Guests remember Phu Quoc. They do not remember your name.
The confusion between destination brands and business brands is causing thousands of tourism operators to rely on the reputation of others.
When guests remember the destination but not where they stayed, the operator is letting the location do the work of the brand. Breaking free from this cycle requires building a distinct reason for guests to return, independent of whether Phú Quốc or Đà Lạt is trending.
Ask someone who just returned from Phú Quốc: "Where did you stay?" The answer often starts with "In Phú Quốc" before they remember the resort name. That’s not a small matter. It’s a sign that the location is doing the job that the operator's brand should be doing.
The landmark is the stage, not the brand.
Phú Quốc, Đà Lạt, and Hội An are names that already have appeal. They attract guests. But when guests book because they "want to go to Phú Quốc", the resort is just one option on the list, not the destination. This distinction is much more important than it appears.
If a resort succeeds because it’s in the right location, it will fail as soon as another place is in a better, newer, cheaper location. Locations do not belong to anyone. They are not private property. All competitors in the area have the right to use that name in advertising.
A brand, as defined by Marty Neumeier in The Brand Gap, is the perception in the minds of others, not the name or logo. A resort has a true brand when guests remember it before they remember the destination.
A brand is not a logo. A brand is a person's gut feeling about a product, service, or organization.
Marty Neumeier, The Brand Gap
The loop of the ride-sharing operator
This is the cycle Sinh Vũ sees repeating in the Vietnamese resort industry. Resorts open, attaching the location name to everything: "Phú Quốc beachfront", "Đà Lạt hillside". Initial booking numbers are good because the destination is trending. When the destination becomes saturated or faces issues, the number of guests declines steadily. Investors pour money into OTA advertising (online booking platforms), with commissions of 15 to 25% eating into profits. Ultimately, the only asset accumulated is for the OTA, not for their own brand.
The issue is not a lack of marketing budget. The issue is that marketing money is reinforcing awareness of the destination, not the brand.
The real confusion lies in where
Many resort owners think they are building a brand when they invest in beautiful photos, locally styled interior design, and write "healing" captions on social media. Those things are good. But they are not a brand without a distinct core reason behind them.
Try asking directly: if you remove the location name from everything, what does this resort have for guests to remember? If the answer is "beautiful photos" or "reasonable prices", that’s not yet a brand. Because competitors also have beautiful photos, and prices can be cut lower at any time.
A true brand is what guests use to tell others. It’s not "I stayed in Phu Quoc," but "I stayed at that place, and it was different because..."
Brand assets accumulated
Byron Sharp in How Brands Grow points out that a brand only accumulates in memory when it is consistently repeated and tied to a unique characteristic that is not shared with anyone else. In the resort industry, what does that mean?
It could be a service approach that no one else offers. It could be a rooted story about the creator of the place. It could be a specific experience that can only be found here, not just because it’s in Phú Quốc, but because of how this place operates. Resorts that achieve this do not need the destination as a crutch. They become the reason for guests to visit that destination.
Kantar BrandZ shows that brands perceived by customers as "meaningful and different" can command prices up to 38% higher than competitors in the same segment. In the resort industry, that price gap represents the difference between surviving and thriving without resorting to price cuts.
Breaking free from the shadow of the destination
There is no one-size-fits-all formula. But there is one question that should be asked before any brand decision: if this destination suddenly loses its appeal, does the resort still have a reason to exist?
If the answer is no, that is the clearest signal that the brand has not been built, only named.
Building a distinct brand does not mean separating from the destination. It means using the destination as context, not as the reason for existence. Six Senses anywhere is still Six Senses before it becomes "the resort in Côn Đảo" or "the resort in Phú Quốc". Guests seek Six Senses, not "a luxury resort on some island."
That is the gap between operators who are relying on others and those who are building real assets. That gap does not naturally close over time.
Three points to clarify first
- What is the unique reason for existence, aside from geographical location and beautiful photos?
- What are guests saying about this place to others, and what name do they use to describe it?
- What percentage of bookings come from people actively searching for the brand name, not through OTAs?
These three questions cannot be answered without brand consulting. But if the answers are difficult to articulate or unclear, that is the moment to pause and carefully reconsider before continuing to invest in destination advertising.
References
Byron Sharp, How Brands Grow (Ehrenberg-Bass Institute). Marty Neumeier, The Brand Gap. Kantar BrandZ 2020. Data on the VN tourism industry: Vietnam National Administration of Tourism, 2025. OTA data: GoHost, HotelJob.vn.
Frequently asked questions
Does a small resort need to build its own brand, or can it just rely on the destination name to save costs?
Relying on the destination name costs nothing to build, but it also accumulates nothing. When the destination becomes saturated or faces issues, the resort has no independent reason for guests to return. A distinct brand doesn’t need to be large, but it needs to have a specific reason that only that place has.
How can you tell if guests remember your brand or just the destination?
The simplest way is to ask guests directly after checkout: will they recommend the place to friends, Phú Quốc or the resort name? If the answer mainly refers to the province or island name, that’s a sign the brand hasn’t left a distinct mark. Monitoring direct bookings versus those through OTAs is also an indicator of how actively guests seek the brand name.
Is the OTA the reason the resort brand is overshadowed?
OTAs are a distribution channel, not the root cause. If the brand is strong enough, guests will seek the name directly whether OTAs exist or not. The issue is that many resorts have not built a reason for guests to remember their name, so OTAs become the only place guests find them, and the 15 to 25% commission is the price paid for lacking a brand.