Louis Vuitton wins core values game, set and match with Federer and Nadal

It is refreshing that a brand knows who and what it is, ladies and gentlemen please welcome: Louis Vuitton. Well, in case you do not know it, at the heart of every brand is a set of core values, and for Louis Vuitton here they are: a journey beyond the physical, a commitment to excellence and a transmission of dreams.

Of course, when you are one of the world's largest behemoth, you can afford people like - Angelina Jolie, Bono, Sean Connery, Steffi Graf, Keith Richards, Muhammad Ali, Francis Ford Coppola, Sofia Coppola, Sally Ride, Buzz Aldrin (yes, the astronaut and the second person to ever walk on the moon, that Buzz Aldrin). And now to continue the series? Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal - for some statistics they met 40 times, with Nadal leading 24-16 including 14-10 in finals. 

It is interesting for a company as huge as Louis Vuitton to still know its identity - because many companies/entities end up diluting themselves so much they lose track of that: think Versace post-Gianni's death even if the company is now back on track as a prime example, or any pop star once their initial zeitgeist is gone with Madonna being a poster-girl for the movement.

As I said, it goes better when the budget is there. Federer and Nadal are not going to just join the campaign for pennies, both are still - even if Federer is now retired and Nadal no longer at the top of the ATP ranking - incredibly popular figures in the game and of course, in the world at large as "brands" (note that Federer has a line with Uniqlo and is a partner in On - the sports brand taking market shares from Adidas and Nike). 

So here we are, the campaign is back and - with the force of Federer and Nadal - Louis Vuitton won game-set-and-match.

Brands and the hypocrisy of values

Artwork by Tarek Chemaly

In David Foster Wallace's book "Infinite Jest" (a writer's writer book if there was any) years are referred by the name of their corporate sponsors called "revenue enhancing subsidized time" (and yes, trademarked). Recently, a piece ran in The Guardian newspaper entitled "why corporate social responsibility is BS" by Robert Reich (who was a former US Secretary of Labor no less) and today in the much-hyped sneaker/streetwear bible Highsnobiety a frontpage article entitled "Should brands even be speaking about values".

Look, by enhancing their bottom line (selling one extra shirt or pair of trainers or a butter packet) brands are insuring their sustainability, and whereas - mind you this does not apply yet in markets such as the Arab world - young consumers support companies that share their values (in 2019 there was a report by Deloite worth reading, here) so when  Nike went into the Colin Kaepernick debacle (read here) they knew who was buttering their bread - and no, it was not those aging conservative older demographic who would buy one pair of trainers a year. However, in real life, Nike got caught flat-footed with the pregnant women ad (see here). In short here's Nike's position: They support women who are pregnant, as long as the pregnant women are not on their roaster of athletes such as Alysia Montano and Kara Gouche.

Classic example. Values only apply where and when it makes financial sense to be "on the right side of history" and let's face it "on the right side of the finances". Sure, some companies do mean it - I think of Patagonia for example - which no longer accepts adding corporate logos to its much-popular fleece vests allowing the clothes in question to be passed on to other people, or reworn outside business hours, or resold more easily at thrift stores. 

Remember, I am part of the Epica awards, and every year I see tons of ads about "good causes" brought to us by brands that expose their cases in very detailed presentations (mostly soundtracked by silly sad pianos) and how these acts changed the whole society they were part of (no kidding, a Lebanese agency claimed that it increased women's representation in the parliament because they changed a word in the national anthem making it a bit more feminist). But let's be honest, just as I said changing a law does not imply changing a mentality (see here), a silly short-termed Corporate Social Responsibility act is not going to change the life of a whole society, what it will do - it will bring consumers to thinking that their favorite brand is aligned with their values.

Welcome to the year of the Whisper-Quiet Maytag Dishmaster.