felt really good about myself because it tracked all my swimming strokes and all that. But like, so, and that kind of leads me to this like the beer one, right? Like maybe you can just say, our positioning is, our product is so really good tasting. And we're like, dang it, we shouldn't have done the really bad tasting beer.
Preston Rutherford (53:29)
Yeah, right.
This is the best tasty. Why didn't we say that?
Tom (53:53)
And so like, there's gotta be some of that that's like, yeah, exactly. You should have thought of this, Johnson. Okay, start another one that's ours tastes even better. Get an ad out. That would be hilarious. Okay, new ad. Ours is the best taste, not just good taste. So a lot of this does tie back to product with booze and like stuff where it's like,
Preston Rutherford (54:01)
It tastes good!
Killing that out stat.
It's funny.
Tom (54:22)
That just generally doesn't taste good. It's more like the acquired taste. I think the advantage that Bud Light has is probably that Budweiser was a much more popular beer than Miller. And so they can say best taste, it's more familiar taste. But that's something else that you have to back up, I think. And again, booze might be off to the side, water probably off to the side of like, probably generally the same, more of an acquired taste than it is.
Preston Rutherford (54:26)
Mm-hmm. Yeah.
Yeah.
Tom (54:49)
this product is actually the very best water and that one's the worst water. But how do you think about, to me it's so obvious, of course product is the center of this. I'm like, you can't just say stuff about your products and expect people to believe it, but there is this like, how do I frame this feature of the product in an interesting way?
Preston Rutherford (55:09)
Yeah. And how are you on time?
Maybe we'll close up in like three to five. Okay. So, yeah, I mean, to your question, I do start to take a step back through this conversation and maybe less so when I was reading it myself and jotting down notes, but just sort of like, there, yeah, there are some things that are just kind of like missing from the text that can in some ways just be kind of distracting where it's...
Tom (55:12)
Good. Yeah.
Preston Rutherford (55:39)
In some ways, these examples are attempting to create causality that isn't there in some ways. And what resonated with me of what you said is just like...
Product matters, execution matters, putting stuff in front of people matters, and then everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face sort of thing, where it's like, who cares that these examples existed and that you can turn what is truly gray into perfect black and white examples that you can then teach and then test on.
That's sort of one of the things I'm kind of taking away from this where, yeah, let's not get distracted from the things that really matter. Not to imply that 100% of the stuff in this book doesn't matter, but...
I think one of the things you're calling out or that we're trying to call out as part of this episode is just let's also have cognizance of differing levels of importance of some of these ideas where if we just, what's at the top, it's amazing product, amazing content. How do you define that? Put it in front of people, see how they respond to it and fail, make mistakes, keep going, keep learning.
feedback loops on both of those fronts, understand how you're objectively evaluating the success or failure of these things, and then just keep stumbling along. Which is so awesome and great and right. I think one of the problems with some of these things, kind of what I pulled out from the purpose component as well, is just sort of like...
Yeah, I mean you could spend your time spinning your wheels on all this stuff and never actually make any content or make any product. And that's the problem with some of this stuff is that it could add unnecessary friction where it's just start getting in front of people, product and content. And like obviously having a purpose matters. Like really shouldn't be.
creating a company without a purpose that's compelling. And so I guess we have to tell people that. But there's a whole chapter on it in this book. And one of my favorite things from just that, Bo Burnham, I think it's called Inside, his, I think it was a Netflix special, is where he's the brand consultant. And he's just kind of like talking, it's hilarious. I don't think you can actually find the clip.
the video and the audio on YouTube, I looked, but I was able to find the audio, but it just reminded me where it's just like these brands taking a stand, right? And there's like serious examples of this stuff, and not that purpose doesn't matter and it's stupid, I'm not trying to say that, but it's, I don't know, a little bit more of an obvious thing and...
Yeah, confirm you have a strong purpose, but then there's also funny examples. I think even in the book, one example that was given was just this idea of graham crackers. And they were trying to tie their...
their purpose to wholesome ingredients. And then therefore, and not that there's anything wrong with what they did, but then the leap they made was wholesome ingredients. So then now we're gonna talk about wholesome. And then so now we're gonna talk about families of all types, stripes, colors, definitions, and sort of like, yeah, that's great. But...
Maybe, I don't know, maybe it's just taking it a little bit too far. Bo Burnham was like, who are you, Bagel Bites? Will you support, will you support wheat thins in the fight against Lyme disease? Roll up your sleeves and get to work and sell Butterfingers.
Tom (59:46)
Yeah, I think there is this balance of purpose versus social purpose. And I think you absolutely have to have purpose. But there's a funny counterfactual. What if you had literally no purpose?
Preston Rutherford (59:58)
Right, it's a good distinction.
