Thread by @compound100x

Heard some pitches of Canada Goose over Moncler. Here is why I'd choose $Monc over the $Goos ⬇️

Good brand DNA is focused on utility. You see it across multiple marketing message
- "welcome to community of Warmth"
- #generationsofWarmth on IG

- store set up with chill room to test the utility of the parka
- New Branta parka tag lines: elevated material, reversible styles, functional design. Every tag is highlighting the park's utility.

Fashion for one is not about being functional. So what are the implications?

Because of focus on utility, it appeals to the rational side of us, less emotion. Utility has a limited price associated. A feeling is priceless.

With rationality, one is enough to keep you warm through the winter.

There is only so high a price you will be willing to pay for utility. So your asp is constrained. Your unit per customer is constrained.

With feeling, one is never enough. You buy a pink one, a bling one. Now in winter you don't just go with one utility parka. With moncler you..

..demonstrate your attitude having greater degrees of expression in a season traditionally more boring because people tend to have 1-2 outer wear. With feeling, a price is now not too high to pay because rationality goes out e window. You are buying it because there is nothing..

..like it & u simply have to have it. So your asp is now unconstrained & volume per customer expands beyond 1..

$Monc has opp to become a lifestyle brand with unconstrained units per customer whereas $goos is constrained by penetration.

I'd always pick a brand tt appeals to psycho-logic over logic because creating magic & connecting via feeling is so much harder to replicate than utility

Autocorrect error. *Goose brand DNA