From Target to Supreme, Branding's Latest Obsession Is Collaboration

(Bloomberg Opinion) -- That noise you hear thundering across the brandscape? That’s the hoofbeat of collaborations crescendoing to a deafening roar.

Whereas brand partnerships used to be sparing, targeted, special even — we see now a feeding frenzy of collaborative cross-pollination.

Balmain × Barbie? Sure!

Zara × Everlast? Why not?

Veuve Clicquot × Yayoi Kusama? Come on in, the clicks are lovely!

No collab is too kooky, no partnership too cray-cray in this patchwork harlequinade.

If you thought Gucci × The North Face was awesome, check out Gucci × The North Face × Francis Bourgeois — featuring the adorkable British trainspotting sensation who has 37.2 million likes on TikTok (Gucci has 12.6 million; The North Face 1.3).

As Joe Grondin, senior manager of global collaborations for New Balance (which has partnered with everyone from Bodega and Stone Island to Rich Paul and Kith) explained to Hypebeast:

“We’re just trying to occupy as many subcultures as possible, and picking the most authentic brands to do that.”

 * * *

Splendidly, there’s a typographical angle.

Over the past few decades, the breakout stars of the computer keyboard have been the “at” symbol “@” and the hash sign “#” — plucked from obscurity by email and social media, to become as vital as the “?”, “&” and “%”.

But there’s a third symbol to watch, and while it’s often displaced by the letter “x” it should really be the St. Andrew’s cross “×” — our use of which dates to William Oughtred’s 1631 text “The Key to Mathematics.”

You see, brands have traditionally collaborated in the hope of addition. And some (like Halston and Pierre Cardin) have fallen victim to brand dilution’s subtraction. But in an age when virality is the jackpot, “×” marks not just the spot where brands collide creatively, but where they stake their fortunes on multiplication.

In this way, “×” may be branding’s most lucrative symbol: × = ! = $.

* * *

Stop, Collaborate and Listen

Brand collaborations arise when two or more boldface entities unite to promote or produce a product or service. As such, the collaborative spectrum covers everything from simple celebrity endorsements (Stan Smith × Adidas) and product placement (Ray-Ban × “Top Gun”) to complex co-creations (FritoLay × Taco Bell).

It’s not hard to see the allure, since effective collaborations create a triple win — drawing customers of Brand X to Brand Y, and vice versa, while luring new followers into the fold. But although “profit” is the simplest explanation for most brand behavior, “Why collaborate?” has a range of interconnecting answers.

· Impact

The most successful brand collaborations punch way above their weight. Adidas has sold more than 70 million pairs of Stan Smith sneakers since 1978. Sales of Ray-Ban Aviators soared 40% after Tom Cruise sported them as “Maverick” in 1986. In 2013 Taco Bell reported that it had taken less than 14 months (and 15,000 extra staff) to sell more than $1 billion worth of Doritos Locos Tacos. And in 2020, an Instagram post from Justin Bieber merely hinting at a Crocs collaboration spiked the shoemaker’s shares to a 13-year high.

· Reach

The recently announced collab-à-trois between Yeezy, Gap and Balenciaga  illustrates the power of collaborations to extend far beyond the reach of any individual participant. Taking Instagram followers as a marker, this curious thruple instantly established a powerhouse presence …

9.9 million @kanyewest + 3.1 million @gap + 12.4 million @balenciaga = 25.4 million

 … to say nothing of the innocent passersby intrigued by the media coverage. As Gap’s CEO Sonia Syngal confirmed:

“Our newest Yeezy Gap icon, the Perfect Hoodie, delivered the most sales by an item in a single day in Gap.com history … With over 70% of the Yeezy Gap customers shopping with us for the first time, this partnership is unlocking the power of a new audience for Gap, Gen Z plus Gen X men from diverse background.”

