- One issue I would point out is that looking at Trends isn't about absolute volume of searches, but rate of change in volume of searches. Which means that consideration of Google Trends data needs to be thought of carefully. If you have consistently high search volumes you can trend low. Your gains will be less from a proportional basis than even quite modest growth from a low base.
- Secondly, if you are Gymshark customer you are less likely to search for Gymshark, but might search for Gymshark shorts as a term to deep link into what you want.
- Search is no longer on the journey for social commerce, which is where Gymshark seems to have built up its audience and sales over time.
Having worked on New Balance in the past and had some experience in the space I have watched Gymshark with a certain amount of curiosity. Apart from the strong influencer and PR game in the UK at least, I don't understand what differentiates Gymahark from other brands like Under Armour, Ryderwear or Lu Lu Lemon?
I think that Lu Lu Lemon's strong retail game represents better penetration rather than a weakness, even against a DTC brand like Gymshark.
Buying direct on Amazon for good enough products works equally well for those people who will be concerned about the cost of living crisis as rotisserie chicken and protein shakes aren't cheap.
1/ Share of search has proven to be correlated to share of market, check the source at the bottom of my article. So the data is a fair indicator of that and it is not surprising that they are far behind the likes of Nike etc obvs.
2/ The centre of gravity of the piece is about growing the gym category and reaching more 'light buyers'/people who don't really buy Gymshark- so the point of Gymshark's customers not searching is irrelevant.
3/ "56% of consumers consider search results (on Google and other search engines) when making purchase decisions. Also: 63% of respondents said they use search engine results to learn about products they haven't purchased before."
I have worked on both Nike & Adidas myself. The issue Gymshark has is that they have failed to establish and stick with a long term brand platform. Further, they are failing to bring people into to the fold. Appealing to only current buyers is limiting.
Google Trends isn't a particularly good approximation of search volume. It's like trying to decide who won Le Mans by looking at change in acceleration data. It could be just be bad driving.
But you're right that if you have search volume data (from Google Ad Planner) as a proxy for share of voice works.
Agree on heavy vs. light users, I suspect Gymshark leans on heavier than normal users based in the ads I keep seeing.
I completely agree that Gymshark has yet to develop and stick with a consistent and truly ownable ‘brand platform’
I've heard whispers that agencies behind Nike have gotten tired of the Just Do It line, but I don't think they will ever bail from it. Which I believe gives Gym Shark an advantage.
There is one point you made that really stuck out to me which was about the need to attract light buyers.
As you know that is when things get dicey, but I think this is the exact lane they should drive down and drive fast and hard.
I also agree that strength is the way - After a looking into their socials, they dabble in a range of conversation starters, one or two explode.
But then they get weird an awkward and their engagement falls flat.
Their X posts are desperate which doesn't align with strength.
With all that to say, I don't believe their latest campaign is all that effective. They read as cheeky, but lack a big idea.
I've seen lots of chatter about this on LinkedIn and to be honest a lot of it is in support of it. However, I too had the initial 'argh' moment when i saw it and thought... that is *too* niche. It's a bit 'Gym bro'. In their first few years I would never wear GS because of this. The brand had a gym-goer-trying-too-hard aura about it. But slowly I've seen them broaden their appeal - I think Prince William has even been seen wearing it(!). I am totally with you, if it's scale their after, this will alienate many. But perhaps it's an attempt to tighten their 'brand belt'. Perhaps they feel it's become too diluted and this is their attempt to reclaim that original positioning? All depends what they're objectives are I guess.
And after all.. we're talking about it on forums and social media - which any brand team should see as a positive over people feeling 'indifferent' about it.
A great explanation of how in marketing, branding and business is highly and deeply connected. From a high-level pov into a deep dive and solution oriented blog, this shows the potential of branding and storytelling!
Interesting post, Will. Some thoughts:
- One issue I would point out is that looking at Trends isn't about absolute volume of searches, but rate of change in volume of searches. Which means that consideration of Google Trends data needs to be thought of carefully. If you have consistently high search volumes you can trend low. Your gains will be less from a proportional basis than even quite modest growth from a low base.
