Episode 94: A Conversation with Elizabeth Segran of Fast Company

Welcome to Skucast, the podcast for entrepreneurs in the promotional products industry. Skucast shines a light on our industry's best work, features maverick personalities, and discusses what's really involved in running a modern promotional products business. Skucast is the official podcast of Common Skew.

Many of you know that Fast Company magazine published an article entitled "It's Time to Stop Spending Billions on Cheap Conference Swag," written by Elizabeth Segran. We wrote a follow-up article entitled "Here's the Thing About That Piece on Swag by Elizabeth Segran: She's Right," and the article was even retweeted by Elizabeth herself, saying it was a thoughtful response. This open and receptive dialogue led to our invitation to ask Elizabeth to join us for a further discussion about the topic, and she agreed. Elizabeth is a staff writer for Fast Company, and her work has appeared in The Atlantic, The New Republic, Salon, and more. This episode is brought to you by Commenscue, the platform that powers your connected workflow, enabling you to process more orders and dramatically grow your sales. 2019 is your year. Don't delay, start it right. Begin your free trial now at commenscue.com. And now I'm joined by Mark Graham, Commenscue's co-founder and chief platform officer, as we chat with Elizabeth. I began the discussion with a broader introduction to her work to provide our listeners some context. Elizabeth received her PhD from the University of California, Berkeley in the field of South and Southeast Asian Studies with a designated emphasis in women, gender, and sexuality. She's an expert on India, has devoted a decade to studying history, its history, literature, culture, and gender dynamics. And where Elizabeth is really— Elizabeth, correct me if I'm wrong— is really making a dent in the world in terms of slow fashion versus fast fashion. Articles like the Made in America movement driven by innovation, not nationalism, Elizabeth has written the article, The Decline of Premium American Fashion Brands, What Happened to Ralph and Tommy, How to Build a Feminist Workplace. I want to quote from one of your articles, Elizabeth. Fashion is a $2.4 trillion global sector that hires 70 million people worldwide and is the second biggest polluter after the oil industry. And yes, we're drowning in clothes. Setting foot in an H&M or Old Navy means wading through racks of cheaply made stuff that will be replaced with new looks next week. How could a split-second decision to buy a t-shirt from one brand over the other do anything to move the needle? And I'm continuing to quote from this article, but as a fashion reporter, I'm seeing some big consumer-led trends that are sweeping the industry thanks to our collective decision to affect change. We're telling brands to stop treating clothes like they're disposable, cut down on pollution, and treat their workers with more dignity, and they're listening. So I wanted to provide our listeners some broader context to the great work you're doing. And then my question is, how did this particular article come about?

As you've noted, I have been thinking a lot about the impact that our purchasing behavior has on the world. And as a fashion journalist, I think a lot about the clothes that we buy and the impact that that has on the world in terms of how quickly they land in landfills and how much energy it takes to make something that we so quickly just throw away. And I go to a lot of conferences as a journalist. I need to keep my finger on the pulse of what's happening in multiple industries. So I regularly attend conferences. And it was such an obvious parallel that I have been writing against the trend of fast fashion for a while, as you mentioned. And the concept of swag is basically a very, very close parallel to fast fashion in that, you know, it has to be from my perspective, as somebody who receives a lot of it at these events, it's inexpensively made, it's not necessarily designed to be used for a long time. And I don't just mean like a tote bag that, you know, like even among some of the better quality tote bags that you might get at an event, you know, the goal isn't to give somebody something that they will use for the next 20 years, right? Like that's kind of the standard I'm trying to have the industry move towards, you know, having really, really durable products that will last decades. And cut down just the sheer amount of consumption. And there just is very little in the world of conference swag that aspires to that level of longevity, I think. And in fact, most of it, like the most of the stuff that I get seems to be downright disposable, right? Like, you know, it's so poorly made that it seems like the main point of it is just to have the person who receives it have a little bit more brand recognition about whatever company has splashed their name on it. It seems like that's the real purpose of that product. The product itself is not durable. A lot of the time it doesn't work very well, like pens, for instance. I mean, how many of us have been to conferences where the pens are so bad that the ink is all dried up or whatever, right? But the point of that pen was not to give you a writing instrument that you would use for like 10 years. The point of that was just that you would remember the name of the bank or the institution on it. And so to me, that seems like it's so wasteful, particularly given the fact that we know that, you know, our planet is in the middle of a major crisis right now. There's, you know, all this news about climate change and its devastating effects on all of us. There has to be a better way. And if the point of that product was just to get your attention and drive brand recognition towards that brand, then perhaps there are other ways to do that that don't involve creating garbage, basically.

