Article by Dan Jackson, Bladereviews.com
Illustration by Jean-Phillippe Thivierge
As a regular reader of the excellent every day carry gear blog Every Day Commentary I have come to greatly enjoy Anthony’s reviews, his insights, and his sometimes controversial musings on all things EDC. One such controversial musing was a relatively recent post entitled “Fanboy Futility” that touched on the subject of branding, and its involvement (or lack thereof) in the gear review and general purchasing process.
Anthony starts off the article innocently enough, advocating that fanboyism, a phenomena where one blindly follows a particular brand without any objectivity at all, has no place when it comes to the rational discussion of knives and tools. I couldn’t agree more. No doubt fanboyism is inherently stupid, and shouldn’t be tolerated in any form if a rational discussion on gear is to be had. I think the majority of folks (ardent fanboys excepted) can agree on that one.
What I found a little more interesting was Anthony’s concept of being “brand agnostic,” that is, to be completely blind to branding and maintain that as both a consumer, and a reviewer, that brand has no place in his purchasing decision. Anthony argues that branding is merely a gimmick companies use to sell more product, presumably for some nefarious reasons (eg, for the promotion of reactionary and blind fanboy-esque purchasing decisions) and therefore should be to be ignored. It’s an interesting concept, and noble in intention, but can we ever really claim to be brand agnostic? I almost liken it to comedian Stephen Colbert’s declaration “I’m color blind, I don’t see race.” The only difference being in Stephen’s case it’s said with tongue firmly in cheek as part of a reoccurring punch line in the show.
Now I’m a big believer in meritocracies, but I’m also a realist. And frankly, I don’t think humans are capable of completely ignoring branding, despite how good intentioned and strong willed you are to do so. Furthermore, I’m not convinced branding is necessarily a bad thing either.
First of all, if brands weren’t so tremendously effective companies wouldn’t spend trillions of dollars on them every year. But even if we ignore that little wrinkle it is still impossible to avoid how marketing permeates every single aspect of our lives on both conscious and subconscious levels. To shrug such signals would require the focus of a monk, and perhaps even the lifestyle of one. Today if you walk outside, turn on a tv, check your email, stare absently at your smartphone, step into a store, or even meet a new person, you are constantly and continually assaulted by marketing. People and companies desperately vying to sell you things. So how did we let things get this way? Marketing as we know it is actually a fairly recent phenomena, a byproduct of capitalism and the industrial revolution combined with a healthy post WW2 economic boom. Suddenly people had money, and factories were there to create new and exciting ways to spend it. So it only made sense mass-market these mass-manufactured goods. I’m sure many find it offensive, the nerve of this capitalistic machine, but to this day it remains completely and utterly inescapable.
So why the emphasis on brands? Brands act as signals, shortcuts allowing us to sift through the information overload and organize data in a way that is coherent and readily accessible. We attach meaning to brands, messages often carefully crafted by the companies that create them. Close your eyes for a second and think of Apple, of Cadillac, maybe McDonalds or Microsoft. You may find that all kinds of thoughts, images, sounds, smells, and even emotions come to mind. You may open your eyes and actually feel different having briefly come in contact with these brands.
But hey, don’t put that tinfoil hat on just yet, it’s not all bad – especially if the message of the company’s brand is consistent with your expectations. Just imagine being trapped in a grocery store in a world without branding. All the packages look the same, aisles of non-descript foodstuffs in plain brown boxes with sterile lettering. It’s like something out of 1984. I guess you could just buy whatever is cheapest, or perhaps even look at the ingredients on the label, but honestly, who has the time to evaluate every single ingredient solely on the merits every single trip to the store? Go ahead and roll the dice; who knows what kind of gelatinous delight will slide out of that tin, or what sort of cereal comes tumbling forth from that box into your waiting bowl. If you don’t like what you picked out, well, you can always roll the dice again the next time the pantry grows bare. The connections between product and manufacturer remain absent, and perhaps even the idea of true choice also fades off into the mist.
Illustration by Jean-Phillipe Thivierge
So I think branding does have it’s place if it communicates the right message that reinforces your expectations. It can help connect you with the right kind of products and can do so in a relatively painless and efficient manner. Naturally branding it isn’t a perfect system, and a shiny brand can certainly fail to deliver, but as your perceptions sour so does the brand’s reputation. After all, a customer scorned is far more likely to voice their opinion than a satisfied one. So if a company is generally doing a bad job upholding their end of the bargain then the world is going to hear about it. It’s a feedback loop that iterates much faster than a single person’s experience – it is the aggregate experience of all the consumers and it moves at the speed of information.
In the end I totally agree, judging items on there merits is of the utmost importance, and succumbing to fanboyism is utterly stupid. But the fact remains that without good branding many worthy items will never find their way into your hands in first place; the signal to noise ratio in our modern world is simply way too high. It is unfortunate that companies must expend all these funds on marketing, since it indubitably raises the price of the goods, but companies chalk it up as a cost of doing business. And as a guy who has drank the kool-aid and seen the light, I humbly suggest that you do the same.
