Celebrity Bags: Celebrities and Brand Association
I’ve always wondered about this and I might as well raise the issue and ask the question right here, seeing as this blog could very well be the perfect avenue for discussion. Do you think certain celebrities do more damage than good to certain brands once they begin to “publicly patronize” them?
Let me bring up an example. Or two. Or more .
Sometime in late 2011, it was reported that Abercrombie & Fitch was willing to pay Jersey Shore’s Mike “The Situation” and his cast mates to cease wearing A&F. Because apparently the company felt that the association with the Jersey Shore cast could do significant damage to their brand! Whether that was a PR move (which would’ve been genius because it did get media interest) or not, the question remains– are there really celebrities out there who do more damage *infamy* (than add popularity) to brands they wear?
Now A&F might not belong to the same league as premier luxury brands like Louis Vuitton, Gucci, and Hermes, but apply that same line of thought for a moment– do you think a brand like Hermes would have been happy seeing Lil Kim carrying the Hermes birkin to court? Photo credit: Google Images
Or Martha Stewart carrying hers to her court hearings for that matter? Photo credit: Google Images
Remember how much publicity those received? For a period, the spotlight was on the bag rather than on the ladies who carried them *Ok not really, but imagine the bag becoming famous/ infamous as a result*
Of course the Hermes birkin’s popularity was never cemented due to these 2 women– the bag was already more than secure in its cult/ iconic status even before it got that kind of publicity. What I still wonder to this day is how Hermes really felt about their bag being paraded for the world to see as the women went to court to answer charges against them at the time. From Hermes’ end, there was of course, no comment
And then what of Snooki’s love for Gucci and the photos of her carrying that bag?
Let me bring up an example. Or two. Or more .
Sometime in late 2011, it was reported that Abercrombie & Fitch was willing to pay Jersey Shore’s Mike “The Situation” and his cast mates to cease wearing A&F. Because apparently the company felt that the association with the Jersey Shore cast could do significant damage to their brand! Whether that was a PR move (which would’ve been genius because it did get media interest) or not, the question remains– are there really celebrities out there who do more damage *infamy* (than add popularity) to brands they wear?
Now A&F might not belong to the same league as premier luxury brands like Louis Vuitton, Gucci, and Hermes, but apply that same line of thought for a moment– do you think a brand like Hermes would have been happy seeing Lil Kim carrying the Hermes birkin to court? Photo credit: Google Images
Or Martha Stewart carrying hers to her court hearings for that matter? Photo credit: Google Images
Remember how much publicity those received? For a period, the spotlight was on the bag rather than on the ladies who carried them *Ok not really, but imagine the bag becoming famous/ infamous as a result*
Of course the Hermes birkin’s popularity was never cemented due to these 2 women– the bag was already more than secure in its cult/ iconic status even before it got that kind of publicity. What I still wonder to this day is how Hermes really felt about their bag being paraded for the world to see as the women went to court to answer charges against them at the time. From Hermes’ end, there was of course, no comment
And then what of Snooki’s love for Gucci and the photos of her carrying that bag?