More on nau: “Green” Outdoor Clothing as Object of Engagement
By Tom Chandler on Dec 4, 2006 in Engagement Marketing, Marketing
I profiled nau a while ago - an emerging outdoor clothing company hoping to engage customers on issues of sustainability and environmental activism. (my nau profile)
Today - via the Piton blog - I noticed that the Tree Hugger site conducted a lengthy interview with Nau’s employees.
While the interview doesn’t specifically address nau’s engagement marketing efforts, it is a fascinating look at a company’s attempt to market its “green” values as much as they do their products.
While Patagonia - a big competitor in the outdoor clothing market - is also making its environmental activism an issue, they don’t yet have a blog (though one is reportedly in the works).
Despite the fact that nau still isn’t selling any clothing (coming January 2007), they’re making a lot of waves and sticking their noses out in front of their already-established competitors.
It’s an intelligent tactic, and an interesting test of engagement marketing. We’ll keep an eye on this one.
I think what Nau is doing is all very edgy and fascinating. We in the apparel and outdoor biz certainly could learn a lot from their engagement marketing. But show me the product. At the end of the day, if you can’t walk the walk and your product (has anybody even seen the stuff yet?)is not that exciting, so what?
Megan Kress | Dec 19, 2006 | Reply
With product not due until January, a lot of questions remain.
Are the clothes any good? And does the market identify with “green” values enough to make the brand a success?
Still, it’s hard to argue with their marketing so far. And given the paucity of blogs in that market, it will be interesting to see how many companies follow nau (and Isis) into the engagement marketing arena.
Tom Chandler | Dec 20, 2006 | Reply
I completely agree. Their marketing approach is genius. I just feel like it’s only one piece of the puzzle. Brands are so much more than marketing, no matter how good it is.
But..when you look at Patagonia, where many of their core folks seem to have experience, what you are really dealing with is a marketing company. Recent launches for new product lines at Patagonia have had an elaborate marketing story attached. I’m not close enough to their inner circle to determine if it’s been effective, but I know when I sell, I often have to consider their story and sell to it (and sometimes against it) if I’m offering a similar product– so they are clearly getting through to my buyers! However, that’s a hard apple to compare given the the brand power, longevity, and pioneering that Patti has provided to the outdoor biz.
Megan Kress | Dec 20, 2006 | Reply
What you’re describing is pretty normal for markets where the market used to be driven by technology, but where the differences between products have narrowed.
When consumers are faced with a wide array of similar choices (outdoor gear nowadays, especially clothing), factors like connection to the brand become increasingly important.
Hence the importance of engagement, story, etc.
Tom Chandler | Dec 22, 2006 | Reply
I’m one of the people working on Nau’s marketing direction. I couldn’t agree with you more that in the end, it all comes down to the product. In fact, we haven’t accomplished anything yet given that not a single customer has had the opportunity to vote on our product. We’re getting very close to having it in the market and when we do I’ll be genuinely interested in what you think. In the mean time, if you’d like to get a sense of our design pohilosophy and a peak at the product I welcome you to check out this hort video on our website:
http://www.nau.com/#xml/productdesign/beautyperformancesustainability&6
Ian Yolles | Dec 23, 2006 | Reply
Ian, thanks for weighing in.
This blog is mainly concerned with the marketing aspects of nau, though I’m very interested in what rolls out the doors.
In one sense, nau is an interesting test case for the concept of engagement marketing (something I believe in), and I hope the clothes measure up to the somewhat interesting hype.
Tom Chandler | Dec 24, 2006 | Reply