I am a collector of cutlery. All brands and kinds. I am most certainly a “fanboy” for one particular brand. Not because they are considered the best, not because they use the rarest of materials, and not because they have the biggest fan base. It is because of the experience from the community and friendships that have grown from this particular brand.
If I were to recommend a knife for some one I would have to recomend the best tool for the job regardless of branding. But if I were to recommend collecting one particular brand, then I suppose I would recommend my favorite. I own many hundreds of knives from many companies. Some of my number one favorites are other brands.
If I were to go for a using knife, I would choose the tool of correct capability. Would I choose my favorite “collecting” brand? I don’t think I would as I regularly carry my Microtech Lightfoot folder.
So as a “fanboy” I agree, one must put aside your zeal for one particular brand when it comes to recommendations on using.
But if they want to know what to collect, because they want something interesting, and something with a good reputation of customer involvement and service, then I have a great suggestion for them.
Rick, well said. Ultimately when it comes to collecting you have to collect for yourself and seek out the stuff that moves you. I see no problem with that kind of fanaticism, not in the slightest. Thanks for weighing in, it’s great to get more views on this topic.
Dan
Branding is one thing. A recommendation of a brand from someone who has bought and is satisfied with a product from that brand is another. Your own research is a third. Fanboys excluded.
I buy both knives and watches on a regular basis and I stick to brands I either know and respect or in the case of something new a brand and model which garners good reviews from people I know or on various forums from the owners.
I was looking for a dive watch for around $400. Normally I stick with Brand S due to previous experience with them as good quality, reliable watches but I wanted 2 features they did not have on a watch I could afford. I looked for a watch that had those features for my price. Not a brand. Once found I hit the forums, researched, asked questions, made a choice and bought it.
The decision was based on owner recommendations and my own research. Not on company branding. The initial search was driven by the features and the price, not a brand.
Hey Jon,
I think you make some good points here. Sure there are exceptions to every rule and by no means do I mean that branding will always play a prominent role in every purchase. I guess my ultimate question is would you be more inclined or less inclined to buy another watch by this company based on your experience? ;)
Best,
Dan
I honestly never connected fanboyisim with knife collecting, but I’m sure that it exists. I’m still relatively new to the hobby, so maybe I just didn’t know. When I buy knives I firstly look for something I find visually appealing then I make sure it is good quality. Maybe not the best way, but it is MY collection…
Antonio,
If you wander down the rabbit hole of knife collecting you may start to see what some might call fanboyism; especially in forums and places like that. That said, I’m not sure it’s super pervasive – it’s the kind of extreme behavior that lies on the fringe of any hobby or interest really.
Ultimately I say buy what you like. That purchasing decision is yours and yours alone and your method seems as valid as anyone else with money to spend.
Thanks for reading and taking the time to write a comment.
Dan
I discovered the darkside of fanboyism long before I was seriously into knives. There is a tendency for some fanboys to be elitist pricks that will turn you off of products that they advocate. It doesn’t take a lot. An air of superiority,a good sneer, or even just an unhealthy dose of over-enthusiasm. People can grow resentful and form hostile association and spite towards products. It has taken me 15 years to seriously consider buying a Spyderco after a run in with one rabid Spyderco fan. For most of that time, I’ve admitted that Spyderco is a valid quality choice, but my resentment kept me from looking at them.
I know people who will buy the latest knife from a company (Spyderco’s especially) simply because they dont want the gap in their collections. I think the difference between fanboydom and most serious collectors are the initial reasons for going with their chosen brand, i.e.: reputation and quality.
Now I’ve been guilty in the past of contemplating collecting knives of certain colours, just because I picked up a limited edition Benchmade with blue scales and enjoyed the fact that it wasn’t just black! I even found myself searching various brands for knives with similar coloured scales simply because I thought it’d be a nice side-collection to stand out from the plain old black I was used to. After maybe 15 minutes of window shopping I realized that I had just gotten a little too excited!
Now I agree that fanboydom is kind of dumb, but I see how people can be sucked into a particular brand because others rate it so high. I stayed away from Spyderco for years as I was tired of hearing about them, and to be honest, I saw them as too common! It wasn’t until I finally picked one up that I saw the quality first hand that backed up all the talk. I guess some people are just brand specific with certain things, I wouldn’t buy any shoes other than Etnies for years!
It’s strange how the mind works, but I think pure fanboydom must be pretty rare nowadays considering the amount of information available. If you like a brand it’s probably because of what that brand represents in terms of quality and value to you, not just because of the logo or vanity-factor associated with it. But then again, I can picture a rich young kid going out and buying a load of Spydercos because everyone on Youtube raves about them and he wants to be seen as cool. Hmmm… maybe my previous point is invalid!
There will always be some people out there who buy things to fit in with the crowd and the other cool kids. I always assumed that that would be limited to fashion and pop culture, but as knives and tools become more popular perhaps they will get wrapped up in that too. I hope not!
Hey Matt,
You make some good points man, and I agree. Nothing wrong with collecting a particular brand, liking a particular brand, or really even being a fanboy. At the end of the day it’s your money to spend as you see fit. And as a consumer being loyal to certain brands doesn’t hurt anyone. I probably should have made that a little more clear.
