When I’m out in public, I can’t count the number of people who own Coach products. Not to mention the different types of people who own them. In fact, it’s easier for me to count the number of friends that I have who don’t have something from Coach than it is for me to count the ones that don’t. Not surprisingly, I own a Coach wallet myself.
The reason why I think Coach is so ubiquitous is because of how its name and logos are displayed. Take the typical C patterning for its bags. People who aspire to communicate their wealth and status would obviously go for brand name products that are clearly recognizable, like Coach.
However, I do have a friend who is a bit of an anomaly. Yes, she has multiple products from Coach. Yes, she does use them. The issue for her, though, is that everyone owns things from Coach. When she’s out shopping, she doesn’t want to be using a product that an elderly grandmother, for example, is using as well. She wants something that is more exclusive.
This brings me to my point: inconspicuous consumption.
On Science Blog, BJS discusses why consumers are willing to pay more for a bag that doesn’t display its bag and that may be confused with a cheap alternative in his blog post. After reading is post, I have to agree with what he has written. People like feeling like an insider. With inconspicuous consumption, only those who are insiders to the brand can recognize the product.