Skip to main content

Costs of Launching a New Brand

Reading Al Ries and Laura Ries' War in the Boardroom, I took particular note of the following excerpt (page 36):
[A] left brainer at a smaller company thinks, "We can't afford the costs of launching a new brand. So let's use our existing name. Furthermore, we already have some good consumer recognition. With a new brand, we'd have to start all over again. We don't have the resources to launch a new product and a new brand at the same time, nor is it necessary to launch a new brand."
The authors ridicule this line of reasoning, which is unfortunately common even among marketing professionals. The authors counter that successful product strategists:
  1. Strive to create a new product category.
  2. Create a new brand to stand for that category in the mind of the customer.
  3. Keep the brand focused on that one category.
In the short run, creating a new brand may be more expensive. But in the long run, trying to "stretch" a brand name to stand for more than one category is even more expensive.

Comments

Create a new brand to stand for that category in the mind of the customer.

This rule is huge for me. Make your brand synonymous with the market "category" you are trying to corner. Google, Facebook, most of these companies were not the first but they succeeded(in a lot of things actually) but one was becoming synonymous with their category. Search = Google, Social networking = Facebook, online music = iTunes. This is marketing gold.
Sarah Wallace said…
What about the decision on how to move into a new industry? Should a company use their brand which is almost unknown to the new industry or use the brand of a recent acquisition that has a previous reputation (good or bad) in the industry already?
Roger L. Cauvin said…
Thanks for the comment, Sarah.

A brand is a set of associations imprinted in the minds of existing and potential customers. A brand can be an extraordinarily powerful force for selling your products.

The lesson from Al Ries and Laura Ries is that a brand's potential is limited mostly by prior perceptions and biases, not by a company's marketing budget. As a general rule, when introducing new products, companies should choose brand names and images free of historical baggage.

Most companies choose the opposite path. Instead of trying to avoid a brand name with prior associations and biases, they try to leverage whatever positive ones may exist, thinking it will save customers mental effort and the company money. Al Ries, Laura Ries, and other top marketing experts who think outside the box believe this philosophy is a dangerous oversimplification.

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