We have, on several instances, either via the blog, class
readings, or class discussions, discussed the definition and role of
authenticity in the wine industry. These conversations and postings have varied
from defining what authentic means, discussing whether or not authenticity has
a role in consumer choice, and considering the various implications of what it
means for a brand to be authentic or ‘inauthentic.’
In light of the Duckhorn class from last week, I considered
the implications of private equity ownership of a wine brand on authenticity.
Personally, I do not consider authenticity or ownership
structure when evaluating a wine. I evaluate and purchase on two dimensions:
price and taste. However, as several classmates and guests have expressed, for
some consumers, authenticity is a key driver in purchasing behavior.
If authenticity is defined as a brand truly representing
itself and serving the consumers’ passion for wine, then I conclude that being
private equity owned for a winery makes it ‘inauthentic.’ Make no mistake, I
applaud the Duckhorn team and private equity owners for their amazing business.
I wish I had their financial success. However, as soon as a founder takes on
private equity ownership, the business’ existence is instantly financial
returns, not brand evangelicalism or passion. How would consumers react if the
Duckhorn founders publicly said, “We are in this business to make as much money
as possible for our private equity owners.” My gut is consumers wouldn’t
respond favorably because there is dissonance between true financial motives
and the Duckhorn marketing language around creating passion-filled wine. Again,
I think Duckhorn is an amazing winery and business; but it is not a truly
authentic wine brand in my mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment