A strange story of brand blindness

 I came across this young brand, Moma in 2009 and had a brief look at what they were up to. Thankfully they’ve survived and become quite successful – according to their website, they now employ 30 people and seem to have gained impressive distribution. But at the time I struggled to understand their strategy.

The product, albeit nicely packaged lacked any real differentiation against more well established retail offerings and lacked a strong value proposition in my opinion.

At that time they were selling at mainline London stations from little mobile kiosks but their “heathy breakfast” proposition could be obtained from any EAT or Pret a manger  let alone the many retailers on site at the station.

Its pretty easy to tell if a company doesn’t have a coherent strategy. Simply put yourself in the customers’s shoes and see for yourself if the articulated proposition stacks up. Or put another way: do the people + the promises + the product + the reputation + the unconsious bits all build up an expectation that makes purchasing compelling?

Positioning is about occupying a place in someone’s head that causes an exchange of value. Strong brands occupy these places alone and command more value as a result than those weaker competitors which share the same space with many alternates.

Have a look at this photograph to the right? Now tell me, which of these people is the customer and which is the Moma brand representative?

(please “comment” on this post below with your answer and add any other comment you want to make).

Everyone I show this to thinks the lady is the customer; in fact, the man is.

Assuming you are not a customer of Moma, what do you now think of their healthy breakfast promise when it’s served by an unhealthy lady? Would you still be prepared to try it? Does it create doubt in your mind about the veracity of their promise?

Using my CARDS positioning analysis system, MOMA scores as follows:

1. Is it Clear? Liverpool street station is a “noisy” place at best of times but the lack of stand out and visibility was palpable. The fat lady however undermined the clarity of the message, if not consciously certainly unconsciously. Weak
2. Is it Distinct? Within 100 yards of the kiosk were ten’s of competitors with ‘healthy breakfasts’. Of course a kiosk like this is more in your face than its static competitors and so would gain some trial but an indistinct proposition is less likely to stimulate demand and encourage trial. Weak
3. Is it Salient? For me this was weak as it had functional benefits but lacked emotional value so expectations not set apart. Weak
4. Is it reliable? I didn’t taste the product but am assured its great. So lots of scope to build the brand through retention and word of mouth promotion but their lack of a strong promise means they are not calibrating the correct expectation. Weak
5. Is it authentic? Tom’s is a farmer’s son and his family are all involved in food so lots of authentic credentials here but still no reason as to why they care.  Weak

Strategy is making sure everything stacks up behind a distinctive, valuable idea. For me, the fat lady, if not a disincentive, certainly slows down the speed by which they can engage and grow a market for their brand. But fundamentally there was not then a  strong enough value proposition that would stimulate stellar growth. Three years on they have made great strides in the disembodied world of FMCG more than retail sales. On reflection, that’s probably not surprising.

So what are you doing that undermines your ability to grow? Organisations are all too often focused on getting things done and so lose sight of how this comes across to consumers. A very dangerous type of myopia.

Follow