http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Asia/Story/A1Story20120829-368474.html
They say that any kind of press is good press especially the
negative sort. That’s the first thing I thought of when reading about store
owner and entrepreneur Rajesh Shah opening a men’s western wear clothing store
named, “Hitler” complete with a colorful red swastika over the i. Could this be
a business plan epic fail or a brilliant marketing strategy?
Shah, who opened
the store on August 19 in Ahmedabad City in India, claims that he had no
knowledge of who Hitler was nor of the atrocities that he perpetrated on the
six million plus Jews in Europe during World War II and would only consider
changing the name if he were compensated for re-branding costs to recoup
potential losses from the money spent on the logo, business stationary, and the
hoarding.
Where was his business plan and who were his investors? Turns out he
sank about 150,000 rupees ($2700) into the start-up costs and wants to recoup
if forced to change. Yes I said forced to change.
Although the article does not elaborate as to the type and the amount of press “Hitler’s Cross” received, one can surmise that it was fairly substantial in light of those involved in pressing (no pun intended) him (Israeli Embassy, Germany and U.S. Anti-defamation League) to finally give in. The story also doesn’t say if the café succeeded or failed but in my opinion it doesn’t take much to connect the dots as to why a business person would take drastic measures like this—free press and a lot of it.
In Shah’s case, did he really not know about Hitler? I’ll lay odds he knew about Hitler’s Café. One need only to look at the logo for clues. The type font and the colors used in the advertising: steel gray, red and white, look strikingly military. Perhaps if he were to have used orange, brown and blue (a bit more in keeping with western wear), he might be more believable. Perhaps if there were a cowboy hat over the i instead of a swastika, or if the environment for start-ups in India weren’t so brutal for entrepreneurial survival maybe we could take him at his word.
And then there is the matter of ethical implications. Yeah—where are they? And what is going on in India that there is an “unusual degree of respect” (according to the article) for Hitler and Mein Kampf? Granted, he could have paid for the design but then that raises a lot of other questions we don’t have time to consider in this summary. Instead, all this smacks of desperation and survival of the fittest tactics that with the roll of the dice one can imagine a name like Hitler landing on snake eyes. Daring, brilliant and stupid all wrapped in the same tootsie roll.
One
thing is irrefutable and startlingly clear: his store captured the attention of
the Associated Press and was highlighted on Yahoo and with it the potential of
going viral. Not to mention, I am writing about it and will talk about in
class. What other business owner can claim that right now? And how much would
it take in advertising costs to get those legs? So if he changes the name soon
would the idea have been brilliant?
If he keeps the name, what does that say of
the ethics and cultural proclivities in India? Does that matter in this case?
What will it mean to have had succeeded and should we care? Could the same
problem arise here in the states? Would it look the same? I am not going to
open Pol Pot’s Underwear Store any time soon but what is important to
understand is our level of awareness of other cultures and what it would mean
to be insulting or offending to a group of people with deep wounds and tragic
histories.
A business plan would have been a great step in uncovering what one
needs to know. I really do wonder if Shah had one and if he did, why did it
matter more to take such an extreme step rather than to be sensitive to a
particularly delicate demographic? Of
course, he could be just telling the truth and is upset because now he has to
considering changing his presentation. Let that sink in for a bit.