Tom (1:00:09)
No purpose whatsoever. You're like, I have no idea. Put these out. Find it interesting? Or like a really obviously bad purpose. We would like to have everyone eat lots of sugar. That is our purpose. Yeah, exactly. Evil Corp as like having all of these like really fucked up businesses.
Preston Rutherford (1:00:12)
Hehehehehehe
RRRR
That would probably work. Yeah, that would be great.
Tom (1:00:36)
But it's funny because you could spin it on its head and I bet it would be resident content. Like you would probably build brands off of the exact opposite of what they say. It's like have a purpose but have it be evil. Like have it be like not good. Yeah, really unhealthy. And like there are products that, you know, when getting down to it, that's not their purpose. Their purpose is to make people have fun and feel good or whatever. But.
Preston Rutherford (1:00:40)
Right.
Yeah.
Right? Totally unhealthy.
Tom (1:01:00)
You could create a candy company that's purpose was all about. It's just a really not good stuff. Probably would be, maybe not be successful, but I'll throw that out there. If anyone wants to start it. But the.
Preston Rutherford (1:01:06)
I'm just gonna level with you.
This is gonna like eat away at your teeth. It's gonna add a lot of like, so. So.
Tom (1:01:14)
Yeah, yeah. But do it man, have it! You're only on this rock for 90 years. Let's make it 75 and have fun! Yeah, longevity? Let's have a concise life. Anyway.
Preston Rutherford (1:01:25)
Who says living a long time is good anyways? It's question assumptions here.
You're not some lemming some follower are you? Think for yourself.
Tom (1:01:41)
That's just kidding, of course. That's a joke. Don't start that company. But I did think there's something funny around what's your emotional purpose statement for your business? Because I think you do need that. Maybe it's just you yourself as the founder because you have to run through walls and be dedicated.
Preston Rutherford (1:01:59)
Right, right.
Tom (1:02:00)
And it's also something that's a rallying cry for your team. And so the lens I said is like, what would you be yelling from? What would your emotional purpose statement be as with the comparison of something that William Wallace would be saying from horseback, like the rallying cry to get everyone just like losing their minds and charging the English. I think that.
Preston Rutherford (1:02:14)
I thought that was so good.
Hahaha!
Tom (1:02:23)
That's a funny, that's an interesting way to think about it. The other way to think about it is like, without this, you don't have a business, right? Like a lot of these social purpose statements, you remove the social purpose statement and there's still, you know, Pepsi, I think Pepsi was one of the examples of not an awesome execution on purpose, but you remove it, there's still.
Preston Rutherford (1:02:26)
Totally.
Mm-hmm.
Tom (1:02:42)
the exact same company. And so that's probably not your purpose. Your purpose is something else. And if you removed, I'm guessing, the idea of anyone smiling or having a good time while drinking a Pepsi, now you probably don't have the same brand you had, right? Like, and there are probably those sorts of tenants of if you removed them, it would be like destroyed to your brand. That might be a sign that like that's the real purpose.
Preston Rutherford (1:02:44)
Right?
Yep.
Tom (1:03:10)
Where like Patagonia, if you removed their social purpose from their business, they don't have a business. Whereas if you remove social purpose from Pepsi, they've got a great business. They're the same as they've always been. So maybe that's a useful lens.
Preston Rutherford (1:03:17)
Mm-hmm.
Right.
Totally, perfect, perfect way to end it. Any closing remarks? Felt like this was good. Hopefully from the listener's perspective, this maybe felt slightly more structured. We're working on upping our game there, but again, just to be consistent with what we've talked about today, we're just trying to start and failing along the way, but just trying to put stuff out there. And part of it is just...
going through the process of creating because some of this stuff becomes self-evident. Oh, need to have a little bit more structure in these podcasts. But yeah, any closing thoughts, statements? Cool.
Tom (1:04:08)
No, I don't think so. I thought it was fun. We didn't get through all of section one, so we'll have to get through the rest of it. I think there's some cool stuff around competitive positioning and like competitive branding and like being the pioneer, being an early entrant, being a late adopter, and there are good examples of people winning in all of those categories that I think Callagrave highly points out. And then one last thing I'll say maybe is that like...
Preston Rutherford (1:04:18)
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Right.
Tom (1:04:34)
there's a reason that this text is formative, you know? And so like, while there, we have maybe some nuances and some areas where we might add a little bit more, like there's so much value in this book and we'll continue to try and distill it and give our take and hopefully have a genuine vulnerability in how we received it. And hopefully it's useful for everybody here.
Preston Rutherford (1:04:39)
Right.
Yeah, provides such a great vocabulary. I mean, before reading this, just knowing what words to say, how to structure some of these thoughts so that they had meaning in my mind, like just from that perspective, it was so helpful and foundational. So yes, totally agree. That was fun. Thank you, Tom. Thank you to everyone listening, and we will talk to you soon.
Tom (1:05:20)
Thank you, sir.
Preston Rutherford (1:05:26)
Goodbye.