Comments on: Turning Brands Into Megabrands

By: Tracy Zaiss

Tracy Zaiss — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 14:49:03 +0000

Remember Ries & Ries “22 Immmutable Laws of Branding”? Rule 10: The Law of Extensions – The easiest way to destroy a brand is to put its name on everything. We may have moved beyond these 22 laws – but they raise a good point that you have to also consider what extensions do to your core brand. Sometimes it seems like a brand extension is an easy answer – and, as we all know, nothing’s that easy in marketing!

By: Ted Mininni

Ted Mininni — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 11:44:51 +0000

Thanks for the kind words and your insights, Promotional Products. Agreed: Coca Cola is a megabrand. Well put: “If you can cross demographics, generations, or countries you are on you way to becoming a megabrand.”
In this year’s Interbrand’s Top 100 Global Brands, Coca Cola continues to sit in the #1 position, as well. Known and consumed the world over, Coca Cola is iconic. Even though soft drink sales have been less than stellar, Coke’s latest product entry–Coke Zero–has been a winner. As you pointed out, “you do want consumers to be able to differentiate the new product from the old.” To that I would add, “and you don’t want to cannibalize sales of existing, viable products with the launch of new line items.”
Thanks for contributing meaningful content to my post, Promotional Products. I appreciate it.

By: Promotional Products

Promotional Products — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 02:17:38 +0000

Terrific article, I would have thought Coca Cola was for sure a megabrand. I think some rules that apply to a megabrand is crossover ability. If you can cross demographics, generations, or countries you are on you way to becoming a megabrand. Additionally, I think that to launch a megabrand you most likely have to launch a similar campaign to a similar demographic as your best selling product, however, you do want consumers to be able to differentiate the new product from the old. They must be able to know that this is a new product that they must try and will benefit them, but know that it is different from the original to serve a purpose.

By: Ted Mininni

Ted Mininni — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:57:51 +0000

Hi Jamie,
Thanks for asking your own questions and for making this solid observation: “The customer has to be able to make the connection.” Exactly.
Brands branching into apparel? An iconic megabrand like Harley Davidson comes to mind. Many proud Harley owners like to wear their t-shirts, jackets and other gear to show the world they’re brand devotees. Ditto for kids when it comes to strong Disney or Nickelodeon properties. I’m sure there are also examples of brands that segued into apparel and fell flat doing it.
Can you think of examples of successes and failures to share with us, Jamie? I’d love to get your feedback. Thanks.

By: Jamie Birch

Jamie Birch — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 04:02:13 +0000

You asked a few questions there at the end. While I don’t know if there are any rules, I think the mistakes you pointed out lead to some common sense guidelines. The extension has to really make sense. But not to the product development or marketing teams, to the consumer. Coors water? The customer has to be able to make that connection.
Do you consider successful brands branching into clothing and apparel? There are many examples of this, but I’m not sure that this qualifies.

By: Ted Mininni

Ted Mininni — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:37:18 +0000

Interesting idea, Clive. After all: Crayola is a globally known brand; and they have been extending the line with new product intros to encompass “creativity” as you rightly pointed out. Personally, I think Crayola has great potential to evolve into a megabrand; just not sure they’re there yet. What do DF readers think about Clive’s suggestion? Disagreeing points of view are always welcome here.
Thanks, Clive, for getting us thinking about this one. . .

By: Clive Bearman

Clive Bearman — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:28:46 +0000

How about Crayola? They are a global company, have an instantly recognizable glyph (the two black lines on any crayon, real or fake, scream Crayola) AND they’ve moved the brand to reflect the bigger concept of “creativity”.

By: Ted Mininni

Ted Mininni — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:45:31 +0000

You are so right, Kevin. Thanks for pointing this out along with some strong examples. Competition is very intense in every consumer product category, so any company that is thinking about leveraging its brand into other categories, had better research before they leap. Great insights, Kevin.

By: Kevin Horne

Kevin Horne — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:40:02 +0000

Not sure why, but retail apparel always seems to have some good “bad” examples”:
- Abercrombie failed with Ruehl (slightly older demo)
- Talbots failed with Talbot Mens and Talbots Kids
- Pacific Sunwear failed with “demo” (urban clothes) and One Thousand Steps (shoes)
Success in one demo or category doesn’t grant automatic permission to go to an adjacent, no matter how logical it might appear on paper!

By: Ted Mininni

Ted Mininni — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:14:55 +0000

Paul,
I’m not sure that Kirkland could be classified a megabrand yet, even though it has extended into many, many categories. Interesting that the brand has been offered to other retailers, isn’t it? This reminds me of what Safeway is doing on the West coast, offering its private label O Organics brand and Eating Right brand to other retailers. If these brands get enough distribution and consumer buy-in, they may have the potential to become megabrands in my view. What is private label, after all? Not only products that cost less than the “national” brands. . .but significant rival brands to the nationals now. It will be interesting to see if selected retailers’ PL brands do become megabrands in future.
Thanks, Paul. Great question.

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 14:58:56 +0000

Ted, how about Kirkland? I know it’s a Costco inhouse brand, but it is widely known to stand for quality goods and is extended across hundreds of private label products. Some wholesalers also buy the Kirkland brand and retail it on their shelves. Thoughts?