Today, heritage brands occupy a difficult position. Squeezed between private label that sets value and insurgent brands that speak to values. Having worked on several, I have found that they often take the same approach of maximizing margins, targeting younger consumers, and launching line extensions and PPA.
There is no shortage of criticism of marketing organizations. The declining length of tenure of Chief Marketing Officers (CMOs) and the absence of marketing on boards of directors are well-documented. Such facts seem odd when demand generation and management are the lifeblood of organizations, at least those with a high probability of long-term survival. While such a circumstance may suggest some problems with marketing organizations, it very clearly identifies a problem at the level of...
Let’s stop pretending this AI rush is brave. It isn’t. It’s terrified. Across marketing holding companies, executives are racing to adopt AI not because they understand it, but because they’re scared of being the last one without a slide. “We can’t afford not to,” they say; executive code for “I don’t want to be blamed.” This isn’t strategy. It’s signaling under pressure. And it’s going to be catastrophically expensive.
When an iconic brand begins to fade, the decline is rarely dramatic. In iconic brands, financial performance often lags changes in cultural relevance and brand meaning. Revenue may hold steady. Market share may appear stable. Awareness remains high. Yet competitors begin shaping the future while the incumbent defends the past. For leadership teams, restoring an iconic brand is not a communications exercise. It is a strategic mandate.
I am occasionally asked which metric I consider best for tracking consumers. There’s no hesitation with my answer. It’s new home starts. Let me explain why. First, what is it? The metric of new home starts is exactly what it sounds like—it’s the number of privately-owned homes that began construction in a given period of time. (I prefer monthly.)
