“Time is people’s most valuable asset” is something we have all heard again and again. As people juggle their lives, homes, families, and their work the one thing they wish they had more of is time. We would argue that this statement is discriminatory, factually inaccurate and at its most dangerous in relation to brands.

We have an aging society where, according to the Office of National Statistics, more than 16% of the UK’s population is over the retirement age. This group will increase to 23% in the year 2031. These people have nothing but time. They plan their days in a leisurely way to maximise their time expenditure. So, it could be argued that the statement that time is people’s most valuable asset simply alienates older people. Could it even be discriminatory, and does it reinforce ageist marketing? This ‘time starved culture’ doesn’t reflect all of society but rather a specific group. But even the busiest person on earth can and will make time for the things that are important to them. Even to busy people, time isn’t an asset. It’s just a cost of doing something. It’s the downside just like money. It doesn’t take into account the upside or benefit of doing something. So to say time is an asset, is factually wrong.

However the assertion that “time is people’s most valuable asset” is at its most threatening, in relation to brands. Time, just like money, is rational currency. You can measure it in minutes and hours. Just as money can be counted in pounds and pence.

The upside of doing something is an emotional currency. It’s rarely calculated in pounds or minutes. It’s calculated in terms of feelings and desires. This is the area that brands operate in. The value of a brand comes not from the rational benefits of its products or services but from the emotional connection people have with the brand. To build brands we need to reinforce intangible, emotional benefits, we shouldn’t be reinforcing rational costs like time or money.

If we were to focus on time as people’s most valuable asset we would develop time-saving products and services. But this is dangerous pursuit when building a brand. Brands are rarely built on the basis that they save you money. For the simple reason, that if a competitor is able to offer the same product more cheaply the brand would be destroyed. Similarly, to build a brand on its time saving abilities would face the same risk from a time saving competitor. Time is no asset to brand building.

Many technology brands promise to be time saving. For some people there is a benefit in being able use their time more effectively. But is it the kind of benefit that is going to get them excited? Or is it a dry, rational benefit that has the about the same brand building value as a money off coupon?

The ultimate question is whether ‘more time’ will make a difference to how we perceive those technology brands, particularly when every competitor starts offering a similar product or service.

By contrast, successful brands that focus primarily on understanding and meeting customers’ needs promise us better experiences. One recent example of this is the opening of The O2.

The O2 delivers a better experience and branded experience in everything from its arena to its concept store. Watching our sporting or musical heroes, making our own music video, drinking at an exclusive O2 customer bar, or visiting the world class O2 bubble exhibition space is the kind of experience that could enrich our lives. It’s the kind of thing that we’d remember, that would actually make a difference to us. It’s the kind emotional benefit that no other brand could replicate. Moreover, it might actually make a difference to how we perceive O2 as a brand.

Start telling consumers about what you’ll do for them, how you’ll make them feel. Stop telling consumers that you’ll save them time or money. They’ll think of you in those rational terms, and as soon as your competitor starts saving them more time or money your brand will be lost.