My only issue I would take is if you are in the position of a product reviewer, I think at that point there is some “duty” to remain reasonably unbiased. The only problem is that brands are so pervasive I argue that you can’t be entirely 100% impartial or “brand agnostic.” It’s sort of a circular argument in that from a reviewing standpoint fanboys are bad, but we can’t ignore branding so in essence everyone is a fanboy to some extent.
I dunno it’s a convoluted topic with many interesting twists and turns – glad it got you pondering it a little.
Dan
A similar discussion was had over in my part of the world a while ago, the question discussed was if sports journalists should be honest and open about the teams they support as this will always bias their reporting.
IMO this is something that is up to the individual reporter to decide. If the reporter/reviewer feels very strongly about a brand and one should read his/her work with this in mind the consumer has to be aware of this. A simple “Just to let you know, I love [brand X]” at the start of the article/review takes care of the housekeeping as from then on I’m wearing my “is s/he being a bit fanboyish”-glasses.
I honestly don’t think you can be brand agnostic, it’s just not in us as a species. As long as there has been anything other than substistence farming there have been brands (or “makers marks”), even the communist states of eastern Europe had “brands” produced by the same company (much like the Big 3 automakers have “sub-brands”).
As a species we connect with physical items around us, be it a fine rifle bought after living on noodles for a month or a POS folder that our grandfather left us when he passed away. We remember our first car, our first bike, the first knife that made us go “ooooohhhh!”. That’ll always mean something.
Now, this doesn’t mean we should go all fanboy but neither should it make us neglect what a brand actually is. It’s a makers’ stamp of approval upon a certain product, in this case knives. If we take Spyderco as an example we all know it’s owned and operated by the Glesser family and that both Sal and Eric design the bloody things. If you have a problem with their products you can a) contact them through e-mail or b) log onto your knife forum of choice and odds are that one of them (in my case Sal) will be there. That is the kind of thing that breeds brand loyalty with me, a physical person with a real story standing behind a product. For many people Ernie Emersons and Lynn Thompsons somewhat abrasive personality yields the same thing, they just love it.
Fact of the matter is that you can build brand loyalty through a million things; corporate storytelling, a colourful figurehead, publicity stunts or simply by catering to the right kind of customer. It is our responsibility as consumers and collectors to stay away from the ill effects of branding.
Good article.
/Lew, who is a fan of many things but a fanboy of only one [my mothers cooking IS the best in the world, anyone who disagrees is a liar/idiot/child/imbecile/criminal].
Thanks Lew, well said as usual. I like the bit about attaching people to a brand. I think that helps generate a much deeper connection with the consumer and may stir more of an emotional connection. It humanizes a corporation, which is another discussion within itself. It becomes especially interesting when you think about the shareholders who the corporation ultimately needs to satisfy. There becomes some disconnect between the “brand”, the leaders of the company, and their respective obligations to both consumers and shareholders. It’s a balancing act with blurry lines and dollar signs, and is a topic I find imminently appealing.
At the end of the day I think you are right. It’s up to the consumer to decide whether a product is worth buying.
Best,
Dan
Response forthcoming…EXCELLENT POINTS Dan. I am not going to even call it a rebuttal because I tend to agree with a lot of what is here.
Thanks Tony! You touched on a fascinating topic and thought it would be great material for a little editorial style response. I look forward to hearing your thoughts!
All the best,
Dan
I have to say its an interesting article but branding is not a new phenomenon and has been around for several hundred years since the creation of the middle class. A brand is a way for a company to stand out in field rife with competition such as tools you can look at craftsmen or snapon their slogans and marketing get them new customers and long term customers when sure they could go into a hardware store or tool store and buy a generic cheap hammer. In America it is a newer concept compared to europe, Mediterranean, middle east and asia counterparts. Department stores where some of the first to truly make use of branding in the US and mass marketing when it came to sears catalogs that where mailed to every one. They were even used as toilet paper on farms. Fanboys or fangirls are not really collectors in the general sense of the term since they are item or issue specific compared to a collector who will collect anything in that genre to round out their collection. The japanese call fanboys otaku and they have been around for a long time. Human beings naturally like to chose favorites when it comes to things in our lives because it helps define us as human being and our unique identity while still being part of the pact or our family when our father drove chevy or ford, watched the same sports team all season then we as children tend to emulate our parents by the same or similar purchasing habits. Its not factual that marketing as we know it today came from post ww2 economic boom. Before we had internet and tv in every home we had door to door sales man who would travel across the country marketing a brand and its products with a demonstration and catalog of said product. So basically marketing as we know it today truly came out of the dot com era and its bubble. The creation of viral and flash mob marketing to take advantage of the wired generation today who tend to be better informed on products and the prices of those products. All in all the article was a good read.
Hey RRISC,
Thanks for the thoughtful and detailed comment.
I really don’t want to get into a factual inquiry here as I will be the first to admit that my fact finding could certainly use some work. That said, I appreciate the extra information and am sure others will find it valuable as well.
Thanks again,
Dan
[...] shouldn’t come as a surprise, as counterfeiting is based on simple economics. When a company builds a successful brand based on high end products that people come to covet there is plenty of profit margin for overseas [...]