Elizabeth, what kind of feedback did you receive from the article?

The article did very, very well. It got shared by a lot of people. A lot of people agreed with me. A lot of consumers of swag products at events totally agreed with me and said that they have boxes of things that they got at these events that they never used, that there has to be a better way, that they feel guilty taking this stuff or having it in their homes because it reminds them of the waste that they have, you know, that they have sort of brought into their homes, things like that. A lot of people agreed with that. Of course, I also had feedback from people in the industry who had some very interesting things to say, to be perfectly honest. There were a lot of people who talked about how there are some brands in the industry that are actually trying to create eco-friendly versions of their products, or there are brands that are working really hard to create more durable versions of the product. And I, you know, I understand that. I think that that's definitely moving things forward in a positive way. I think that, you know, we're still fundamentally talking about different things, right? Because my bottom line is, is that, you know, Americans and, you know, and people in the, in the developed world, we are just consuming way too much stuff, like just in general, every day. We are throwing out tons and tons of garbage every day and it's ending up in landfills. It takes so much energy to make this stuff, the plastics and the cotton bags and all of this stuff. It takes so much energy to make these things. And then we just, we throw them out within a few days. And my, you know, my starting point is, you know, what can we do to reduce consumption in general? Not just consume more eco-friendly products. I mean, that's definitely a step forward, but what if we just What can we be doing to live as minimalistically as possible? That's my starting point.

The industry itself is a $23, $24 billion industry, and yet there's this market that you tap into actually in a larger span with fashion, but there's a market itself that might include band merchandise or other types of merchandise as well. And I think most of the people, at least maybe, Mark, this is our hyper progressive-minded distributors and customers and the people that we hang with and work with generally were opposed to the idea of buying thinking and selling disposably. In the long run, what is better for the planet is actually better for our clients when you look at pairing and doing the right thing. Like all along the supply chain, there is this culpability from buyers to sellers to makers, and there's yet there's this distinction between the market and the industry. And one of the interesting things about it too is that all of us hate being handed an ad that we didn't want. We talk about this from the positive side within the industry. We talk about this being a multidimensional tactile product that people have an intimate connection to. And it's true with brands we love. So for example, you cited the New Yorker tote bag right at the beginning of your article. So you set the tone that, hey, there are brands that I love that get the connection and make the connection happen. And I guess my question here is more around, as a journalist, from your viewpoint, you even have brands you love that you would encourage and challenge in terms of building more sustainable products or using more sustainable products. But I wonder if part of the disconnect with all of our frustration with this swag is that we are not emotionally connected at all to some of these brands that we touch.

Totally. I think it's about the emotional connection. I also think it's about choice because with the New Yorker tote bag that I love, I actually have two of them now. I resubscribed to the New Yorker so I could have another one because I was using my tote bag so frequently, right? And it was, you know, like after like using it for 5 years, it was like disgusting and dirty and like developing holes. And so I wanted another one just as a backup, but I chose it. It cost me, I mean, I was paying for The New Yorker, it came with a subscription. So there was some transactional, you know, some monetary transaction involved, but also, you know, I chose it and as a result, I used it a lot. So in some ways it was similar to any other sort of purchase that I might make, you know, for something that I felt like I needed and that I delighted in it because, you know, I love getting The New Yorker every week and reading it in its reflected something about me. I bought brand merch before, you know, my favorite band Minus the Bear recently decided that they were, that they were retiring. And so I went to their concert and I bought a t-shirt that reminded me of the band. It was probably one of the last ones that would come out. And I'm planning to wear that a lot. It's not the fact that it's branded, I think that's the issue. It's about products that the consumer is choosing rather than something that the consumer is just kind of getting that they didn't necessarily need.

