Abercrombie and Fitch made its name by offering clothes aimed at the “cool kids”. This worked when the vision of a “preppy, all-American youth” was dominant image of culture. Its marketing was exclusionary, its store assistants were young, attractive and, often, models. It also refused to stock bigger clothing sizes. Essentially, Abercrombie & Fitch’s clothes were only for thin and attractive teenagers. The exclusivity of the brand made young teens, like me, want it even more, I felt as though if I was able to buy into the brand, I would also be able to buy in the kudos of the brand and the connotations associated with it.
The most prominent commercial problem is that the brand has failed to respond to changing shopping patterns and failed to move with a market in which teenagers demand fast fashion at low cost, not a premium unchanging proposition. The insinuation that A&F’s products are designed to be worn exclusively by attractive, athletic young people is extremely alienating for consumers who do not fit this bill, and no doubt this has lost the retailer custom over the years, myself included.
Due to the change and demand of Generation Z, A&F have made some attempts to change its image. Once known for plastering its logo over everything, they have now made the decision to remove its logo from a range of its products to give them a more understated look. And as for their infamous smaller sizes they have introduced more loose-fitting styles.
The changes haven’t stopped at the products but their actual stores. The stores have been revamped, with its Hollister brand introducing better lit stores, quieter music and reducing the amount of fragrance spritzed around the store. However, by removing all these iconic characteristics of their stores are they really staying true to themselves?
Abercrombie was formerly known for its raunchy ads and scantily clad models who greeted customers are the entrance of the store. Today, it has ditched its shirtless male models and opted for a more down-to-earth look. This is one of the most noticeable changes in its stores and social media platforms today.Its marketing has also begun to adapt. The shirtless models are gone, replaced with images of a more down-to-earth look, swapping the oversexualized ads for outdoorsy, wholesome images.
Though I do understand their reasoning behind revamping the brand in order to stay relevant and profitable, especially with the likes of Generation Z who strive off inclusivity, I can’t help but see right through it all. Growing up, the brand wardrobe (their iconic shirtless shopping bags were also a regular occurrence when it came to days with PE). So, for me seeing a brand switch to a completely opposite marketing and branding strategy I can see straight through it and see how unauthentic it is.
Comments