They get you paid!
The logos of Vineyard Vines, Lacoste, and Polo are just a few of many well recognized clothing brands all around the world. And for many the cost of such clothing doesn’t justify the brand recognition that comes from it. Perhaps we should all take a page from the most materialistic people we know and go pick up some name brand clothes.
Because as it turns out, people that wear clothes with designer logos are more trusted, liked, and likely to make more money. That is according to research from (none other than) Europe. Research in the Netherlands looked at how people reacted in various situations to individuals with and without logos. They chose to use the Lacoste and Tommy Hilfiger brands.
In one such experiment, people were asked to rate pictures of a man wearing a polo shirt. In some pictures he was wearing the shirt with no logo. In others he had on the Lacoste or Tommy logo and in another a more generic brand. The photo was digitally altered so it wasn’t actually different shirts. The ratings for status and wealth heavily preferred the two well-known brands
Another study showed a guy interviewing for a job. One showed him wearing a shirt with a logo, the other didn’t. The one with the logo was recommended for the job more than the other, and received a 9% higher salary recommendation. This is perhaps something we’ve always known, but it’s very interesting to see measurable results.
There were other studies that showed similar results when soliciting donations and in measurements of trust. The reason why most people respond positively is the same reason most people crave these brands. It conveys status and quality. It goes against almost everything I stand for, and I have to admit it’s something I’m guilty of. Whether it’s assuming certain things about the wearers, or just being a wearer myself. I am guilty.
But we all know this goes above and beyond simple designer brands. This explains why people want to live in certain neighborhoods, buy certain cars, get fancy jewelry, or even acquire certain pets. It also shows that quality is in the eye of the beholder. And the more people think there is quality, the more cache it builds. This is a not a wisdom of the crowds sort (though I’m sure the ones that profit from it would argue this point). I’m also not saying that there isn’t quality in a specific good that has high brand cache, but that some of the quality just comes from the perception of the brand. The newest one that comes to mind is Lululemon. If you haven’t heard of them yet, you will. It’s a mostly female athletic clothing company that makes a really good product, but also charges an enormous premium. And while I can’t recognize their stuff in the gym, my wife does. And guess what she wants?
I guess the old mantra of faking it till you make it actually has some equity in it. To quote a 20th century philosopher: You know that we are living in a material world, and I am a material girl.
Read: I’ve got you labelled – Clothes may make the man, but it is the label that really counts (via The Economist)
Photo: bludgeoner86
 By The Weakonomist |
The Weakonomist is the founder of Weakonomics. Clicking the picture of the puppy will tell you more about him. If you like what you're reading consider subscribing to the blog, following him on Twitter, and checking out the related posts below. Please consider a donation if you really enjoy Weakonomics. Also keep in mind that nothing I say can be construed as financial advice. |