Paul Bellantone, he's the chairman of the $24 billion industry. You know, he— I'm quoting him from an article he wrote after you published your article. Most modern promotional products are designed to be useful, practical, and enjoyable. Their shelf life is far more extensive than meets the eye. For example, the flimsy totes we receive at conferences have become more and more useful with the adoption of plastic bag bans that are rolling out in states across the US. Many consumers have made them an essential part of their everyday lives. Mark and I are really passionate about this, just so you know, about tapping into the emotional connection that we can make happen, just like your experience with Minus the Bear. And so because Mark and I have seen this countless number of times for the brands that we work for and work with, this is possible, and it's what the best in the business actually do on a day-to-day basis for sure.

But I do think that the idea of choosing to get something from a brand that you love. I mean, so sure, the monetary component reflects how I value the product. You know, I paid money for that Minus the Virtue. You know, I worked to get that New Yorker tote bag. All of that is signaling that I have an emotional connection to this brand and I want to have this swag because it reflects something about who I am and what I like and so on. So I agree with all of what you're saying. I just think that Basically like throwing something in somebody's face, right? As you're describing, which is what commonly happens at these events, is very different from like having a situation where you're, you know, you're creating products, you're asking your consumer in some way to work for it in some small way, whether that's to like actually purchase the product or to, you know, to ask for it. It's a way of sort of like signaling choice, right? And I think that that's ultimately the difference. It's not just about creating better quality products and creating useful products. It's also not giving somebody something that they really don't want or need. It's giving the consumer the ability to be part of that process and say, "Actually, I really love this brand. I would really like this." Yeah.

You're talking about untargeted, undifferentiated product that people have an apathetic attitude toward. We're with you 100%.

Yeah. And Elizabeth, I think if we look at this in the context of the advertising industry, what you're talking about with this undifferentiated, untargeted piece of swag that's been foisted upon you from booth 1022 from some insurance company you don't care about, that that's exactly the same thing as you receiving a cold call at 7 o'clock when you're trying to have dinner with your family.

Totally, totally. And it's even worse because you get a cold call and that like takes, takes time and attention away from something that you'd rather be doing. But I know that not everybody is as passionate about the environment as I am, but I think that people are increasingly going to be more conscious about these things as more and more of these climate reports come out. And you don't want to feel culpable for something that you didn't choose, right? You don't want to feel culpable for owning a craft that you did not really ask for. And I think that to me, that's part of it. It's like, you know, I don't want to be part of something that I didn't choose, especially something that's so problematic and negative for the environment.

I feel like there's a really interesting irony and a tension that's happening here in this overall conversation, and it's one between getting crap that has not been differentiated or specifically designed for the end customer, or an end customer that has not been emotionally or financially invested in the transaction, and products that have been designed with a clear purpose in mind. I think where the tension is, is that when the product has been well designed. So we're just using this example, this New Yorker tote. Think about how many plastic bags you have saved from a landfill over the last 5 years because of that New Yorker. Think of the impact on the New Yorker's bottom line when, as you say, I confess that I canceled and resubscribed to the New Yorker just so that I could get a new version of the tote that comes with membership. That kind of stuff is incredible. You could argue that the New Yorker tote and the promotional products industry in that particular case has benefited the environment. So you've got this like home run case on one hand, but yet there's a counterbalance with the junk that is being handed out by end clients and maybe suppliers and distributors that are not really thinking strategically and creatively about the end use of that product, which as, as you argue, ultimately goes into a landfill. And I think that tension between Maybe the good, like the really good of our industry and the arguably maybe not so good part of the industry is what we're trying to figure out here.

