A few weeks ago, when I was in NYC, I was struck by the sheer number of Canada Goose winter parkas which were being worn. True it was exceptionally cold but this was a 'bird' which usually stands out (the arm patch is almost as big as the polar ice shelf) because spotting an example was a rarity. Not any more. I gave up counting and, more importantly a bit of on the spot ethnographic work (a fancy term we marketers use for staring at people) made it quite clear that this expensive item was being worn by a wide demographic range. In essence it's gone from exclusive to mass in about 12 months.
That's a good thing right ? Especially for the owners of Canada Goose, Bain Capital, who must surely be contemplating a sale.
In the short term it has to be a "yes" but I would qualify that with the brand having the ability to sustain the impact of ubiquity. A few years ago the wearer made a signature statement donning one - now it's relatively mass attire.
That makes life tricky for a brand unless they can quickly side step into new items and develop their franchise. Louis Vuitton has been a master at this. It's obvious who has a historic purchase, or worse still a fake and who has the latest season.
Exclusivity is not the only foundation of luxury but it is an important one. The ability for a brand to achieve immense velocity has never been easier but that applies to ALL brands which have a winning proposition, including the NEXT hot brand. As fast as you climb the reverse is true.
It seems that no one is ever content with creating a successful brand with longevity only one which saturates the marketplace and then burns out just as quickly.
Perhaps Canada Goose can have it both ways and it could do worse than looking at Moncler which is establishing a bit of depth as well as breadth.
Meanwhile I'll wrap up.