« Hotel Le Bleu Reviews Trickle In Restaurant Sorrell Closing? »
December 4, 2007
In Brooklyn, Brand Value Outpacing Real Estate
Even if Brooklyn's condo prices are no longer skyrocketing, the value of its brand still is, according to a recent piece in the NY Press. Check it:
I was having lunch yesterday with someone from a prominent Brooklyn cultural institution and he admitted that he now gets requests to collaborate with his arts organization simply because they're located in Brooklyn. "We think it would be great to do something with you guys," he's been told. "We'd really like to have BROOKLYN associated with our name. It'll look great on the poster." Isn't it grand how quickly a borough can become a brand?
This anecdote comes as no surprise to us. Do you think there's the risk of overexposure to the brand, though? Might there be brand fatigue at some point and, God forbid, a backlash?
The Brooklyn Brand to Expand [NY Press]
Photo by Dan Cox
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/3114
Comments
Brooklyn has always been a brand. For many years it represented something that wasn't very palatable to the rest of the country. Now it's got something else going on. It's definitely a trend, but a city can ride a trend to a new place and build from there, or it can get taken for a ride. Hope there's no backlash, but it's probably inevitable.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 10:17 AM
Funny how "bridge and tunnel" and "718" just don't have the sting they had in 1987....
Posted by: Rehab at December 4, 2007 10:34 AM
Did anyone see the ad on TV for the new Ford car (called the Edge), where youngins leave the bright light big city of manhattan for dinner at Marlow and Sons (but they need to use their GPS to get there)?
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 10:38 AM
If 35 years is quick - then yes it is amazing how quick;
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 10:41 AM
Along these lines, I've found something interesting over the past few years. In my general socio-economic group (gentrifiers), there's a clear borough-based trend in how people identify where they live:
Brooklyn residents, when asked where they live, will respond "Brooklyn" first, and then clarify with a neighborhood afterwards, if asked.
Residents of a certain other borough invariably respond with the neighborhood first: "oh, I live in [Jackson Heights, Long Island City, Astoria]." It appears that nobody lives in "Queens."
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 10:48 AM
I've lived in Brooklyn for 25 years and can attest to the Bridge and Tunnel stigma that used to exist. Now it's cool to live here. Brooklyn is too big to experience an overall backlash... do you think immigrants will no longer want to live here because it's overexposed? Hipsters, possibly, after they've all been displaced to Canarsie.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 10:53 AM
I think most who live in Park Slope would say neighborhood first before Brooklyn.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 10:57 AM
One of the great draws of Brooklyn was that it was affordable to regular working folks.
That is why it was so stigmatized by the Manhattan elites. It is no longer affordable and how hip it really is depends on who you ask.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:04 AM
Park Slopers, DUMBOites, and Brooklyn Heights-types tend to all say the neighborhood first rather than "Brooklyn" first (though I guess with BH, that's semi-semantic; my point is that in the Heights, they'll tend to say BH rather than just Brooklyn).
I think the explanation of this is pretty simple - these are established and or well-known areas; if you tell an UWS person you live in Fort Greene, they may or may not know where that is. But by now, everyone knows where the Slope is.
Queens, on the other hand, is so friggin' huge, that neighborhood identification is key.
On a related point, Queens residents tend to put their neighborhood on their postal addresses, and the postal service delivers to them just fine. In Brooklyn, you tend to just see the boro name used on mailing addresses. All this begs the question - why does Manhattan have a monopoly on the "New York" in their mailing address? It's supposed to be city, not county (or else it would be Kings in Brooklyn).
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:09 AM
It used to be that the distance from Manhattan to Brooklyn was much greater than the reverse. No more, I'm glad to say!
Posted by: Bob Marvin at December 4, 2007 11:11 AM
What does condo prices in the borough have anything to do with this topic? Just another gratuitous shot? Try: 'Now that Brooklyn's brownstone and pre-war apartment building prices are no longer skyrocketing...'
B'stoner, your prejudice-pushing is like listening to a monkey banging on a piano.
And no, I'm neither a broker nor a condo owner.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:15 AM
as to mailing address - why manhattan has 'monopoly' is historical reasons. But really doesnt matter much what you put down - could put Palm Beach, NY and as long as zip code is correct will be deliverd.
Thing that annoys me most is the NY TIMES.
They insist on Fort Green, Brooklyn or Cobble Hill, Brooklyn anytime in any article.
It is never Greenwich Village, Manhattan or Soho, Manhattan. Just Soho or Greenwich Village.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:19 AM
Well, I've always first said, when asked, that we live in Fort Greene.
These days, it seems most Manhattanites have at the least a vague idea of where or what FG is. Heck, the NYT does an article on Fort Greene every two seconds for G's sake.
And to that person who returns a blank stare, I quickly append a "you know, Fort Greene, near BAM" (BTW, speaking of "branding"!).
Doesn't anyone remember the "Welcome to Brooklyn" sign on the bridge in the series "Taxi" opening credits?