You're right. That's like a win-win-win situation on three fronts, right? Like the brand, The New Yorker, is winning. I'm winning because I get this thing that I really want and reflects part of who I am. You know, I definitely have saved, you know, plastic bags because of it. I would say though that you quoted somebody else talking about how giving away these reusable bags is like somehow good for the environment. I mean, sure. You know, like if somebody actually keeps a bunch of these bags that they get at conferences in the back of their car and takes it with them when they go grocery shopping, that's great. But I suspect that a proportion of people actually don't, right? I think that a proportion of people will get these bags because they're not, they don't want to be necessarily associated with the brand or because the bag was poorly made. Because I mean, you're in this industry, you know how many plastic quote unquote reusable bags are actually pieces of crap, right? I mean, you know, like it's not always going to be used for that purpose. It's a nice idea, but like in practice, it might be just as bad for the environment, probably worse for the environment than a plastic bag that you'd get at a grocery store. So my point is that like, I think we got to be a little bit careful about assuming what the consumer will take out of that. That product and instead give them a choice about whether to take the product in the first place and then assume that like once they've purchased the product, you know, we don't really know what they're going to do with it. I mean, you know, they might deposit it with a bunch of like, you know, 500 other tote bags that they're collecting, which is also just not for the environment, right? I would just expect a little bit of caution from that.

I think what's interesting as an industry insider, I am going to make an assumption about some of the promotional products that you have received from NPR and New Yorker. I know those were two brands that you specifically said you have an emotional connection with, you love their product, you feel great about it, and they're in the home run side of this, uh, side of this conversation. What's interesting, as someone who, who has sold a lot of these products, if you were to go into that tote bag and read out the label of that, I would probably recognize the manufacturer of that brand, which is likely sold by many, many distributors to many, many end clients. And what— where the irony of this is, is that that same bag may have been foisted upon you with a kind of a crappy logo that you didn't really care about and you weren't invested in that emotional financial way. There's a bit of an irony in there that the only difference between those products was the context in which you received it, as well as the fact that you were less invested in that transaction. So I'm making an assumption there, but I would imagine the NPR and the New Yorker product line is really, really cool. But what makes it cool is actually the branding and the design and maybe the product may almost be secondary because the products in this industry are so ubiquitous.

I think that's true. I would also point out that New Yorker tote bag that I have is a very durable tote bag and it's pretty well made. I don't know where it was made. It was likely made, you know, in India or China. You know, I don't know. It was durable. I mean, it certainly does point to this like larger issue that I also have, which is that in so many of these cases, I imagine that since the product is gonna be given away for free and it's, you know, and it's a marketing product and the goal is to get it to as many people as possible, then trying to make the product ethically or with the best quality materials isn't necessarily, you know, always the goal. There are lots of exceptions to this. In a lot of the swag that I'm getting, you know, it's very, very poorly made and it inevitably says made in China or made in Bangladesh on the inside. My only issue there is that as I've reported, there's a lot of environmental impact. There's also a lot of human impact in a lot of these supply chains. And I'm sure the swag industry is not on its own here. I mean, almost every home in the United States is filled with products that are made in factories that don't treat workers well. And that's just a problem. But I would make the case that when you're, you know, when you're making essentially disposable products, so like fast fashion clothing, or, you know, cheap, cheap swag that is designed to be disposable, basically, you know, after you use it maybe 2 or 3 times, The treatment of the workers who made that product is not high on the list of priorities in the manufacturing process, I think. And to me, that's really, really problematic. As for my New Yorker tote, it's very likely or possible that, you know, it was made in a factory whose human rights record isn't great. I don't know. I would say that, you know, that is something that we need to be thinking about.

Absolutely. I'm curious, Elizabeth, what else you have learned in your work with fast fashion versus slow fashion. That we can apply to this business? In many ways, one of the reasons we love having you is because of your extensive knowledge, your research, and your reporting in the industry. Because in the $24 billion promotional products industry, over 30%, just over 30% is apparel, which is a cross-section between the fashion world that you research. What else have you learned that we can apply to our supply chain through your work in fast fashion versus slow fashion?

