Volume 009: From Ivy Park to GAP via the dropped Fox & Peacock

1. Thank God. Ivy Park ain’t no Yeezy.

Tl;dr: Adidas scores big, renews commitment to brand-building.

Ivy Park, the new athleisure brand from Beyonce, launched and sold out about as quickly as you’d imagine. It’s a real testament to the power of Instagram and her celebrity. But what really struck me was the prominence of Adidas through both product and promotion; a refreshing response to the current trend toward anonymity. Roughly 80% of the Instagram imagery has the three stripes on bold display on everything from her nails to her teeth and all over the collection itself. While the name isn’t there, Adidas' most recognizable distinctive asset is everywhere.

This is the first tangible example since their very public re-commitment to brand-building, and I think they’ve got it so, so right. Great partner, expertly launched, prominently branded, and building desire again rather than being stuck in the discount hell of online ads. At a brand level, this is a striking departure from their other famous partnership with Kanye, where the total lack of brand presence for Adidas seems daft by comparison.

It’s also fascinating to see the strategic differences between Adidas and Nike on display. While Adidas pursues a small number of high-profile celebrity partnerships, Nike is much more focused on limited collaborations with a broader array of boutiques. What’s so refreshing is that by pursuing different strategies, they both get to be right, which is way more interesting than just duking it out by going at it head to head.

2. Disney drops the Fox and NBC unleashes its inner Peacock.

Tl;dr: There’s beauty in restraint and then there’s a Peacock.

Disney is about family entertainment for all, not family entertainment for some, so removing something as polarizing and out of their control as the Fox name from their properties makes perfect sense. As a result, 20th Century Fox was re-named 20th Century Studios, and Fox Searchlight became plain old Searchlight. It’s a notable exercise in restraint. Rather than do something completely different, or fall for the seduction of 21st Century Studios, they kept it simple. There’s nothing broken about these brands, and no major perception change required, so it makes sense to keep the change as simple and minimal as possible. For the film geek in me, it’s also fun that they’ve returned to the original name used before the merger with Fox Studios in 1934.

Over at NBC, they just launched Peacock, their entry into the streaming wars. While I love that they called it Peacock instead of what Disney did with Disney+, or what HBO is going to do with HBO Big Gulp, I can’t help but wonder if the execution is more of an inside joke that will play better in Rockefeller Center than it will in the rest of the country. Not utilizing the distinctive peacock of the NBC logo when you’re a war for attention might ultimately prove a big mistake.

It also has an overly complicated value proposition, which might hurt, but that’s a story for another day.

3. Be careful the company you keep: You might accidentally fund climate change denial.

Tl;dr: Advertisers unintentionally funding the BS of our times.

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen advertisers unintentionally finding their ads attached to questionable content, now activist group Avaaz claims top brands are funding content that promotes climate misinformation on YouTube.

Brand safety is a big problem for any online advertiser, and YouTube has had problems before. What’s interesting this time is the activist angle. In the past, the defense has been that ignorance is bliss: “We didn’t know our ads were attached to that content,” but when an activist publicly names and shames you, it’s a defense that quickly becomes untenable.

With environmental considerations only increasing in importance across society, there’s a very good chance Google and YouTube are going to have to do something about this, and do it quickly. More importantly, it reinforces that brands with advertising budgets have power over the platforms they advertise on.

It’s high time major advertisers recognized their own power and publicly made it clear to the platforms what their expectations are vis a vis the content they’re prepared to advertise alongside. It’s crystal clear that the platforms won’t get there by themselves.

4. GAP stays trendy and fires its leaders.

Tl;dr: CEO of Gap Inc, Gap brand & Gap CMO all out in recent months.

It’s a tough time for retailers, and GAP is no exception. I’ve talked before about how Old Navy spent too much money on digital performance ads and found itself in trouble. Now, it looks like their parent company is behind the woodshed.

In a surprise move, the much-touted spin-off of Old Navy was canceled last week, with a lack of value cited as the reason. A strategy formulated by former CEO Art Peck being walked back by his interim successor.

But the shakeup hasn’t stopped there. The CEO of the GAP brand also left, and as of today, GAP CMO Alegra O'Hare, who has been with the company for just 11 months, is also out. While not quite the leadership cull at Bed, Bath & Beyond, it’s still a notable shakeup.

They’ve got big challenges ahead. By wasting a year on a spin-out that isn’t going to happen, GAP hasn’t done much to improve its brand’s position in the market. Worse, I’m not even sure if I can tell you what GAP stands for anymore. Whoever comes in to lead will have much work to do against some pretty strong headwinds. I wish them well. GAP is a formerly great brand crying out for resurrection.