 |
|
|
|||||
Here is a number worth sitting with: 295%. That’s how much U.S. app uninstalls of ChatGPT surged in a single day last month, after OpenAI struck a deal with the Department of Defense that its rival Anthropic had publicly refused to sign. In the same 24-hour window, Claude’s downloads jumped 51%. By that evening, Anthropic’s app had climbed to No. 1 on the U.S. App Store, leapfrogging 20 apps in under a week. One values-driven decision. One weekend. A measurable transfer of market share. Most of the coverage framed this as a political story. It isn’t. Or at least, not only. It’s also a brand loyalty story. And it tells us something important about the category war that’s actually being fought in AI, one that has very little to do with compute power. The Switching Cost Nobody Is Naming Brand strategists understand switching costs intuitively. In banking, insurance, enterprise softwareanywhere the friction is highemotional and values-based factors end up doing as much heavy lifting as product performance. The category with the highest rational switching cost often becomes the category where trust matters most. AI is moving toward that same dynamic, faster than most people are ready for. An AI platform doesn’t just perform tasks. It accumulates context. It gets to know ushow we think, our shorthand, our working rhythms. For enterprise users in particular, this depth compounds quickly. The longer a business embeds an AI platform into its workflows, the higher the exit cost becomes, not just technically, but cognitively, culturally, and even emotionally. There’s a name for this: the relational cost. It’s the switching cost nobody in the AI conversation is actually naming. And in any high-switching-cost category, the brand questionwhat does this company stand for, and do I trust iteventually becomes the definitive one. Operationalizing Values Is Not the Same as Talking About Them The consumer response to the DoD news didn’t come out of nowhere. It was the visible payoff of a positioning strategy years in the making. Anthropic has been making a consistent, operationalized argument about what kind of company it isand backing it with choices that have visible cost. The Claude Constitution is a publicly available, inspectable training framework. Not a mission statementa framework. Anthropic’s Economic Index analyses AI adoption across sectors and positions the company as a participant in the difficult societal conversation about AI’s impact on employment, not just a product vendor. These are category-shaping moves, not PR. The market had been registering these signals quietly, long before last month. Independent analyses suggest Claude holds 32% of enterprise AI usage, significantly disproportionate to its 3.5% consumer footprint. Enterprisesmore deliberate, more risk-averse, more consequentially exposed to AI failurehave already been choosing Claude at scale. That gap between enterprise and consumer adoption isn’t a coincidence. It’s a trust premium. The Cost of Caring It’s easy to have values when they cost you nothing. For Anthropic, these came with a $200 million price tag. Thats the suggested value of this contentious Pentagon contract. Furthermore, the supply-chain risk designationa label the Trump administration has now formally applied, and which Anthropic is challenging in courtthreatens hundreds of millions more across broader government contracts. This damaging designation, historically reserved for foreign adversaries like Huawei, has never before been applied to an American company. That is a real commercial cost, not a hypothetical one. But what looks like a ceiling from one angle looks like a moat from another. In the weeks since the dispute went public, Anthropic’s revenue run rate has nearly doubledfrom $9 billion at the end of 2025 to almost $20 billion today, according to Bloomberg. The government closed a door. The market opened several more. That is not a coincidence. That is what trust, operationalized and defended under pressure, looks like as a growth strategy. So What Does This Mean for Your Business? The question that should be on the table in every leadership meeting right now: which AI platforms are you building on, and have you thought seriously about what that association means for your brand? AI platforms are no longer neutral infrastructure. They carry values, make visible choices, take public positions. The AI your business relies on is becoming part of your brand. When a platform’s ethics come into questionas they periodically and inevitably willthat exposure travels upstream to every company in its orbit. This creates both a risk conversation and a strategic opportunity. Evaluating AI partners on trust and values criteria, not just capability benchmarks, is the kind of decision that looks obvious in hindsight and prescient in the moment. The Brand Codes Are Being Written Now Early positioning in emerging categories hardens fast. The companies that define what a space stands for, not just what it does, shape expectations for years. We saw it with social media, with streaming, with fintech. In each case, the brands that defined the category’s values, not just its features, built loyalty advantages that capability alone couldn’t disrupt. AI is at that moment. The conversation about what kind of category this is going to be is happening now, in public, in real time. Stop asking which AI is most capable. Start asking which AI your business can afford to be associated with. Because our whirlwind romance with AI is fast turning into something more serious; committed, often exclusive, long-term relationships where platform loyalties get more embedded and more entrenched by the day. Choose carefully. Credibility compounds faster than compute. The data is already proving it.