Brooklyn has been a "brand" in some form or another since the 1800s...once sold for its fresh air and beaches!
FG/TheGrammarLady
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:19 AM
I have lived in Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope and except when talking to fellow Brooklynites - I always say Brooklyn to the question of where I live and so does most everyone I know.
While I am sure the class warfare people here will continue to have other theories, I think the fact that postal addresses in Queens are by 'Town' (i.e. Astoria, Flushing, etc..) rather then by Boro/City - (i.e. Brooklyn, Bronx, NY) plays a MUCH bigger part in this then anything else
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:28 AM
"why does Manhattan have a monopoly on the "New York" in their mailing address? "
I suspect it's more tradition than anything else, dating back to before the consolidation of New York (AKA" the mistake of 1898") .Brooklyn was a separate city. Queens was a collection of towns.
The Bronx OTOH has been part of New York City much longer than the Long Island boroughs; it used to be common for Bronx mail to be addresssed to New York, NY.
AFAIK it's still common for older Staten Island neighborhoods to use their name PLUS Staten Island in their mailing address (i.e. St. George, Staten Island, NY).
I think a letter addressed to " *** Carrol Street, New York, NY 11215" would get there, but it would look funny.
Posted by: Bob Marvin at December 4, 2007 11:30 AM
11:09 AM Those aren't neighborhoods, they were towns before the great incorporation.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:35 AM
Whoops--it'd probably still get there , even though I mis-spelled Carroll Street.
Posted by: Bob Marvin at December 4, 2007 11:44 AM
Brooklyn is certainly known all over the world, but more for its rough and tumble, slightly gangster past, from old white ethnic street gangs, to more current "urban" gangsta rappers. Sad but true.
I was riding in a London car service a couple of years ago, on my way to the city from the airport, and the African driver asked me where I was from, and I said Brooklyn. He was quite impressed at my survival and toughness, and then asked me if I knew where he could get a gun in New York, because he wanted to come to the States and drive cross country, and he had heard that EVERYONE in the States had a gun. I'm sure I was quite the disappointment to him when I assured him that I didn't have a gun, don't know where to get one, and that not everyone here is packing heat. What a world.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at December 4, 2007 12:00 PM
I'd argue Montrose that even though that outdated notion of Brooklyn that some outsiders have is PRECISELY what makes it "cool" to live here as well.
Artsy and "edgy" creative folks are usually the first to gentrify an area. As long as Brooklyn remains seen as rough and tumble, it will be looked at as the next hottest thing.
That's what made Soho SOO cool back in the day. It was rough around the edges. Same thing with the East Village, then Lower East Side and now the Bowery.
Now there is no longer a feeling of rough and tumble in Manhattan.
Even though most of us know that Brooklyn is a much gentler version of its former self, the longer we keep up the appearance it's rough, the better for our brand.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 12:08 PM
I think the "Welcome to Brooklyn" sign was in the begining of "welcome back Kotter"...not "Taxi"
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 12:15 PM
MM, that must have been quite a few years ago or the cabby was yanking your chain. Any Londoner and many others in the world know Brooklyn as the namesake of Posh & Becks' kid.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 12:20 PM
BTW,
BROOKLYN SINDUSTRIES seems to carry non-USA made inventory for the most part.
Should change their name...
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 12:55 PM
12:55pm. don't know where brooklyn industries makes its stuff, but from what I understand, they are a very impressive business - a couple that grew a t-shirt shop into an international brand.
i live in williamsburg, and there are foreign tourists everywhere shopping and most are holding a brooklyn industries bag.
in any case, criticizing a business because it doesn't have all of its operations in the US, is silly. they have the right to make a profit, and also, their clothes are fairly inexpensive and really well made. my husband has a lot of clothes from them, some several years old, and they still look great, especially a jacket he bought.
i have no special relationship with this store, but i think that we have to respect what they've done.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 1:05 PM
Then walmart should change their name to
Everything here is shit made in China.
What is your point? They never claimed to make everything in Brooklyn.
Don't be absurd.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 1:12 PM
Those of us born, raised and still living in Brooklyn have always thought of it as a brand - we have always identified with being from Brooklyn, which we've always considered superior to Manhattan. Still do.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 1:15 PM
I seriously doubt that most people, particularly people born and raised in Brooklyn, have "always" thought of it as a "brand." Plus, no better way to showcase that famous Brooklyn inferiority complex than to insist that Brooklyn's always been superior to Manhattan...
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 1:32 PM
"I seriously doubt that most people, particularly people born and raised in Brooklyn, have "always" thought of it as a 'brand.'"
Who cares what you think? Are you from Brooklyn? No. So what the hell do you know about it??? NOTHING!! Brooklyn's better, punk. You must be Manhattan trash. Or worse, a newcomer to Brooklyn who doesn't know the deal.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 1:42 PM
Brooklyn is made up of newcomers.
Without them, the borough would be dead.
You are the punk, 1:42 for not recognizing that.
