Recently a longtime aftermarket marketing veteran asked me a simple, yet compelling question: “Do brands matter anymore in the aftermarket?”

Now, I must confess that taking on such a subject for a publication that predominately depends on advertising revenue from nationally branded merchandise for its survival is a bit of a slippery slope. But frank and candid talk is what is appropriate, especially on a critical subject like this.

My research on the subject with technicians has revealed a few things pretty clearly. Their relationships with brands is evolving and changing. Interestingly, the attitude shifts that are occurring are based almost exclusively on the behavior of those who manage the brands. 

Before I explain that last statement, let me directly answer the initial question as to whether or not brands still matter. Yes, they do; but not as much as they used too. Further, there are more brands that are on the installer’s radar than just the national brands that were implied in my friend’s question. 

Techs’ relationships with brands are evolving based on three things 1) their personal experience with the brand’s quality, 2) what the product in the box communicates about the direction in which the brand is being taken and 3) the quality and type of information that is available to them about the brand. 

Personal experience with a specific brand is the single biggest factor in choosing any product. Overwhelmingly techs say if they have tried a product and it “works” they will use it again. “It works” is code for a product that looks right, fits right and doesn’t result in a comeback. In a sense, techs have become their own product and brand managers. They make their decisions based on discernible product benefits, their personal perception of value, the elimination of comebacks and their amalgamated personal experiences, including word of mouth from other techs and their suppliers.

Interestingly, a subject as seemingly unrelated as “global sourcing” is impacting their perception of brands. Techs report opening boxes of traditional North American brands to find products of another brand inside. This has caused them to scrutinize even familiar brands with some skepticism. This rattles their notion about manufacturers making what they sell. They view this as evidence that manufacturers are becoming “re-boxers” and it is effectively eroding brand perceptions. 

But there is another, newer factor that is complicating the brand issue with techs.  That is the propagation of private labels and exclusive national brands from many of their suppliers. They are impacting the tech’s view of traditional brands. Their perception is that these house brands, which are mostly low-cost country manufactured products, are very much like the reboxed lines available from major manufacturers. The general effect is a dilution of brands overall.

I made the statement earlier that the attitude shifts about brands could be attributed to the behavior of those who manage the brands. Certainly, product managers’ (and often bean counters’) decisions to put other branded parts in their boxes is evidence of that. However, I think it is arguably the greater issue of the availability of information that has leveled the field between national brands and these new upstarts.

One facet of this is obvious, the other more obscured. The obvious is that most manufacturers have significantly reduced the amount of resources they put behind their national brands. Advertising budgets have been slashed, promotional programs reduced and more recently, field sales support diminished. 

The more obscured side of the issue is the absence of technology-enabled compensators to replace the atrophying support, especially reduced sales people.  For manufacturers that are drawing down capital-intensive resources like field sales people and national advertising, alternatives are available to fill the ensuing voids. Unfortunately, few seem to recognize this.

The Internet has become the consummate sales person for those with vision to “hire it.” The technology, when compared with paying salaries and running extensive print advertising schedules, is a bargain — especially after the initial investment. There is, however, a primary directive that must be followed before technology can help: You have to have normalized, standardized, squeaky clean and replete data to feed the technology.

And that brings us back around to the rise of national exclusive and private label brands at the expense of traditional national brands. A private label product that is well supported in electronic media (POS and Internet) with replete technical and marketing information can easily stand with a known brand without such support. It’s happening more and more every day.

And it is these technology supported exclusive national brands that would keep me awake nights if I were a steward of a traditional national brand. Yes, brands do matter, but not as much as they once did. And especially not as much as they did before the advent of exclusive national brands.