RSS
Online vs. offline brands
I wear Warby Parkers.
I can’t tell you the last time I could name the brand of glasses I wear, but these days, whenever anyone comments on them, I tell them, “They’re Warby Parkers.” And they cost $95. And I bought them online. And that, because I bought a pair, Warby Parker donated another pair to someone in need.
Warby Parker gets it. They get that there are people out there who (a) love to wear glasses (b) would buy a different pair for every day of the week if they could and (c) like having their little bit of vanity balanced by helping someone else out. In other words, they get that I’ve become an instant devotee because what they offer, and how they offer it, intersects with what I want and value. That my “brand” intersects with theirs.
An optical shop up the street from our office, on the other hand, does not get it.
A tale of two brands
Warby Parker doesn’t have a store; you buy their glasses online. That’s a little weird for us lifelong glasses wearers, but Warby Parker has answered that concern with both at-home try-on options and a virtual try-on feature that works surprisingly well (once I got my pair, I went back and checked how they fit against the virtual try-on: VERY close). You choose your frames, send along your prescription and doctor’s information with your order, and then they send you your glasses.
But it turns out that offline optometrists and optical shops have a monopoly on one little piece of information that’s needed to make your glasses work properly for you: a measurement called “PD,” for “pupillary distance.” Any optician can do the measurement… but as soon as you go in and ask for it, it’s a red flag that you’re about to buy your glasses somewhere else.
Such was the case at the aforementioned optical shop up the street. It’s a shop well-matched to this Boston neighborhood—they carry fashionably high-end frames (some exclusive to that store) that cater to the well-heeled and fashion-forward clientele of the area. I went in, asked for the measurement, and was immediately asked,
“Are you buying your glasses online?”
Yes…
“Well, we offer a service where we’ll do the measurement for you, and then do the adjustments once you get your frames. Because, you know, an online shop can’t do that.”
I’m pretty sure I could have found a place to do the measurement for free, but I was already out on my lunch break, there weren’t any other optical shops nearby, and I was incredibly eager to complete my order and get my new frames. So I agreed, got the measurement, and was on my way… but not before several more digs at online optical shops.
Hmm. Not exactly the way to get me to come back to your store, despite your protestations that “We’re not in business to give away business to online stores.”
But they were already into me for $25, so I was definitely going to go back to get my Warby Parkers adjusted. Which I did, but not before more digs and snarky comments at their construction (a fact noticeable only to proprietors of optical shops, apparently, as I had no complaints), lack of service (as imagined by the proprietor; again, I had no complaints), and rhetorical questions about why people would ever buy glasses online rather than a store like his that had exclusive (and blisteringly expensive) frames.
Um, hello? I’M STANDING RIGHT HERE.
The optical shop didn’t get it.
They didn’t get that by criticizing the glasses I came in with, they weren’t just criticizing Warby Parker, they were criticizing me, and my choice to buy them.
While I’m sure it was all the result of a somewhat misguided attempt to convince me to shop further in his store (“Do you need your prescription sunglasses updated, too?” Um, no. At least, not with you.), what he didn’t get was that how he handled the difference between his offline experience and my online one was an opportunity—if not to get me to buy a pair of glasses at his store, then at least to encourage a recommendation of his store to people I might know whose needs and values more closely aligned with his.
Brand evangelists, agnostics, and atheists
Companies and organizations cannot be all things to all people. They just can’t. The more they try, the less they’re able to focus on what really makes them stand out, or on how best to make that all-important connection with those who REALLY care about what the organization does and stands for.
Customers (or audiences or stakeholders or…) fall into one of three categories: the evangelists (those for whom you can [usually] do no wrong), the atheists (those who’ll never be interested in or value what you do), and the agnostics (those whose opinion isn’t yet set).
As a brand, your first responsibility is to your evangelists—they are the lifeblood of your organization, and the ambassadors who’ll do much of your proselytizing for you. Since you’ll never change the atheists’ opinions (at least, not without an extraordinary amount of time and effort or some kind of deus ex machina), they’re best left alone, as are the evangelists of your competitors (since it’s awfully hard to get an evangelist to change religions).
But you can change an agnostic’s opinion… in either direction.
I was agnostic about Warby Parker when I first heard about them. Could I really buy a pair of glasses without ever trying them on? What if I didn’t like them? What if I wanted my friends’ opinions on them? Would they look like I only spent $100 on them? But Warby Parker answered every concern I had (not to mention the added benefit of donating a pair of glasses for the pair I bought), and they delivered—within a week of getting my order in the first place. So now I’m an evangelist.
I was agnostic about the optical shop, too. I had been in their store in years past when looking for previous pairs of glasses. They were always friendly, and always had nice frames, though nothing ever struck me as fabulous enough for the money I’d have to spend. But I left the store this time not only aware that I’d never return (an atheist), but also of a mind to write this post—and wondering how offline brands can compete with online ones.
So, what do you think the future holds? Is there a middle ground for online and offline brands? How can each best find their market—and maybe even work together to provide shared customers with value?
Categories Branding, Outside the Square
Twitter
LinkedIn
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tamsen McMahon, LisaDJenkins, DanyaShea iMarketing, Sametz Blackstone, Richard Winter and others. Richard Winter said: RT @tamadear: 3 kinds of customers, whether your brand is online or off (my new post on the @Sametz blog) http://bit.ly/9uWJyj [...]
My husband is planning on buying a new Volkswagen soon. Both this time and the last time he bought a VW he went with the online sales rep because he’s figured out that he’s had an entirely different experience with that person. I believe VW understands that an online customer is particularly savvy when it comes to researching car value. They also understand that an online customer wants to avoid spending too much time at the dealer and in negotiations. My husband can text and e-mail the rep, who responds immediately (another bonus), and in person the negotiations are straightforward and pretty painless. Rather than repel this type of customer with the typical car buying experience (miserable!) VW has taken advantage of the situation and turned it into a way to gain brand loyalty.
What a great example, Summer! Being a deep-city dweller without a car, I’ve been spared the ins and outs of the car-buying experience for over a decade now. You’ve nailed it perfectly, though: someone who chooses an online route to purchase something that is readily available offline is telling you, through that very choice, a significant amount about what they need and value.