The old days are over.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 1:50 PM
Reference 10:48 am:
When I'm anywhere in the city, I usually give my neighborhood when asked where I live, but when I'm anyplace else in the world I say Brooklyn. Because people have usually heard of it. I think folks in Queens, like most of us from the five boroughs, give their neighborhoods when asked where they live while actually in the city. (Staten island might be an exception.) I think those same Queens's residents are prone to say New York when not in the city. (I just don't think Queens is as well known.)
I think that may be a possible reason, you seldom hear people from Queens say they're from Queens.
As for me, I just love saying "I'm from Brooklyn." In fact, I like saying it more than I like saying my neighborhood.
Posted by: BKNYKEV at December 4, 2007 2:40 PM
OTOH? AFAIK?
Posted by: Park Sloper at December 4, 2007 2:45 PM
"Brooklyn is made up of newcomers.
Without them, the borough would be dead."
Yeah, right. I was here BEFORE the newcomers, and Brooklynites like myself will be here AFTER losers like 1:50 are gone. New days, old days, it's MY Brooklyn. Why don't you just go back to where you came from and stay out of this before you have to catch a beat-down?
Punk.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 2:59 PM
I'm from Baltimore, bud.
I could kick your ass any day of the week.
Brooklyn is my home now too.
Live with it.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 3:08 PM
"I'm from Baltimore, bud. I could kick your ass any day of the week."
Then you woke up. Baltimore?? HA!! Sucker town. Baltimore is for punks (like you). The day a Baltimore she-male like you kicks my ass, I'll give up my Brooklyn citizenship. Keep dreaming.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 3:23 PM
12:55, I hope you now realize what a moronic comment that was. Please read the above responses to your post specifically...
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 4:00 PM
What I think is funny is when a musician, or artist that is a transplant claims they are a "Brooklyn artist" or "Brooklyn band" when they are actually "Brooklyn based" and just using Brooklyn as a selling point. People would not have moved here if it weren't forwhat the people here before set up, and us who are born and bred, and are continue to live here and own businesses here are prouder from where we came from than people who had to fight all their lives to get out of the shit towns they came from cause those towns sucked compared to were they moved to- BROOKLYN....Otherwise you'd still be there proud as fuck, like us.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 4:12 PM
I am Brooklyn born and bred, 40 years, and have the scars to prove it.
The newcomers can not be lump into one category. (Across the bridge, from other states, from other countries) I welcome them as long as they keep things on the upswing and stay the f@#$ out of my parking space. Oh yes they are welcomed, since they replaced many of the criminal elements and broke the cycle of replacing one generation of salvages with another. I no longer have to carry my gun and do not see the need to pass it down to my son. Yes some good people were also replace, casualties of class war. These two guys going at it on this thread are your classic example of people who should be booted from Brooklyn.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 4:28 PM
"These two guys going at it on this thread are your classic example of people who should be booted from Brooklyn."
You CAN'T boot me from Brooklyn. I'm FROM here (I'm 3:23)and I'm 44, meaning I've been here longer than you. I ain't afraid of you or your gun. I grew up in East New York, dealt with every kind of tough guy you can imagine, never owned a gun and STILL earned my respect. I don't need no gun to take care of myself, unlike your pu**y ass. So get another gun and hold on tight. You're going to need it.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 5:37 PM
i really doubt anyone moves to brooklyn because of abunch of guido douches.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 6:19 PM
Love the clothes but why oh why are they made in China? they should be made in Brooklyn. At $75 for a sweatshirt you can't tell me they would loose money if they made the clothes here.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 6:34 PM
well, if Brooklyn is good enough for Posh Spice and David Beckham, it must be the new "it" place. Now, excuse me as I place my head in the oven.....
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 6:42 PM
My, my, my. You young guys really went at each other...pent up hostility?
Take a deep breath everyone!
TheGrammarLady (who wouldn't fit in anything at Brooklyn Industries anyway....aren't a lot of those clothes tattered and distressed? I would look like a fool.)
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 8:07 PM
"OTOH? AFAIK?"
Pretty standard stuff IMHO Park Sloper, albeit not exactly English.
http://www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Lagoon/9819/acronyms.html
Posted by: Bob Marvin at December 4, 2007 9:51 PM
no, brooklyn industries clothes are not tattered and distressed. they are very nice.
Posted by: guest at December 4, 2007 11:58 PM
I think I would buy Brooklyn Industries cloths if they were made in brooklyn or even the US.
If I want clothes from china im just going to go over to target and save 40 bucks.
Posted by: Santa at December 5, 2007 8:27 AM
the clothes made at target are made by 8 year old chinese.
i at least prefer my clothes made by legal age chinese.
Posted by: guest at December 5, 2007 2:24 PM
They USED to make some cool Ts...but started experimenting with some wacky hallucinogenic designs (like you could only get em in fuschia, teal, mustard, etc.)
THEN they start charging like 30 bucks for 'em!!!
They lost me a cool couple of summers ago...
Posted by: guest at December 5, 2007 3:21 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.