Imagine a store full of people without pimples or imperfections of the face and everyone had perfect bodies as workers. It is hard to tell apart one person from another because they are the same age, race, and size. Marshal Cohen argues that hiring for looks helps represent and make that particular brand look good. He is also implying that good looking workers mean better profits. Cohen is only targeting the “younger, fashionable market” while it is not true that the older generations do not buy clothes. It is important for retailers to keep in mind all age groups or groups of people. I do not agree with Cohen’s argument from the beginning of this quote until the end of it. I will try to use some of my ideas to make Cohen’s seem a bit narrowminded, although what he says are just his opinions.
These walking “billboards” become an image that the company wants and not necessary a good image. For the people who aren’t hired, they think that if they were to be hired, they would make the brand look bad. Those that are rejected will have their self-esteem hurt slowly. Through constant rejection due to looks, the paradigm of that person will change. Cohen says” it’s really important to create an environment to the community”, but an environment where customer can feel lesser than someone is not very welcoming. A good environment should be making the customer want to be there. From my experience, Abercrombie & Fitch is not a very welcoming place. The moment I enter the store, I inhale the stench of their overly strong perfume that makes my head dizzy. This aspect of the store is not very welcoming like the aspect that the employees feel better than you.
Another point is that are “walking billboards” that important or that beneficent? Although Cohen is talking about retailer brands, let’s imagine real human walking billboards. Think back to when you see the people dressed in Subway’s sandwiches or another food company’s hotdog. These real humans that are representing their company do not make me want to buy their products but to laugh at the creator. We sympathize with these workers that have to project an image for a living. The person in the suit or in our example the models do not feel very comfortable because their job is from their looks. Going for the looks can make these young people feel insecure due to the fact that one day they will lose their looks and therefore lose their jobs.
When Cohen says that a guy, (a guy that goes shopping by himself for clothes) goes to a store, he wants to see pretty girls. There are few things wrong with this statement. Cohen said that guy is “to hang out” and doesn’t involve the act of purchasing merchandise. Hanging out at a particular place could lead to loitering of a group of people and that results in less room for other customers. It is possible that he is too occupied with checking out the employees or other girls that he doesn’t even buy things. It is also possible that he purchases something to show off his wealth at this expensive Abercrombie & Fitch store to impress gals. In the first case, the girl become a distraction and is not actually a profit attraction. In the second case, the guy is buying for the sake of the girl and not the trendiness or quality of the product. Having attractive workers in your store does not always have a positive effect.
I got the idea of targeting the general people from the occupy Oakland. Since Cohen is talking about like a lower percentage of the population, it could be like the 5%. The adults and seniors are the 95%. If companies truly want to profit, they should aim at targeting the elderly, mainly the baby boomers, or the people who actually earn money. There will be millions and millions more people retiring now and they will get Social Security. Companies should make a high quality clothe or electronic which will tempt the senior citizen to use their money for that product. Even if the corporate bosses aim at the youngsters, the clothes should be something the parents would agree to. Since it the parents that pay for the clothes and not that children who pays, they must aim toward the parents. The fashionable child could be attracted to a store for the employees’ looks but if the clothes are low quality, the parent would make them return it.
A company that currently does not need brand enhancer based on looks is Apple. Their product itself is what gets the profit that goes in the billions area. They hire intelligent workers who are familiar with the product, so in this case, brains can be the attractive thing. Advertisements are not even shown quite often for this company because they do not need that extra publicity. Since some guys are interested in computers and gaming, a computer or itouch can possibly sell better than a shirt. Having a representative who “captures the awareness of your brand” could help business but not always in the long run.
Cohen should have thought about his words before he uttered them for this article. To have a real successful company, it should target every single age group. You must make them believe that this object they are selling is something they need even though they didn’t know they needed it before. In the case of clothing company, then one product should be able to adapt to all possible weather. A company should not hire by looks because by doing so, you lose possible terrific potential workers. Gals at a store do not attract customers but only distracts them. Walking billboards advertise the company but at the stake of the worker. I kind of went off topic with this essay but I just went with some different ideas and angles for this problem that I thought of.