Category:
E-Commerce
At a time when mainstream brands live in fear of getting dragged into a contentious political landscape, theres something curiously benign, almost feel-good, about Florsheimgate. If youve somehow missed it, this particular instance of an involuntary pop-culture brand cameo came about following press reports this week that President Donald Trump has become an enthusiastand de facto brand ambassadorfor Florsheim dress shoes, gifting pairs to cabinet members and media allies. The upshot is that less-than-$150 Florsheims have become the hottest and most exclusive MAGA status symbol, according to The Wall Street Journal. But more to the point, administration insiders who dont find the brand hot in the slightest, and would likely prefer more luxurious footwear, are sticking with the shoes Trump gives themeven, weirdly, if they dont fit. This naturally caught the attention of MAGA critics, who promptly lit up social media with mockery of the 79-year-old presidents taste and allegedly Stalinesque bullying of his compliant minions. And this included some collateral damage for the venerable, and some might say dowdy, Florsheim. But really, even the inevitable dunking (what a dated mall brand!) seemed good-humored. Florsheim, one Bluesky user wrote. When a Gift From Wicks n Sticks Just Isnt Enough. Others added comments like florsheim didn’t go out of business in like 1978? and Florsheim shoes? Man, that guys brain really is stuck in the 80s and Ok I give. Whats Florsheim. And of course plenty of memes. I get the feeling well be discussing Florsheim shoes today.— (@sundaedivine.lol) 2026-03-11T10:18:31.168Z Funny, but well short of a dangerous brand backlash. Nobodys demonizing Florsheim-wearers in general, putting out videos of shooting up loafers, or organizing a grassroots brand-oppo campaign on behalf of Vuitton loafers. To the contrary, it seems, at worst, to be a short-term, almost charming free publicity reminder to those who dont know that the brand is still aroundand, apparently, thriving. Turns out, Florsheim enjoyed record wholesale sales of $92 million in 2025, according to parent Weyco Groups most recent earnings release and call earlier this month, demonstrating resilience in a declining market for non-athletic brown shoes. The Florsheim brand has a choppy history dating all the way back to 1892. Worn by everyone from Harry Truman to Michael Jackson, its a brand deeply embedded in American consumer culture, a staple brand of the suburban shopping malls heyday. But it also endured a bankruptcy filing in 2002. Its now part of the Weyco Group, whose CEO is Thomas Florsheim Jr., a fifth-generation Florsheim. (Sales of other Weyco brands Nunn Bush, Stacy Adams, and Bogs were down last year, dragging down revenue and earnings for the company overall.) Weyco did not respond to an inquiry from Fast Company, but CEO Florsheim told The Journal he was not aware of Trump’s orders (and declined further comment). In the conference call (which predated this weeks Trump fandom news), the CEO was upbeat, calling Florsheim one of the few mens [shoe] brands outside of the athletic category to sustain this level of post-pandemic growth. While the non-athletic brown shoe category has been in secular decline, Florsheim has bucked the trend and gained market share. Whether thats true or not, the association with Trump seems more like a passing entertainment than a brand controversy. At a moment of profound tension brought on by war and the threat of a new global oil crisis, Florsheimgate didnt land like a point of contention; it was more like comic relief. In an interesting footnote, Weyco noted in its earnings call that tariff impactswhich CEO Florsheim has groused about in the pastsignificantly affected gross margins in 2025. Those tariffs have since been judged illegal by the Supreme Court, and the company is optimistic about retrieving $16 million from tariff refunds. Maybe Trumps Cabinet members should keep a spare pair of another brands loafers at the office, just in case Florsheim goes out of fashion at the White House.
