How Brands Grow: mechanics and meaning

I think some of the confusion around How Brands Grow comes from the word brand itself. In everyday marketing language, “brand” often means image, meaning, associations, personality, purpose, or reputation. But in the Ehrenberg-Bass sense, brand growth is mostly about something more concrete: how companies grow market share. Their model gives us something close to the mechanics of growth: observable patterns, repeatable laws, buyer penetration, light buyers, mental availability, category entry points, distinctive brand assets, and physical availability. In that sense, mental availability explains how brands come to mind in buying situations. A brand grows when it becomes easier to notice, remember, recognise, and buy. But I still wonder if brand meaning plays a different role. Perhaps meaning is closer to dark matter. It is not always directly visible in the model, but we infer its presence from how markets bend: persistent preference, price premiums, cultural stickiness, symbolic value, and why some associations seem to carry more weight than others. So maybe the interesting question is not whether mechanics or meaning matters more. It is this: Does mental availability explain how brands are recalled, while meaning helps explain why some memory structures become heavier, more durable, and more valuable? At least that is how I understand the distinction. Happy to discuss — especially if you see it differently.