· Maturity

Collaborations allow established companies to deepen their customer relationships, and neophyte brands to co-opt legacy depth. Such inter-generational partnerships are run-of-the mill in music (Tony Bennett × Lady Gaga) and fashion (Louis Vuitton × Supreme), but they are becoming common in other market sectors. For instance, Leica (whose revolutionary camera debuted in 1914) has collaborated with several modern brands including Mykita eyewear (est. 2003), Hodinkee watches (est. 2008) and Master & Dynamic audio (est. 2013).

· Media

Whereas most journalists resist the stenography of “Brand X launches Product Y” PR, there is significantly more “man bites dog” about a collaboration, especially when it’s unexpected or counterintuitive. As a result, brands are becoming increasingly tactical (Mucinex partnered with the designers Steven Alan and Christina Viviani to create a Covid-catalyzed “Sickwear” clothing) and controversial (Liquid Death created 100 skateboards painted with traces of Tony Hawk’s blood).

· Hail Mary

Collaborations not only allow active brands to co-opt a bigger buzz (Johnnie “White” Walker × Game of Thrones), they give troubled companies a Hail Mary grab at the coattails of pop culture. The photography brand Polaroid, for instance, is casting its relevance net far and wide via collaborations with Fendi, Teva, Fragment Design, Star Wars, Lacoste and even Keith Haring (who died in 1990).

· Network Effect

The network power of collaborations means that when Brand X collaborates with Brand Y, it also benefits when Brand Y collaborates with Brand Z. This helps explains the absurdly expensive (and expansive) ecosystem of James Bond product placement — where mid-level brands like Toyota, Heineken, Dell and Moscot bask in the reflected glory not just of 007, but of luxury marques like Aston Martin, Bollinger, Omega and Leica.

· Respect

Lest we become too cynical, collaborations are also driven by genuine affinity and creative simpatico. The stunningly successful Skims × Fendi collaboration (which earned $1 million in one minute when launched last November) was the result of such “game recognizing game” — as Fendi’s artistic director Kim Jones told Instagram:

“The idea for the collaboration came about when my team and I were sitting around a table at the @Fendi studio in Rome. Suddenly, all the women went silent and started looking at their phones. I didn’t know what was going on, but they were waiting for the launch of the new @SKIMS collection. It was then that I thought: let’s do something together.”

* * *

A Collaboration Taxonomy

Having explored the why of collaboration, let us turn to the how — and the myriad (often intersecting) techniques brands deploy to find common commercial cause.

· High/Low

When well-timed and executed, high/low collaborations create the perfect storm of hype: bestowing top dogs the common touch, granting underdogs a sniff of cool, and dispensing catnip to cultural critics.

The poster child of high/low collabs is surely Target, which has surprised and delighted its mass-market base by partnering with more than 150 designer brands since 1999, including Proenza Schouler, Victoria Beckham, Marimekko and Jason Wu. Yet it was 2011’s blockbuster Target × Missoni collection that shook the C-suite and launched a thousand high/low projects by convincing the haut monde that mall-mom “masstige” was a goldmine. As Angela Missoni recollected to Vogue:

 “We discovered there was a whole audience out there that responded to the Missoni world on an emotional level, many without knowledge of us as a luxury brand.”

A few companies attempt to straddle both sides of the high/low divide. The jeweler Swarovski, for instance, collaborates with a bipolarity of brands — Nikon and Nike, Vivian Westwood and Snoopy, Zaha Hadid and Disney — and even plays the game within the same collection: The 2019 Swarovski × Hello Kitty range ran from $149 to $10,600. 

· Strawberries × Cream

As every supermarket planogrammer knows, you shelve sauces next to pasta, chocolates next to flowers and batteries next to toys. Such strawberries-n-cream thinking drives many collaborations, most notably the Apple × Nike (music × fitness) partnership which launched in 2006 with the Nike+iPod in-shoe sensor, and continues to this day with the Apple Watch Nike Series 7.

Complementarity is also at work with Pottery Barn × Sherwin-Williams paint; West Elm × Casper mattresses; Uber × Spotify; and Red Bull × GoPro — a collaboration which mixes adrenaline and braggadocio so elegantly, even the slogans fit: Red Bull Gives You Wings × Be a Hero.

