Hi there,

Happy reading, 

Jean from Tracksuit 💜

Puck broke the news a couple weeks ago that millennial DTC darling Everlane will be selling to fast-fashion darling Shein. You read that right.

If you weren’t formerly aware of the brand, let me read you in: Everlane is a fashion brand founded in the early 2010s which positioned itself as a sustainable company which practised “radical transparency”. It was refreshing at the time, when it was less common for brands to be radically transparent about their manufacturing practices. And it worked. Until it didn’t. With the entry of other affordable brands which specialized in quality basics (Quince is the primary example), Everlane failed to truly establish itself as the go-to for modern essentials.

In 2026, Everlane was reportedly up to $90M in debt. The sale is estimated to have been for around $100M. Alfred Chang, Everlane’s chief executive, said in a statement to The New York Times that Everlane will “remain an independent brand” and keep its “sustainability commitments.”

In the Clothing (Both Genders) US category, Everlane has a low awareness (6%), especially when compared to Shein’s awareness base (54%). While Shein has the awareness, the brand is obviously seeing an opportunity to tap into a market they can’t access: people that care about quality and sustainability.

When it comes to, “Is a quality brand”, 54% of people who consider Everlane agree with that statement, compared to 27% for Shein. Comparing what people think of the two brands also shows stark differences: the most common unique theme which emerges for Shein is “cheap” and for Everlane, “sustainable”.

Which is to say: if you’re a fairly premium brand, it doesn’t seem enough anymore to rely too much on a platform of sustainability and transparency, unless you express those values in a unique way – being sustainable at that price point is a consumer’s expectation. As a result, Everlane washed out into a sea of sameness.

Liquid Death made water irreverent and edgy. Hint Water is making water… sexy?

In Hint Water’s first national campaign since 2024, ‘Mmmmm, Water’, makes fun of old-school fragrance ads, using billowy imagery, languid shots, hot actors, and the French language (classic) to signal water as something you should crave. That you ravenly desire. Like sex, if that’s not clear enough. Hint Water has also created an OnlyFans page (to post “nude bottles”) and are working with adult creators Yung Gravy and Ari Kytsya.

“Our brains are wired to chase desire, not discipline. We operate on want, not should,” Cullman, Hint’s SVP, head of marketing, told Marketing Brew.

Obviously, this concept won’t be anything new for the marketers reading this newsletter. But as Douglas Brundage, the founder and CEO of brand studio Kingsland says in the above article: “It’s funny, but is it going to convert?”

In the Bottled Water category in the US, Hint Water has 24% awareness, compared to Liquid Death’s 37%. And in terms of if the fun campaign is actually going to convert, well, the number one top-of-funnel conversion driver for this category is the statement “Is a brand I trust”. 26% of people aware of Hint associate the brand with this statement, compared to Liquid Death’s 20%.

Is a campaign like this going to make people trust Hint Water more? Or maybe, like with the Liquid Death playbook, its low awareness base compared to brands like FIJI Water (75%) and Evian (69%) means the main job at hand is to increase awareness – so there’s actually going to be people to convert.

Perhaps some brands did pay attention to our article, Seven disruptor brand habits that legacy players can learn from, because Hawaiian Tropic certainly seems to have listened – all in the hopes of reeling in that valuable Gen Z group on their hook.

Hawaiian Tropic’s new campaign fronted by social media influencer Alix Earle, “Tana Sutra” has launched. It focuses on reminding consumers that summer is meant to be fun, “breaking away from industry messaging that is often serious and centered around protection to instead focus on how to get a sun-kissed glow.” I would say this is pretty much word for word what Vacation Inc says about their branding as well.

Although Hawaiian Tropic is a high-awareness brand (69%), this campaign is clearly aimed at reeling in younger consumers – a necessary investment, considering that this low economic period has seen travel and vacation spending go down, which will undoubtedly impact this category.

It also makes sense why they’d want to put in a little extra effort when looking at Tracksuit’s data on the brand. When filtered by the 18 to 34-year-old age group, Hawaiian Tropic’s awareness drops to 46%. Consideration drops from 43% to 27% amongst 18-34s.

And although other brands in the category like Sun Bum are perceived as “fun”, “modern”, or “trendy”, Hawaiian Tropic are thought of as “established” and “nostalgic”.

Alix Earle is a Gen Z marketing fixture, having also fronted campaigns for brands like poppi. She has over 7.4 million TikTok followers – the third most popular media consumption platform for 18-34s in this category (54%), only behind Instagram (58%) and YouTube (69%).

Happy FIFA World Cup to those who celebrate – including the marketers trying to “tap into” this cultural moment, as they say.

The real marketing winner of the World Cup so far has been Adidas, which launched its campaign with a five-minute film called “Backyard Legends”, with Timothee Chalamet starring as the organizer of a neighborhood match, trying to defeat a legendary street football trio that has gone unbeaten for 30 years. Plus, Bad Bunny! It’s nostalgic; it’s got you rooting for the underdog; it’s entertaining. And people love it. Even @MilkEK.

In comparison, Nike has decided to forgo the Big Campaign, swapping it for “unexpected collabs and cultural expressions” with teased celebrities like Cristiano Ronaldo, Kim Kardashian, Travis Scott and more. Just a reminder: Nike is currently in the middle of a marketing “pivot”, turning towards growing via athlete-focused marketing and product innovation, a strategy they call “Sport Offense.”

So what makes a bigger impact? Can a Big Moment like Adidas’ five-minute commercial still make a dent in our fractured media landscape, or does it make more sense to spread your resources around, making smaller swings but covering more ground?

To close the gap on Nike, Adidas needs to improve its top-of-funnel conversion rate. Adidas currently converts 67% of consumers from awareness to consideration, compared to Nike’s 76%. The brand also has much lower Preference than Nike, with 34% of consumers in this category preferring Nike compared to 12% for Adidas.

It’s not a coincidence that both Nike and Adidas lean strongly into underdog stories. For the Sportswear category, “Is for people like me” is the highest conversion driver, meaning fostering relatability is key to winning in this category. Amongst people that consider the brand, 60% of people think Nike is “for them”, as opposed to 56% for Adidas.

Tracksuit data: May ‘25 to April ‘26

Now, I’m going to be completely upfront and honest here (radical transparency), but this story is mainly just a little treat for me. I am a huge Survivor fan and have seen basically every season, including the latest season, which is the show’s FIFTIETH. And, YES, I am upset about the outcome.

This special season of Survivor has also seen more celebrities involved than ever before, with guest appearances from Mr Beast and Zac Brown, as well as the idol being renamed the “Billie Eilish Boomerang Idol” (not joking). E.l.f. obviously wanted a piece of that action, airing three vignettes during the live finale, which feature creator Delaney Rowe suffering through challenges, only to be given a leg up with e.l.f products.

When it comes to cultural storytelling and relatability, e.l.f is pretty much best in class. With the statement, “Is a brand that appeals to me”, 38% of people aware of e.l.f. agree – this is second in the category behind Maybelline (42%). Again with “Is a brand I trust”, e.l.f. sits at 41%, second to Maybelline (53%).

This changes when we filter the data by 18 to 34-year-olds however.

“Is a brand that appeals to me” is associated with 47% of those aware of e.l.f, compared to Maybelline (38%). The same thing happens with “Is a brand I trust” – 52% for e.l.f. compared to 42% for Maybelline, when filtered by 18-34s.

Which is to say – the youth are clearly very into e.l.f.

This also comes through in the perceived themes. E.l.f. is thought of as “fun”, “youthful” and “innovative”, whereas Maybelline is “established”, “classic” and “timeless.”