Matcha Addiction: Uji Cha (Malaysia) matcha latte

This place popped up in one of Malaysia's suburbs recently. There used to be a Tsujiri matcha house there, but they seem to have been replaced by this locally-owned outlet Uji Cha. (Uji Cha is actually the name of a traditional green tea produced in the Uji region in Japan; but I can't find any reference to this cafe chain being in Japan, and Google lists it as a Malaysian company.) The  branding and imagery for this store actually looks a lot like the previous cafe, though!

It's a shame that the Tsujiri franchise shut down, but I was curious to try its replacement on a recent visit. 

Unfortunately in Malaysia - now one of the world's leaders for diabetes and obesity - it is hard to get away from ultra-sugar and chemicals in foods. (A subject for another post, I think!) And things like sugar being addictive, a vicious cycle has emerged - where shops add more of it to their products - because the addicted public now prefer to buy items which have even higher sugar / chemical content. For me (having resided in healthier places like Singapore and London) I was thus slightly suspicious of what the recipes might be in this locally-run place. Japanese desserts and drinks are famously low on sweetness - which is part of their appeal. Would this Japanese-branded store offer authenticity?

In short: no! Unlike its predecessor, this cafe offers a menu far more focused on high-sugar desserts, with Americanised additions like chocolate chips and candy toppings. And when I inquired regarding their matcha latte, the staff - a friendly duo who used to work at the Tsujiri too! - warned me that the matcha latte would be very sweet and I might not like it. So I asked if they could serve me one with minimum syrup/sugar added. And they kindly obliged! 

The matcha latte was made using the traditional bowl/whisk method, which was quite nice. Though sugar is still added. Then the hot milk is poured in. The 'regular' portion costs the same as Tsujiri's, but you get a smaller cup for the price. 

The verdict: 
The drink had a bitter edge to it, from the actual matcha powder added. This is good. But the overall experience was very much like hot water + sugar + a small amount of matcha. Not much creaminess or depth. And it was still very sweet, even though they had added only a fraction of the recipe's sugar quota. 

For the small portion for my price, this was disappointing. And the drink was not good enough to go back for. My overall advice would be to get your matcha elsewhere. (You can check my Matcha Addiction label on this blog for reviews of better places!)

It might even have to be *gasp!* Starbucks 'without syrup' packet matcha for me, if I visit that suburb again! 

Posh COS and Yo Grandma's Pants

I just went into the clothes shop COS in Singapore and was treated to some of the snootiest staff service I've encountered in a while. Of course, the cliche is that we expect snobby staff in very high end stores like maybe McQueen or Stella McCartney. The assumption is that only the very richest of customers are welcomed in these stores, so if you appear less wealthy, staff will look down on you.

But this was COS!

And I'm from London.

COS is part of H&M. And in London, it is like the 'older sister' of H&M. It's an affordable high street store, with nicely designed, slightly minimalist, clothes. It's where the H&M shopper goes after they hit 30 and have a decent job. It is not McCartney or McQueen!

In Singapore, however, COS is situated next to the likes of Vivienne Westwood and Issey Miyake. And it also might be a little bit more expensive. COS in Singapore is positioned as luxury fashion. And the staff certainly believe it is! (Even though it slightly made me laugh ^^)

Brands quite often position themselves differently in markets globally. Or for a bunch of reasons, they become organically positioned differently due to local perceptions or events. And this can seem strange or amusing if you're an expat, or travelling a lot. Here are a couple more examples:

Starbucks (American)
In the UK: a ubiquitous and unremarkable coffee chain. In London, it's the one which tourists are most likely to frequent. It's OK, but not special. Good for a quick takeaway - probably not somewhere you'd choose to sit and socialise. (We prefer other chains, or independent cafes for that.) In fact in the 90s - when there was a big UK backlash against big global corporations - Starbucks was socially branded as a bad place. The ubiquitousness of it is also a bit unpopular and 'uncool' in the UK. Because uniqueness is generally more fashionable.

In Singapore: quite hip. For some reason (which might come from South Korea?*) Starbucks is apparently seen as a fairly trendy place to go or to work. And actually, the standard of service from the young students in Starbuckses in SE Asia stands out way above that in other global coffee chains. Because it's more fashionable, so the chain can pick the best staffers? Ubiquitousness is also viewed very differently in Asia - it's generally a sign that something might be good, and desirable. In Singapore, I would definitely go to Starbucks. Simply because for service it is better than many other venues.

*Apparently in certain areas of Seoul, it is (or was once) seen as quite chic to be seen or photographed walking around with a Starbucks coffee takeaway or tumbler in your hand. So maybe this sentiment has spread around the region? South Korea and Japan are fashionable in SE Asia, and often set trends. And I'd guess this was a deliberate IG campaign started by Starbucks's S Korean marketing department. Otherwise why would it be Starbucks, and not another big, global coffee chain?!

Uniqlo (Japanese)
In Japan: bog-standard utilitarian clothing store. It's where you got to get decent quality basics and thermal underwear for the winter. It is not fashionable. In British terms it's an equivalent of maybe BHS!

In the UK: quite fashionable. OK, from my limited experiences in Japan and the UK, the stock is different - with more designer collaborations etc in London. But even for basics, Uniqlo is ever so slightly trendy - it's where the art and design set might go to buy their basics and black polo-neck jumpers! (As well as thermal underwear..) Because it's Japanese. So it's a little bit different - and special/unique - from the usual basics we can buy in the UK!