A subsection of such partnerships includes crème de la crème collabs, where two brands in the same space aspire to the impact of celebrity portmanteaus like Brangelina, TomKat and Kimye. Fashion has recently seen the launch of Fendace (Fendi × Versace) and Pradidas (Prada × Adidas) — though when Gucci announced its Aria collection, using elements of Balenciaga’s brand, it was anxious to transcend commonplace “collaboration,” calling its alliance:

“a hacking lab, made of incursions and metamorphoses. An alchemical factory of contaminations where everything connects to anything … A place where thefts and explosive reactions happen: a permanent generator of sparkles and unpredictable desires.”

· Synesthesia

In addition to linking two (apparently) kindred brands (Karl Lagerfeld × Tsingtao Beer) and elongating brand longevity (Ben & Jerry’s × everyone from Cherry Garcia in 1987 to Netflix & Chilll’d in 2020), collaborations that riff on our senses are an engaging way to:

• Create complementary taste collusions (Coffee Mate × Snickers; Choco Leibniz × Baileys Irish Cream)
• Create controversial taste collisions (Pepsi × Peeps; Coca-Cola × Tic Tacs)
• Engineer amusing sensory collisions (Bonne Belle lip gloss × Skittles; Innisfree face powder × Mentos)
• Associate brand use with specific sensory pleasures (Dungeons & Dragons × Nerds; Find My Past genealogy × Grant’s Whisky)
• Align audiences in unexpected ways (Allbirds × Shake Shack; e.l.f. Cosmetics × Chipotle)

· Canvas Brands

Certain brands are so secure in their standing they feel empowered to become “canvas collaborators” — populating their product’s real estate with an iteration of superimpositions. Trailblazing this trend was Château Mouton Rothschild which, since 1924, has invited a galaxy of artistic talent to decorate its labels, including Jean Cocteau, Marc Chagall, Pablo Picasso, Francis Bacon, Lucian Freud and David Hockney.

Interestingly, several artists who collaborated with Mouton Rothschild also collaborated with another canvas-brand innovator — Absolut Vodka — including Keith Haring, Olafur Eliasson, Anish Kapoor and Andy Warhol. And the trend has been taken up by Nestlé’s San Pellegrino which has sought to spotlight its Italian heritage via collaborations with Missoni, Bulgari, Luciano Pavarotti and Vogue Italia.

Other notable canvas collaborators include the kitchen appliance maker Smeg, which has incorporated designs from Dolce & Gabbana, Disney and Fiat into its products:

And the retro British homeware company Cath Kidston has overlaid its designs onto an array of “brands whose ethos we share” — including food manufacturers (Roses Chocolates, Heinz), footwear (New Balance, Gola) and children’s fiction (Mr. Men, Disney, Alice in Wonderland, Peanuts, Harry Potter, Beatrix Potter, Moomins).

· Social

Although every brand aspires for its collaborations to go viral, some are more blatantly focused on breaking the internet. In 2019, Nike collaborated with LeBron James to create the “AF1 More Than” — a white sneaker that came with two Sharpies “to encourage athletes to share their stories” and, presumably, Instagram them.

And in 2021, Jif collaborated with Ludacris on The Lil Jif Project which promoted the consumption of peanut butter to smooth your hip-hop flow. TikTok videos tagged #JifRapChallenge have accrued 7.3 billion views.

· Beachhead Collaborations

Instead of thrusting samples into the startled hands of shoppers and pedestrians, some brands deploy location-specific collaborations. In this way, the restrooms of hotels, airlines and restaurants have become beachheads from which toiletry brands can attack new markets. Hence: Soapbox × Delta Hotels ; Diptyque × Qatar Airways; and Aesop × “every fancy restaurant.”

