Should you put the brand’s defined meaning over consumer interpretation and populist cultural adoption? ????????
Red Bull climbed to success, utilising a unique advantage; it didn't project or shout about a specific message or meaning. Their market entry positioning was somewhat agnostic, allowing them to infiltrate various non-related consumer groups such as; extreme athletes/fans, gym-goers, middle-class office workers, clubgoers and motorsports enthusiasts simultaneously. They've achieved this via a hyper-focused, grassroots approach to product seeding and authentic cultural facilitation resulting in consumers from every cultural group believing Red Bull is for them, partly because they haven't been told otherwise. The Red Bull can is able to stand for whatever you want it to stand for. Meaning flowing from consumers rather than the other way round is a solid approach to forging a genuine emotional connection. A brand's ability to foster consumer projection is vital for adoption. Most of today's most iconic brands; Timberland, a VF Company, Stone Island, and Rolex, were appropriated by a cultural group. The cultural equity they enjoy today was projected onto the brand by communities that fuel 'cool'.
