I found this article today on nytimes.com, written by Rob Walker, on dead products that have been revitalized by a new company, purely based on the advantage of having existing brand equity.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/magazine/18rebranding-t.html?_r=1&sq=&st=nyt&scp=4&pagewanted=print
An interesting idea, it's almost like retro-entrepreneurship. Instead of creating a new idea, you leverage an existing one that has since died, and reinvent it.
I have mixed thoughts on this.
First, there's a reason why the brand became obsolete in the first place, so you have to take that into consideration (i.e. change of attitudes, better competition, increased cost of raw materials, etc.). Then you have to check to see if the brand has negative associations in terms of esteem and knowledge. Businesses that had lots of investment once don't just end without a good reason.
What you want to find is a brand that can continue to compete as a similar product to its original form, find a way to enhance it or make it "fresh" or "revitalized" while leveraging the same brand attributes for which it still has equity. Like, if you try to make salon selectives a premium brand that communicates "sophisticated" to consumers, it's old brand equity doesn't help you. On the other hand, if you continue to leverage "fun" or "youthful" attributes, and then make the product, with say, new organic ingredients, then you've got something.
I'm guessing there are relatively few of those types of opportunities around.
No comments:
Post a Comment