LoveMarks

ThoughtStorms Wiki

Why is this page here? Am I just a sad follower? I'll be creating a page about SethGodin next.

http://www.allaboutbranding.com/index.lasso?article=336

the RageBoy response : http://www.rageboy.com/2004/08/lovebites-and-you-bite-too-its.html

DavidWeinberger : http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/mtarchive/003404.html

Cluetrain vs. Lovemarks : http://www.gapingvoid.com/Moveable_Type/archives/001126.html

So maybe it's all hype and hot air, but here's the phrase which catches my attention : Charles Darwin would have got it straight off. Fish to lizard. Monkey to man. Product to Trademark. Trademark to Brand. Brand to Lovemark.

Each level forms a platform (OnPlatforms) on which the next things builds / is parasitic. And perhaps building the next level requires a new skill-set / to work in a new medium. So what the idea of a LoveMark really means is that there's a higher level platform / media above brands. And where brands themselves (and the activities which go building them such as advertising, marketing and by implication, the MassMedia etc.) are merely commodity components. And this is new level of differentiation. Don't know how well the analogy holds but if it does expect all kinds of CommoditizeYourComplements and ConservationOfModularity issues to hold.

Of course, what's "above" MassMedia / advertising in the great chain of consumer being is GonzoMarketing.

Maybe I'm just a cynical curmudgeon, but I don't see the leap in Lovemarks. It strikes me as branding folk doing what they do best and re-branding "branding". New coat of paint covering up the same old concepts – AdrianHoward