I think that there's a couple of interesting trends happening. One is that we're seeing that among millennials and Gen Z to a certain extent, there is a shift now in terms of what consumers are looking for. Fast fashion was certainly a huge trend and people loved the idea of getting fashionable products for very cheap. That seems to be waning. All of these fast fashion brands that are well-known, like H&M and Zara, are losing market share. They're not doing very well financially. They're still huge businesses, don't get me wrong. But they're, you know, over the last couple of years, their sales have been in a bit of a slump. It seems that consumers are now shifting in terms of what they want. On the other hand, there's been a push towards getting, you know, higher quality goods that are more durable and are more classic. So think about brands like, like Everlane is a good example of this, right? Where Everlane is still making products that are relatively affordable. I mean, they're not as cheap because, you know, they care more about the supply chain. Consumers like this idea of getting fewer but better things that will last a long, long time. That seems to be a trend. And it seems like, you know, because of Everlane's success and because of other brands like it, this is becoming more and more of a trend. There's also a huge and growing awareness of the impact of Fashion on the environment. I've certainly written about it, but I'm also responding to trends that are happening on the ground because, you know, consumers themselves are conscious about this and want to buy products that they can be proud of because they're not, you know, having a negative impact on the environment. So this is what consumers seem to be wanting. This seems to be the direction in which we're going. And like the best products, it seems like, are products that are durable, that are classic, that are well-made, that are well-designed, but that are also not absurdly expensive. And so there are all these companies that are working to try and make goods that hit all these boxes, right? So I think that this is like intimately connected to our feelings about the swag industry, because I just think that as consumers become more aware and as consumers stop going to places like H&M to buy a $5 t-shirt, that sentiment and the feelings that they have about and the choices that they're making there are going to affect them when they, when they think about the shirt that they picked up at like a college fair, right? If they're, if they're thinking through all of the negative feelings they have about going into an H&M and buying that cheap t-shirt, I'm sure that, that those negative sentiments are going to come up when they're looking at other products that are, you know, in the same universe.

Yeah. What are some of the big brand retailers that you respect that are hyper-conscious about the supply chain?

So I would, I would definitely say Everlane. You know, Everlane has been in the industry for a while now, and on their website, they basically describe the conditions in the factories that they make their products. And their products aren't all made in America or Italy or in European markets, where there are strong regulations around workers. In some cases they are going to China, you know, and other places, but they're just extremely conscious about how workers are being treated. They're involved in all of that. So the answer isn't necessarily to make products in inexpensive factories, but it is, it is like being aware of what's going on on that front. I would also like to highlight another brand, American Giant, which has invested heavily in the American supply chain. So they try and get their cotton from North Carolina. And they have factories in several parts of the country where they make all of their products and they make things like hoodies and t-shirts. They're really good. My husband like doesn't ever shop and likes to own things for like, I don't know, 15 years at a time. And he, this Christmas, he put two American Giant things on his Christmas list, which is like shocking because he's like, doesn't, he doesn't feel a strong affinity for clothing brands. But anyway, He supports the values of this company. But anyway, it was interesting because so they make their products here in the US, but they're not really doing it out of patriotism. I mean, this isn't about like Made in America for the sake of like hiring American workers, although that is certainly a benefit, you know, like supporting the communities where these products are made. The founder just wants to make the best darn hoodie that he could possibly make, a hoodie that will last your whole life, you know, and, and that is great. And he just feels that if he makes it here in the US, he has a lot more control over the quality of the product and he can tweak the design of the product along the way rather than placing an enormous order for something in China. People are fiercely loyal to this brand and the products are not hugely expensive. So these are some companies that are doing things really, really well. If there was a product that was durable and made by a company that had these kinds of values and it was connected to a brand that I love, I would just like totally dig that product. You know, that would be something I would love to have.

You're also pointing out the transparency in the supply chain, making that crystal clear to the consumer. Because it's very interesting to me too that we often get tripped up on a quantity versus quality issue when there are companies manufacturing in this industry that have incredible regulations and are incredibly respectful all along supply chain. So it's not necessarily a quality versus quantity conversation.