Beachheads also help brands lure a new generation. When in 2017, Clinique partnered with Crayola to create crayon-shaped “Chubby Sticks,” the PR talk was of “memories of childhood filled with playtime and creativity.” How fortunate that such a product might also attract a new cohort of customers … and how coincidental that, a year later, Crayola released its own 58-piece crayon-themed makeup collection.

Beachheading has also influenced the latest collaborations between fast food and faux meat. Last year Impossible Food launched a “restaurant concept” with the Dog Haus hot dog chain, and Beyond Meat agreed to produce plant-based products for McDonald’s, KFC, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell. Such collaborations allow legacy food brands to test the waters of alternative protein, while introducing meatless pioneers to a captive audience of curious carnivores. Clearly it’s in both parties’ interests that such co-produced innovations are boldly co-branded:

· Analog × Digital

Because collaboration allows analog brands to span the digital divide without completely retooling their factories, the trend has proved popular with fashion labels that have seen the zenith of luxury drift from textiles to technology. Hence Berluti × Bang & Olufsen; Gucci × Xbox; Thom Browne × Samsung; Prada × LG; Louis Vuitton × Royole; Dolce & Gabbana × Motorola; and Yves Saint Laurent × Google.

The Hermès × Apple Watch collaboration is especially notable. Notwithstanding the eyewatering price of its highest-spec professional computers, there are currently no luxury Apple consumer products — a point made bluntly to Cousin Greg in the TV show “Succession”:

“Dude, your phone is a widget, a button. Every janitor in America has one.”

Sure, Apple briefly flirted with a $17,000 18-karat gold Apple Watch Edition — and third-party modifiers like Caviar will flog you a “pure gold” iPhone for $42,380 — but even Apple’s premium consumer products seem democratic in comparison to today’s luxury watches and hi-fi. Discounting the PR bromides of “craftsmanship,” “attention to detail” and “unique expressions,” collaborating with Hermes allows Apple to flirt with old-world affluence, just as it allows a saddlery founded in 1837 to approach the cutting edge.

· Shock × Guffaw

If delight and surprise are central to most collaborations, a few deploy scrappier tactics of shock and guffaw — tropes that date back to at least 1937, when the fashion designer Elsa Schiaparelli worked with Salvador Dalí to create a dress based on the surrealist’s infamous lobster telephone.

Shock is well-illustrated by the collaboration between the rapper Lil Nas X and the art collaborative MSCHF which created 666 pairs of Satan Shoes by “customizing” Nike Air Max 97s with (what they claimed was) human blood. And guffaw is illustrated by the midlarious April Fool’s Day stunt collaboration between Warby Parker and Arby’s.

The undisputed master of the lampoon collab is, surely, Supreme which seems to be on a quasi-parodic quest to discover if there is anything it can co-brand that won’t sell out in seconds. This quest has given the world Supreme × Hohner harmonicas, Braun calculators, Stern pinball machines, Ludens cough drops, Colgate toothpaste, Duraflame fire logs, Meissen figurines, Rawlings baseball bats, Hastens beds, MTA metro cards and many, many more.

· Imprimatur

At the subtler end of the sensation spectrum are collaborations that carry the imprimatur of authority — most obviously, partnerships between brands and nation-state stamps, such as the United States Postal Service × Harry Potter, Spider Man, Bugs Bunny and Star Wars (released, inevitably, on May 4th, 2021).

More elaborate are the Royal Warrants which, since 1840, have been granted by members of the British Royal Family “as a mark of recognition to people or companies who have regularly supplied goods or services.” There are currently 800 brands collaborating “by appointment to” the various royal households — including Angostura bitters, Berry Bros. & Rudd wine, and Hunter wellington boots — all of which are entitled to use the relevant family’s royal crest.

Of course, once in a while brands achieve the imprimatur of authority by accident. Ronald Reagan was so famed for his love of Jelly Belly candy that three and a half tons of red, white, and blue jelly beans were delivered to Washington for his 1981 inauguration. More recently, Donald Trump has had a slightly more complex relationship with a range of brands, not least Goya, My Pillow, Sharpie and Four Seasons Total Landscaping.

