I think they should reuse some brands that are available again instead of wasting a new name. I could suggest MCI, Charter, Blackwater, etc as all names that would be befitting for these "oops" rebrands.
Point taken, bad idea. But they would need to back up a rebranding with new and innovative products that demonstrate vision. I shouldn't pretend to know what those products should be, or how they should be sold.
It's really not that bad of a rebrand. Brands are important. People care about them. They need to be updated with the times. Perhaps the author would care to show some alternative modernizations to illustrate a better way to do it.
There is absolutely no need for this rebrand, because they're not actually getting rid of the old brand, they're trying to reuse it for something different, which is insane. Hence the defensiveness. They know this will cause problems and complaints. They can't get ahead of the complaints without actually fixing them, by reversing the decision.
I don't really agree with renaming or rebranding. It is like going to the grocery store to buy one of your favorite things, but you suddenly cannot find it anymore. The box changed so you are not sure if it is the same thing as what you use to buy. You had recommended it to you friends under one name, but now when they get around to buying it, they can't find it.
reply