Brands are an enduring fashion

There is a mistrust of brands in much of the pub and restaurant market. It is misplaced.

Despite the fact that we live in an overtly branded world and that the public obviously loves and understands brands (well many of them), a large number of operators remain nervous of 'brand roll-outs' or even admitting their concepts might actually be brands.

There is a widely held belief that customers don't like brands. What they don't like is bad, poorly performing brands ' and the problem for the eating and drinking-out markets is that over the years it has suffered from a few of those.

In the pub trade, there is a strong argument that the 'local' nature of the public house makes individualised, unbranded businesses a more appropriate consumer proposition. It may well be true, and the best bet is often to leverage local market knowledge and understanding in building a business.

Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that 90% of the adult population knows what a Wetherspoons is. Neither has it stopped a third of them eating or drinking in one in the past year.

The branded versus unbranded debate is sterile, because both approaches can work.

In the world of chain restaurants, the case for brands is stronger, but there is still suspicion.

The growth in branded chains ' from Frankie & Benny's and PizzaExpress to Nandos and Wagamama ' is evident for all to see. People use brands.

When around three quarters (and sometimes more) of those eating in them rate their experience 'good' or 'excellent', as happened in a recent piece of research for Peach Factory, the evidence is pretty clear that the public likes them, as well.

There is always anecdotal evidence of customers thinking that standards have fallen when groups expand, of things not being as good as they were. There is a nostalgia for a more personalised, exclusive experience. But is that a reason for not taking a concept out to a wider, perhaps more appreciative, audience?

There is an important imperative to match a brand's growth to market demand, and not to over-reach, but demand for more quality eating-out brands among the public is real enough.

What the public want is for brands to deliver on their promise. If they do that size is not an issue.

Look outside the sector at the retail market, for example. Is the Marks & Spencer brand any less powerful because it has 400 stores across the country? Are people saying that's too many?

Has River Island lost its fashion cache because it operates over 200 shops. Even trendy clothes chain Zara is up to 50 stores, coincidentally the same number as Wagamama restaurants in Britain.

Even in the food market, Waitrose retains its quality, upmarket image with a 200-strong chain.

So what's the problem for eating out? There isn't one as long as brands keep their standards and continue to satisfy their customers.

What some operators obviously need is a little more self-confidence, by accepting they are brand-owners and to start to fully exploit their brand assets, building a real brand rapport with their obviously willing customers.

first published in M&C Report, August, 2007