- Secondly, if you are Gymshark customer you are less likely to search for Gymshark, but might search for Gymshark shorts as a term to deep link into what you want.
- Search is no longer on the journey for social commerce, which is where Gymshark seems to have built up its audience and sales over time.
Having worked on New Balance in the past and had some experience in the space I have watched Gymshark with a certain amount of curiosity. Apart from the strong influencer and PR game in the UK at least, I don't understand what differentiates Gymahark from other brands like Under Armour, Ryderwear or Lu Lu Lemon?
I think that Lu Lu Lemon's strong retail game represents better penetration rather than a weakness, even against a DTC brand like Gymshark.
Buying direct on Amazon for good enough products works equally well for those people who will be concerned about the cost of living crisis as rotisserie chicken and protein shakes aren't cheap.
1/ Share of search has proven to be correlated to share of market, check the source at the bottom of my article. So the data is a fair indicator of that and it is not surprising that they are far behind the likes of Nike etc obvs.
2/ The centre of gravity of the piece is about growing the gym category and reaching more 'light buyers'/people who don't really buy Gymshark- so the point of Gymshark's customers not searching is irrelevant.
3/ "56% of consumers consider search results (on Google and other search engines) when making purchase decisions. Also: 63% of respondents said they use search engine results to learn about products they haven't purchased before."
I have worked on both Nike & Adidas myself. The issue Gymshark has is that they have failed to establish and stick with a long term brand platform. Further, they are failing to bring people into to the fold. Appealing to only current buyers is limiting.
Google Trends isn't a particularly good approximation of search volume. It's like trying to decide who won Le Mans by looking at change in acceleration data. It could be just be bad driving.
But you're right that if you have search volume data (from Google Ad Planner) as a proxy for share of voice works.
Agree on heavy vs. light users, I suspect Gymshark leans on heavier than normal users based in the ads I keep seeing.
Looking at their audience social search becomes increasingly prominent and I suspect your search consideration plays across that: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2024/03/11/genz-dumping-google-for-tiktok-instagram-as-social-search-wins/
I completely agree that Gymshark has yet to develop and stick with a consistent and truly ownable ‘brand platform’
I've heard whispers that agencies behind Nike have gotten tired of the Just Do It line, but I don't think they will ever bail from it. Which I believe gives Gym Shark an advantage.
There is one point you made that really stuck out to me which was about the need to attract light buyers.
As you know that is when things get dicey, but I think this is the exact lane they should drive down and drive fast and hard.
I also agree that strength is the way - After a looking into their socials, they dabble in a range of conversation starters, one or two explode.
But then they get weird an awkward and their engagement falls flat.
Their X posts are desperate which doesn't align with strength.
With all that to say, I don't believe their latest campaign is all that effective. They read as cheeky, but lack a big idea.
thoughts?
I worked on Nike...they are very much not ditching the strategy behind Just Do It. Thanks for the comment
Huh?
I've seen lots of chatter about this on LinkedIn and to be honest a lot of it is in support of it. However, I too had the initial 'argh' moment when i saw it and thought... that is *too* niche. It's a bit 'Gym bro'. In their first few years I would never wear GS because of this. The brand had a gym-goer-trying-too-hard aura about it. But slowly I've seen them broaden their appeal - I think Prince William has even been seen wearing it(!). I am totally with you, if it's scale their after, this will alienate many. But perhaps it's an attempt to tighten their 'brand belt'. Perhaps they feel it's become too diluted and this is their attempt to reclaim that original positioning? All depends what they're objectives are I guess.
And after all.. we're talking about it on forums and social media - which any brand team should see as a positive over people feeling 'indifferent' about it.
But there is the thing.
Strength would appeal to their community and a broader audience. Best of both worlds.
I was just about to point you to the recent Uncensored CMO episode then noticed you'd already heard it. Was a great listen.
I always do my homework ;)
This was a great read.
Hopefully shooting your shot works.
If not, hopefully it makes you stronger...
Share it on Linkedin...and tag some Gymshark people....lets see
A great explanation of how in marketing, branding and business is highly and deeply connected. From a high-level pov into a deep dive and solution oriented blog, this shows the potential of branding and storytelling!
Thanks Chris...i wonder what Gymshark will think...