In Singapore: somewhere in between the above two. Japanese things are often fashionable here, but Uniqlo is not particularly outstanding. The styles are a little more conservative than the Uniqlo clothes in London, though there are still a few nice things. But it is probably more of a family and basics store in Singapore.

M&S (British)
In the UK: trusted own-brand department store; part of our heritage! The food today is seen as quite posh and very good quality (with high prices to match!) but the clothing lines are viewed as little dull and  old-fashioned. Incidentally, M&S food halls are massive in the UK and sell all kinds of wet and dry foods. Good for clothing basics; M&S cotton (under)pants are a men's and women's staple in probably every British wardrobe (and were for our parents, and maybe also grandparents)!

In Singapore: luxury or semi-luxury store. OK it is mostly clothing items sold in SE Asia (and a small selection of dry foods). The prices are actually not far off what they are in London - but that equates to quite high cost in many SE Asian countries. (London is an expensive city!) If you compare the items in good local stores or supermarkets (as you might find in Singapore) M&S is at a much higher price point. It is a good place to go for traditional English foods as gifts, though - and if you're in Singapore and want to try British crumpets, Christmas pudding or Hot Cross Buns, it's worth the splurge! 

***

English learners: 'snooty' is a slightly informal British English term which describes a person or behaviour which is a little bit snobby or aloof, and looks down upon others. (Not to be confused with 'snotty' which means bad tempered and rude!)

Adblocking – the 'them and us' of marketing?

TWO APPARENTLY UNRELATED THINGS

1: Anyone who's studied business is probably familiar with a version of this rivetingly artistic diagram. It's a model of a marketer's wish-list, and it is achieved by building their target customers' trust. With increasing trust, sales, repeat sales, even valuable advocacy and partnerships can be possible. Hurray! 

2: Some examples of crap tech.

• Instagram puts up horrendous recreational hunting videos on my suggestions page, because it has noted that I like 'wildlife'. Yep, both involve animals. But they're ABSOLUTELY not the same thing.
• Just after hols, I reviewed the very nice resort I'd visited, on TripAdvisor. On the next web page I opened, a banner flashed up urging me to book a holiday at this resort. Well I was only there yesterday... do I want to book again, now? No. Do I want this orange animated thing flashing at me? No.

 

WHY THEY FIT TOGETHER

Like 90% of people in APAC today (apparently), I love my adblockers. Hitherto irritating experiences with platforms like YouTube (which temporarily made me switch to Veoh and other options) have once again become interesting and engaging. Because I go in there to view specific content, to learn, be entertained, escape and enjoy. Not to have trashy ads telling me to buy buy buy (or that I 'NEED a website!'). And I certainly don't go online for the learning, enjoying thing, to find content that is really advertising masked heavily as something else. (Known rather euphemistically in the industry as 'native advertising'!)

And yet I've just been reading an article (for and by marketers) discussing exactly the above but suggesting the way forward is to be even sneakier and tech-smart about getting their client's brands under the noses of us adblocking public who don't want them. It's all about speed of upload and targeting, apparently. Or is it?

OK, targeting sounds smart. And I don't think anyone will argue that it's most certainly better than the 'spray and pray' of yesterday (which is still happening today – website, anyone?). But there are some problems with this too:

1. Some people don't like their data and behaviours being tracked, aggregated and used to 'target'. I don't know what the stats for this are in APAC, or even if we have a choice, but for many, it's not a trust-builder
2. A lot of the tech for so-called 'targeting' seems to currently fall way short of having even basic common sense. (That's where the recreational hunting and trip example come in.)
3. The whole concept of speed and targeting might be missing the point entirely. Because adblocking suggests that we don't want ads.

The rise of adblocking (and also the new, EU-style, protective data privacy laws which are set to hit Singapore this year) both seem to be approached by marketers and their agencies as 'evils' which need to be overcome or circumvented in clever ways. And of course all businesses need to monetise, and to sell, otherwise, no point. But what seems to be have been lost from this whole, high-cash, high-energy, marketers' circle is that thing with the unglamourous ladder: customer TRUST.

So is a new ladder emerging? Where the value chain for humans in the digital age is not about building trust to achieve sales, advocacy and co. But brands being clever and non-transparent enough to trick or pressure us into buying products instead - and use paid 'advocates' to trick us a bit more? Where the brands/marketers and their customers are opponents in a sort of tacit battle of wits?

To be honest, perhaps this is working. Or working well-enough. There seem to be big bucks invested in it. Though that 90% keenness on adblocking might be problematic here!

OR does a different model need to be found, to build trust via more transparent and thoughtful means which genuinely include and respect the customer? Maybe marketers need to jump off the 'pushing ads' hamster wheel and think of something else entirely?

Some outfits are already exploring avenues such as rewarding users who view / engage with their ads. And my personal opinion is that consumer choice of WHEN to view is key: I don't want an annoying orange banner flashing pointlessly at me now; but in a year's time when I'm actually booking another trip, I might like to ask for its help.(SEM, anyone?) 

Let's see how this one pans out!

PS: I don't NEED a website. And if I do, this particular outfit – which barked at me 20x daily on YouTube for so long - will be the first provider deleted from my list!

PPS: And I don't work in sales. I'm just a consumer :)