Something just came to my mind, which was a real light bulb moment, that we in the four walls of the promotional products industry talk a lot about how distributors can add value to the sale and how distributors can maximize margin and how distributors can get away from the commodity sale. Okay, so Elizabeth, these are the things that people in the business of promotional products stress about a lot. There's a lot of us. Differentiation is a real challenge. You know, how do you separate one swag seller from the other? What you just said in your past comment there is this idea that if a brand, and I would say by extension a distributor, can advise a brand that's buying promotional products, if they can get all these factors right, selling a product that stands for something, how that aligns with the end client, because that's what you are, Elizabeth, in our, in our world. You're the end client of the end client. You're the recipient of the product. If all those things are in alignment, then now that distributor who goes to NPR or to The New Yorker or who knows, Joe's Plumbing, let's say, an unlikely brand that's going to be all that cool and can do this and understand how the products align with the values of the end client and understand this idea of emotional connection, then that's that true win-win-win, which for a distributor means that they have now separated themselves from the competition. They're able to charge a responsible margin and have a responsible business. So all of this stuff actually comes back full circle. And why wouldn't you want to do this? Why, why wouldn't you want to spend the extra time in selling the right product? Because your marketing buyer is going to love you, because Elizabeth Segren, who got the product at the trade show, is going to go, I love this product, and you're probably going to go renew your subscription to The New Yorker or go and purchase plumbing from Joe's Plumbing and everyone really wins there. So that's a real message to our industry.

I mean, I think that hurdle here is just like the price of making that product. I mean, so like American Giant and Everlane are charging a slightly higher price point than fashion because it just takes a little bit more money to ensure that the supply chain is better and people are getting paid okay. These are not outrageously expensive products. They're just, more than we're used to, you know, when we've spent our whole lives, you know, buying crap basically. So, you know, like a shirt from Everlane might be $30 instead of like, you know, $5 or $10 from H&M or whatever. I do think that it would, it would have to take a little bit of like kind of a paradigm shift for a brand to do what you're talking about, just in the sense that like, you know, if it costs a little bit more to make that piece of swag, maybe you're making a little bit less of it on, you know, the marketing budget that you have. And if that's the case, maybe, you know, your expectations need to be a little bit different where, you know, you're not just like throwing it at people who may just put it in the trash when you get home because that seems like a waste of whatever amount that you paid for that item, which is not negligible at this point. Maybe what you're doing is you're, you know, inviting customers to ask for it or like to get it when they give you their email address or something like that where you kind of have to change how you think about that product if you're paying a little bit more for it.

I've got one Last comment, and then, and then I'll let Elizabeth, you and Bobby have the last word. But maybe my last comment here is to end on a positive note and information for you, Elizabeth, about a very fast-growing and dynamic segment of the promotional products industry. That segment of the industry are these creative agency-oriented distributors and then these more, I would say, premium, either domestically made suppliers. So I'm going to give you a couple of examples. So there's a company called Fair Wear that is in British Columbia in Canada that is an eco-friendly and sustainable promotional products agency, and they advise brands like Patagonia and Ben Jerry's for sustainable produced products, and they're able to charge a premium and they're doing wonderful work there. That's really the envy of a lot of people in the industry. There's two other brands. Again, you wouldn't know them because they're on the supply side, but one called Redwood Classics. That's a made-in-Canada brand that charges significantly more than, say, a Fruit of the Loom or a Gildan shirt because they're making the product all in Toronto. What's interesting about their positioning is they know they're a premium. They're like American Giant in that respect, and business is off the charts for them. There's another manufacturer called Numo that's down in just south of Dallas in Texas where they make Tote bags. They may in fact have been the manufacturer of the New Yorker tote bag. We should ask you afterwards to look in the label. The majority of their line, and Bobby and I toured their factory a little while ago, is made right in the US, which actually gives them a turnaround of production advantage. From a pricing perspective, they know they are not interested at all in competing with the cheap import tote. They're not in that market, but the market that they're in absolutely growing like gangbusters, and they're the envy of the industry. So that's exciting. I think as we look 5, 10 years out, that the spotlight is really on these interesting agency-oriented, I think very thoughtful companies that are doing really great work, as opposed to the ones that are just, you know, throwing out junk. Now that's a very general comment, but I can tell you that based on being within the industry, that the real focus is starting to shift towards this exciting segment.