· Scattershot

A subsection of brands use collaboration not as an occasional marketing fillip, but a central strategic plank. Oreo, for example, has recently partnered with, to name a few, Pokémon, Lady Gaga, Krispy Kreme, McDonald’s, Breyer’s, Dunkin’, Milka, Candy Corn, Swedish Fish, the NBA, Game of Thrones, Google Android and (of course) Supreme.

Similarly, the remarkable renaissance of Crocs has been fueled not just by Covid casualness, but by collaborations with fashion brands (Liberty, Balenciaga), food brands (KFC, Hidden Valley Ranch), designers (Salehe Bembury, Nicole McLaughlin), artists (Takashi Murakami), musicians (Post Malone, Diplo), department stores (Barneys) and media giants (Disney).

· Causes

Cause collaborations allow brands to emphasize the PR inherent to public philanthropy by partnering with complementary charities, such as Whiskas × World Wildlife Fund or Land Rover × Red Cross. Occasionally, brands allow their employees to pick a charitable partner: Morgan Stanley’s London staff recently voted for the firm to support The Felix Project. And some brands activate direct-to-consumer charitable executions: During the Covid crisis, Uber partnered with Moderna to “to provide accessible, credible information on vaccine safety through Uber’s in-app messaging” and with Unilever to provide drivers and couriers with hygiene kits.

Perhaps the most sophisticated cause collaborator is (RED) — the charity founded by Bono and Bobby Shriver which partners with “the world’s most iconic brands” to help fight AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. Since 2006, (RED) has raised nearly $700 million by developing co-branded products and services with an array of companies, including Gap, Converse, Canon, Fiat, Nike, Hallmark, Apple, Starbucks, Amex and Durex.

Collaboration Fails

How do porcupines mate? Carefully.

Because collaborations involve intermingling not just commercial assets but corporate prestige, the risk of reputational contagion is inevitable. In 2014, for example, the canvas collaborator Lego was forced to end a 56-year partnership with Shell in response to a Greenpeace campaign against Artic drilling. More recently, public outrage pressured Mercedes-AMG Petronas Formula One to end its partnership with a building supply company whose products were associated with the mass-fatality Grenfell Tower fire in London in 2017.

Collaborations also risk a “negative network effect,” where one brand’s scandal sparks a chain reaction. Although the Sackler family’s “artwashing” co-brand of museum, gallery and university buildings around the world had become increasingly outrageous as the opioid crisis unfolded, it was only when Britain’s National Portrait Gallery refused a £1 million Sackler grant in March 2019 that the dam burst. Three years on, the stain of Sackler has been erased by a number of organizations, including The Louvre, The Serpentine, Tufts University and The Metropolitan Museum of Art. More are likely to follow, and many more will think twice before partnering with controversial names.

* * *

Collaborations, clearly, are going nowhere.

And this may be no bad thing. Collaborations add not just to consumer choice and the bottom line, but to the gaiety of nations. As the tongue tag of Nike × Ben & Jerry’s “Chunky Dunky” sneaker proclaims: “If it’s not fun, why do it?”

But there may be a moment when even the most provocative partnerships pall. For some this line was crossed in October 2020 when Cole Haan collaborated on a range of shoes with the messaging platform Slack.

Spending $120 of your daily bread on sneakers that shill your daily grind seemed to many neither amusing nor ironic, but simply masochistic. And it prompted the question: If collaboration is focused on building bridges, is there a bridge too far?

Supreme × IRS anyone?

More From Other Writers at Bloomberg Opinion: 

• All Those Silly Crypto Ads Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg: Lionel Laurent

• Unilever Still Has to Transform Itself. Here Are Its Options: Andrea Felsted

• Simone Biles Nike Snub Is a Big Win for Athleta: Sarah Halzack

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

Ben Schott is Bloomberg Opinion's advertising and brands columnist. He created the Schott’s Original Miscellany and Schott’s Almanac series, and writes for newspapers and magazines around the world.

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.