Skip to main content

Case Study in Brand Extension

Laura Ries writes about an interesting case of brand extension:
My last post praised Geox, the first breathable shoe. Mario Moretti Polegato, CEO and founder of Geox, has built a powerful global shoe brand by focusing on one word “breathable.”
But then Ries follows up:
Mario’s itch has led him to start a Geox fashion line featuring clothes that breathe.

But he is staying focused you might be thinking. The product is still breathable. Yes, but there is a great difference between shoes and clothes. It is a great divide that Geox will have great difficulty crossing.


Now, I do think that extending the Geox brand to clothes instead of just shoes has its risks and liabilities. But just how serious these risks and liabilities are depends on whether "Geox" means "breathable shoe" or just "breathable".

If it means "breathable shoe", then extending the brand to clothes is actually a form of rebranding. It's not just a matter of applying the meaning of "Geox" to another line of products. It actually changes the meaning from "breathable shoe" to something broader. Changing what a brand stands for is a dangerous move.

If "Geox" already means "breathable" instead of the narrower "breathable shoe", on the other hand, then applying the brand to clothes is a natural extension that does not change the meaning of "Geox". Ries seems to believe it is an unwise decision, but I'm not sure.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the