Category:
E-Commerce
For the first time that I can remember, this year I was completely enthralled by the Winter Olympics. In fact, I dont think Id ever watched the Winter Games before, but it really caught my attention this go-round. One event that really stood out for me was the skeleton. For the uninitiated (like I was just a month ago), the skeleton is a slide-based sport where athletes lie face down, headfirst, on a small slide going 80 mph down an icy, declining slope. On the surface, it doesnt look like it requires much from the athlete but to lie down and hang on for dear life until crossing the finish line. But upon further inspection, the sport is far more intricate, requiring the athlete to make subtle adjustments with their shoulders, knees, and even their toes to control and steer the sled. The slightest weight shifts can make the difference between first place and last. As if the Olympics werent competitive enough, the margin of error in this event is miniscule. I was fascinated, particularly about the idea of finding balance. Theres so much talk about work-life balance, work-self balance, and just about any other something-something balance where the two somethings seem to be at odds with each other. To find balance, we make subtle adjustments throughout our days and weeksblocking off time, making time, taking timein hopes of steering our lives and maintaining control of ourselves. However, according to Misan Harriman, balance is less of an act and more of a series of choices that informs action; its not what we decide to do but who we choose to be. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_16-9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_square_thumbnail.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"FROM THE CULTURE","dek":"FROM THE CULTURE is a podcast that explores the inner workings of organizational culture that enable companies to thrive, teams to win, and brands to succeed. If culture eats strategy for breakfast, then this is the most important conversation in business that you arent having.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Listen","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/playlist?list=PLvojPSJ6Iy0T4VojdtGsZ8Q4eAJ6mzr2h","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91470870,"imageMobileId":91470866,"shareable":false,"slug":"","wpCssClasses":""}} Raw and honest moments of humanity Harriman is a photographer, activist, and Oscar-nominated filmmaker whose work has been prominently featured in publications like Vogue, celebrated on awards stages, and widely shared throughout the zeitgeist. His work captures the raw and honest moments of humanityin resistance, grief, joy, and all the many manifestations of our true existence. Our conversation with Harriman on the From the Culture podcast explored the balancing act of profitability and principle, where he argues that profit at all costs carries a heavy price tag that can cost us our authenticity. We make decisions at work that call into question the integrity of who we perceive ourselves to be outside of the office. Tech CEOs sell products to schools that they hardly ever let their own children use. Managers treat their subordinates in ways that would anger them if it were something their spouse had to endure. Whether its the way we communicate with peers or manage our presentation of self at work, far too often there is an imbalance between ourselveswho we say we are and how we are. Our inconsistent performances of self not only cause harm in our work but can also cause a crisis of authenticity. Fittingly, sociologist Erving Goffman likens the theatrical stage to the dynamics of social living, borrowing from William Shakespeares comedy As You Like It, where he writes, All the worlds a stage, and all the men and women merely players. Our presentation of self, as Goffman posits, is a choice we make. We decide which character we choose to play in social life. This choice subsequently demands a series of decisions that coincides with said character. The costumery. The script. The mannerisms. The exits and entrances. They are all by-products of the character we choose to play. That is to say, who we choose to be informs how we choose to be. A choice of character Through this lens, the balancing act of work-life or work-self is a choice of character and commitment to it. And although we attempt to balance the existence of two characters with adjustments here and there, like the athletes in the skeleton event, these seemingly subtle shifts of self can have tremendous impact. The idea then is to remain true to self, one character that is consistent despite the context. This is, after all, the definition of authenticity. As Goffman warns, we should pay mind to the mask we choose to wear because if we arent careful, our mask could soon become our face. This means we have agency in the matter. We can decide who we want to be and, therefore, how were going to behave. We have a choice; but when we dont choose, the context will certainly choose for us. Check out our full conversation with Misan Harriman on the latest episode of From the Culture here on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_16-9.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/studio_square_thumbnail.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"FROM THE CULTURE","dek":"FROM THE CULTURE is a podcast that explores the inner workings of organizational culture that enable companies to thrive, teams to win, and brands to succeed. If culture eats strategy for breakfast, then this is the most important conversation in business that you arent having.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Listen","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/playlist?list=PLvojPSJ6Iy0T4VojdtGsZ8Q4eAJ6mzr2h","theme":{"bg":"#2b2d30","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#3b3f46","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91470870,"imageMobileId":91470866,"shareable":false,"slug":"","wpCssClasses":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||