As I developed a cold over the weekend, my sense of smell is greatly diminished. I was therefore not able to pick out many nuances in the aromas of the breads.
The first bread I tried was the French bread. It had a hard crust with a dense interior, and a light, soft smell. The flavor was not very strong, but had an excellent 'bread' taste. for lack of a better descriptor. The bread was just slightly sweet. This turned out to be my favorite bread, as the texture and flavor were both very enjoyable.
Next I tried the whole grain bread. This bread also had a hard crust and dense interior, although this bread was more dense than the French bread. However, I did not like the whole grain as much because the smoothness of the interior of the bread was broken up by some crunchier material. I think it was nuts, but it could have been grains. I was surprised by the flavor - usually I don't like the flavor of whole grain breads very much, but this bread was very rich and didn't taste like health food.
Third, I tried the sourdough bread. The smell was a little bit sharp. The density was intermediate compared to the other two, and again there was a distinct, hard crust. The bread appeared to have more hole in it than the whole grain bread. The flavor, sadly, was not very strongly that of a sourdough bread, which is to say, the bread was not very sour.
Then we moved on to trying some pastries. I was a big fan of the croissant, which was very buttery and flaky, a little sweet, and soft and chewy in texture. In my way of thinking, it was a perfect croissant.
Finally, I had an almond Danish. As an aside, I don't like Danishes any more. I used to, but in 2008the summer camp I worked at got shut down due to E. Coli. The staff were not allowed to leave, and as the source of the E. Coli had not been identified, we (the staff) were forced to survive on prepackaged Smuckers PB&J sandwiches and Danishes for a week. So, back to Danishes. I tried the almond Danish, and was surprised at how good it was. The texture was wonderful - thick and fluffy. The pastry was sweetened excellently. Still, I don't really like almond flavoring, so I didn't really like the pastry.
-----------
Smell marketing is certainly effective. I have bought food for this reason before. Specifically, I have bought a Soft Pretzel from Auntie Anne's before - this company certainly benefits from having a strong smell presence in the mall.
I also hear from my sister, who is going to a culinary arts school, that they deliberately pump the smells from their bakeries into the streets outside. As they are not on an isolated campus, but rather in a downtown urban area, this is an effective strategy for driving purchases.
What about non-food items? I know stores such as Hollister strive very hard to maintain a certain scent - but I am not sure this actually makes people want to buy stuff, or if it's just a 'hip' thing to do.
Although I was aware of scent marketing, I am surprised by its scope - both the breadth of non-food applications and the availability of scent systems to spread a specific scent.
In terms of ethics, I think it is alright as long as the chemicals causing the scent are not harmful in the quantities in which they get inhaled. In terms of the Hard Rock Hotel, for example, is it safe for guests to stay in the hotel for several days? And what about employees that work there? I know that the 'new car smell,' for example, was shown to be unhealthy.
Also, what if the scent is perceived as gross? I don't really enjoy smelling that fry scent of McDonald's, but maybe other people do. But if I lived next to Cinnabon store, I might be very pleased. The problem with banning 'gross' smells is that people have different sensitivities and preferences. Maybe there is some maximum amount of smell that could be generated compared to the property of the establishment.
I think that consumers are ultimately responsible for their actions. Understanding that scent marketing is occurring helps diminish the effects of scent marketing. Furthermore, although scents create responses before we are truly aware of them, I do not see this as fundamentally different from other forms of advertising. Advertising, as a whole, exists to tweak our mentalities. Sure, scent marketing might be a little more extreme, but society has already decided that advertising is acceptable.
Marketers attempt to reinforce the brand image of a store. So, for example, they play pop music in a trendy store.
Istanbul's Grand Bazaar is effective due to it's visual appeal, its appeal to smell, and the ability to taste products. I think visually modern stores are already appealing, although decreasing packaging dramatically seemed to work well in Istanbul. Tasting products depends on the type of product being sold, but already in malls or even at Meijer there is regularly an employee giving out samples of food. In modern supermarkets the appeal to smell is largely untapped, but I suspect that will change.
Lush is successful because it has implemented these lessons in order to appeal to the customer.
Stores can target specific demographics based on the specific sounds they play and scents they use. Research must go in to determining what, specifically, fits the demographic most successfully.
Slow music encourages shoppers to slow down, while bright displays entice the shopper to come nearer. Thus, a display in the back of a store can help shoppers linger. Seating areas also play a role in helping people stay longer.
In regards to the Forum in Las Vegas, it's not just designed to cause the consumer to lose track of time. Based on personal experience, it's actually quite hard to leave the Forum - clever usage of one-way escalators and disorienting angles makes it akin to the Minotaur's Labyrinth. Finally, when you do escape, there are advertisements for things to go do right away.
No comments:
Post a Comment