(2/2) The Concept Brand
First idealised in 2013, “This Is - Humility™ is concept, fictional self-branding initiative; a modular typographic branding identity for the budget-conscious - everyday health & nutritional brand designed hypothetically to compete against the comparatively ”no frills”, generic low-cost alternative labels in major groceries chain.
Designed to attract health conscious, lower to middle income groups who have already established a sound awareness in all aspects of progressive nutrition. Within contexts of affordability & accessibility - amidst the increasingly difficult socio-economical status in Australia.
This is™ - is a minimalist, typographic, modular brand that connects itself implicitly to the product it tries to promote. No fanciful “product” or “catchy-names” for expressing frivolous sense of identity.
This is a conceptual brand/initiative that is never fit for competition in the quantified, superfluous realms of Advertising. Concerning the product and its ingredient only. Nothing more. Nothing less. To give a brief example as one of the "products" in conceptual existence - This is™ Coconut Oil / No Hexane / 90% MCTs as the overall product tagline immediately and effectively informs any buyer that it is simply: 1 - Produced without harmful Hexane chemical process and 2 - Contains over 90% MCT as legally disclosed by any / all official certificate of authenticity / extraction reports. Nothing else but presented cleanly and orderly and concise typographic manner.
To put things in retrospect - we buy grocery foods every day/week to and for implicitly one thing and one thing only - to nutritionally supports us to live from day to day. Nothing else matters. This Is™ - as a branding initiative is simplistically designed to give consumers a humble - frame of mindset as exactly that. An anti-thesis against superfluous realm of “Advertising”.
"Brand Loyalty", Expectations and Competitions
There is a reason why consumer / brand loyalty exists. Because it primarily feeds upon a consumer’s perpetual desire/s via either one or both of these factors interchangeably:
One - that directly reaches and appealed to his or her psychological receptors for solely pleasure and hedonism from either past or new experience (aka “thrill” factor). Or sense of mystery from peer pressure, word of mouth.
And two - for communicating and connecting the relativity to that consumer’s intrinsic needs as a means to an end. Implicitly - to appeal towards the consumer's perpetual needs.
This Is™ - is a brand that focuses on the latter.
It is a brand that does not portray an excessive (as presently evident) consumerist expectation that this brand simply "tastes" better and less "paler" as the ones sitting next to it. Because the very words "This Is" by its own dictates none of those expectations. It expects no superficial or objective competitions. From "taste" to formidable marketshare positioning in its relative industries.
If there is one distinct difference between this branding intiative to that of other no-frills “Products” portfolio; is that this brand was not envisioned to see itself mass-producing “ready-made” or convenience frozen ready-to-eat rations.
The very name and invention of "convenience" already perpetuates - demand for accomodating "good" or "delicious" expectations out of discerning enduser. Hence, This Is™ - is a brand that does not glamourise its products based on “taste”. Hence, this hypothetical / fictional start-up organisation is envisioned at producing of simple wholefood produces. From, Butters, salt, olive oil, potatoes, rice, protein powders, etc.
"Good" or "delicious tasting" are only both political and cosmetic labels. It does nothing but entices to the customer some egoistic faith that such is hopefully interpreted the same to his/her physiology. But “good” or “delicious” also pertains some risk for alluring abuse and over-consumption. Hence, the need for omitting these simpleton terms and pejoratives amidst its marketing collateral.
Contextual discussion /
extra food for thought/s.
CONSUMERISM + COMPETITIONS = PERPETUAL WASTE OUTPUT
We should daringly ask our governances and powers-that-be the question - why should there be a competitive paradigm that whereby food; is a glamourised, fashion-show-like market commodity?
Is there any practical, human-centred reason as to why we have five (or ten) competing different names all claiming to be one same product; be it "butter" or "potatoes" - by which processes of making such an end-product are claimed to be "Certified Organic" ? Or "humanely" raised? Or "green"-certified?
Our current paradigm excessively perpetuates waste production. In fact, we condone food waste production due to vast presentation of consumer choices all for added spoilage. Hence, the saying goes "Spoiled for choice". This is largely mistaken as consumer liberalism. The more choices one possesses (through purchasing power), the more meaningful thus such paradigm is believed to contribute back to the development of both civility and society.
Or is it?
What happens when one label is being consumed more than the other? Simple. "The Other" - goes to waste.
One (1) human food for one (1) human physiological / metabolic criteria remains & represent only one (1) qualitative goal. Our current system of perpetual consumption, on the other hand - is dependant on infinite paradigm of these interpretations to absurdity. Hence, a perpetual confusion result amidst the blurring definitions between what is Qualitative against what is Quantitative.
Establishing this fictional initiative comes with a challenge. To broadly remind consumers - that a consumable product or a brand should be there to connect to the consumer’s intrinsic and implicit needs.
To do so requires an almost risky and juvenile task of coming up with a brand title that is minimalistic yet so juvenile that - it is fundamental nonetheless for us to reconcile what food is, at a primal, instinctual level. Simply naming this branding initiative "This Is" is therefore succinctly - is the only avenue to both reach and imply these consciousness.
WOULD THIS CONCEPT BRAND INITIATIVE THRIVE UNDER THE PRESENT "BUSINESS" + BUREAUCRATIC SYSTEM of "COMMERCE"?
This initiative no matter how seemingly nor validly applicably "realistic" to consumers needs - certainly will NOT survive in the present/current context of so called "lawful" passions of “marketing” or “entrepreneurship”. Such is still expected to be bound by moral forces of charity. Despite charity alone is discretionarily misleading for it still requires leverages, be it “funding” / “outsourcing” for such benevolence to remain functioning for social exchange and civility.
This branding initiative strictly remains just that. A philosophical hypothesis. It would surely dissolve in a hindsight regardless of thousands of hours (and beyond) already invested. Because of once again, its principal requirements exceeds the Charitable capacity of any willing individual given its’ unrealistically difficult logistics.
After all this is only one work single handedly produced by one individual alone.
As with any start-up businesses - the fiscal / taxation obligations and their complexities, risks with intermittent partnership/s ventures, franchising laws, property acquisition rights, legal indemnity protection/s one after another all compounds the difficulty of capitalism. For nothing is free without leverages. To be validated as succesfull thus, one must somehow remain infinitely leveraged against all odds.
Perhaps in an entirely different System (whereby money; as an instrument of such Leverage and exchange is not implemented) - everything and all that we know about “visual strategy”, branding and competitive marketing “personalities” would be interpreted very, very differently. Given if such motive/s (towards capitalistic goals of totalitarian ownership over many) do not exist in the first place.
However ridiculed as being excessively utopianist as one simply dismisses, This Author can only hope to live long enough to see the possibility of one day perhaps a distant, emerging new plausibility of the so called “Resource Based Economy” - would somehow serve to substitute the need for resolving much of our societal (and overall civilisation) declines - through uncoercive, automated distribution AND accessibility of resources. If despite such thought alone of course - are obviously not immune to criticism by any or all sides of political opinions from those of opposing indoctrination/s.
All this remains therefore - a work of distant imaginary idealism.
This brand cares little about its narcissist exposure by ways of "likes" or "subscribers". Its existence relies on its perpetual, invisible-trust of learn and "live-it-foward" model as free-self awareness, decentralised education. All of which stems from reading the free-for-download manuscript This Is™ Humility Through Frugality.
I would be gladly and eternally grateful to hear any feedback/s and any connections relative to this branding initiative's concerns and contexts.
With Humility and regards,