Yeah. And I've even seen people like, for instance, Patagonia, which we all know is like a very ethical brand. I've seen actually several companies partner with a brand like Patagonia to make vests or hoodies or, you know, whatever as swag, essentially. The only reason I bring that up is because Patagonia as a manufacturer, as a clothing provider, is a brand that people can get behind. So it's basically like kind of aligning two brands together. And I think that as brands like the ones that you're talking about, or companies and manufacturers and suppliers like that you're talking about, prove that they are also value-driven companies, then it becomes almost like a partnership between the brand that's trying to make the swag and the supplier, right?

Yes, yes. You know, I was having dinner with Jim Martin, the president at Numo, and as Mark referenced them, there are 1,000 employees down in Texas and they have a factory in Mexico as well. And I asked him what he was most proud of. He was most proud of— in our industry, they have some very creative, fashion-forward product designs. They've done some brilliant work, but he's most proud of the richness they can bring to the lives of their employees. I was just so floored and stunned and happy that that was his response, that he loved the ecosystem they support and that it was, at the end of the day, it was about enriching people's lives. The fact that we get the opportunity to do this through product, I think it's a beautiful part of our business.

Totally. So I have a question for you guys. It's kind of the— as a last— what do you guys think of maybe pivoting in some ways from branded products to branded experiences? I mean, this is something that I, you know, I was talking about in the, in the story, and I mean, I, I still think that it takes work to package an experience in a branded way. Um, so I was thinking of like, you know, I went to a conference where they were back rubs or manicures. There was one at one conference where, you know, they basically brought in a team of manicurists to help women with their nails before the event. There are different creative ways that you can do this, but in each of these cases, I think what made it a great branded experience was that, you know, the whole thing was packaged so that you left remembering that brand. And I think that that probably takes a lot of work and your industry is probably the best industry to help with that kind of thing.

I love the idea because we have been in the branded experience business our entire careers. That's what we're trying to affect through product is that same emotional connection. However, I, I know what you're saying, and I don't think it's an either-or proposition. I absolutely love the idea of branded experiences and really what a promotional consultant or trusted advisor does with their clients is actually advise them on the best experiences for the return on their investment. And I'm not talking just through products. So you actually have this happening in our industry, Elizabeth, where you're seeing folks partner with the total experience and not just solely spending that budget through swag only. So it's happening already and has been actually for years, but I just don't think it's an either or. In fact, the other aspect too is when you think about as much as we want to, and I'm this way too, live minimalist lives, at the end of the day, we're still people who love tactile, the objects in our lives that have meaning. And so I don't think we should treat it as an either or, but, but we certainly should be respectful of the fact that that is what people want, and we should do that through product as well.

Two quick things. So I know that South by Southwest tried a digital swag bag a couple of years ago, and the feedback that I recall when I was following this on social media is that there was a surprising level of disappointment that people weren't walking out with cool gear. So I'm just stating the facts there. I'm sure there were other people that loved it. So there was that. And I forget the name of the marketing manager at The New Yorker that I think, Bobby, you had invoked in your article, but it would actually be interesting to ask this year for our branded experience, we're going to do something that's digital. We're not going to do the tote bags. We're not going to do the t-shirts that are beloved. Been beloved in the past. What do you think about that? My suspicion is that what he would say is, love the idea of branded experiences, but now the New Yorker is not going to be in the hearts and minds of our customers going forward. Because if it's a manicure experience, then they're going to love that for that afternoon, but then they're going to remember it, but then it's not going to be with them. That's my guess as to what they would say. And I think that's where we then end up in this circular argument. And I think the way out of it is to make sure that we're challenging everyone in all levels of the supply chain to think in terms— like, the high bar is the New Yorker tote bag and designing product that gets used time and time again and is not wasteful and is contributing positively to the marketing conversation but also positively to the environment.

That's my sense. Totally. Yeah, no, I agree. I hope that people are inspired to do more of that and less of just the straight-up crap.

Elizabeth, thank you for your time.

Elizabeth, thank you so much.

Thank you so much, guys. I really appreciate this conversation.

Thanks so much for tuning in to this episode of SkewCast. Be sure to keep up with our latest content by subscribing to SkewCast on iTunes or to our blog at community.comandskew.com. Com. Until next time, friends, thanks so much for listening.