An Ode to the Brand of Brands, the King of Cola: Coke

   

Dear Coke:

I love you. You are an incredible product. You are the Babe Ruth of soft drinks, the proprietor of the word “cola,” and most of all, the brand of all brands. Your brand is not just bulletproof; it’s indestructible—even from self-inflicted damage.

Interbrand, the global branding giant, recently valued you at 63.3 billion dollars. We’re not talking stimulus money here, but that’s huge. Most brands would be happy with .3 billion dollars.

About a million times a day someone orders a Coke in a restaurant that serves the number two cola and is immediately given an apology, “I’m sorry, is Pepsi OK?” You have your closest competitor, a major brand in its own right, constantly admitting that they are not you. Have you ever heard somebody order a “Rum and Pepsi?” I haven’t.

You guys redesigned Santa Claus, for crying out loud.

   

Years ago, your name became slang for a dangerous drug. But who cares? Heck, you once had a bit of it in your formula, right? For some brands it would be a death sentence; for you, it’s a cool factoid of your heritage.

And that secret formula story is downright mythic. Created by Dr. Pemberton in 1886--only two people have it and each knows only half. One guy has it committed to memory and the other spent the last eight years in an undisclosed location with Dick Cheney shooting Pepsi cans off fence posts. Ok, that’s a stretch.

You are so beloved by your customers that you have survived 100 years of changing tastes, cultural upheaval, and most famously, shooting yourself in both feet by introducing New Coke and dumping your flagship product. Did customers go running to a competitor and tank your sales, as happened to Tropicana this year for nothing more than a package change? No, they simply demanded in various levels of outrage that you bring it back. And you did.

Now that’s brand LOYALTY.

(A brand tangent: Which was worse: Vista or New Coke? Hard to say, but Coke just said, “Oops, my bad!” and moved on. Microsoft refused to back down and helped Apple grow.)

Branding briefs have leaked out from Coca Cola’s global headquarters in Atlanta (the city where the very first Coke was sold) stating that Coke should be positioned as the essence of life, an indivisible part of living fabulously. (Current slogan: “Open Happiness”) Coke is a global symbol of America, the most exported element of our culture, a fixture in hundreds of countries around the world.

 

And yet… And yet, as a brand you are terrifically hard to learn from. Mere mortal brands must worry constantly about their customers’ changing tastes and fickle loyalties. Coke? Not so much. I’m not saying you don’t market your cans off, but you’re so ubiquitous, so everywhere and everything, that it’s pretty hard to emulate your success. Sometimes it seems like you can afford to sponsor every sporting event on earth. Where’s the lesson in that?

Here’s what marketers can take home along with an ice cold six pack of cola heaven:

Coke is remarkably consistent. They haven’t meaningfully changed their Coca Cola name or logo in well over 100 years. (The original design was handwritten by Dr. Pemberton’s bookkeeper, Frank Robinson, in 1886. You couldn’t make this stuff up if you tried.) They own the colors red and white and stick with them. (They recast Santa in their colors for a promotion in the 1930s that became the standard vision of the jolly old elf.) Coke owns and leverages the most famous package trademark ever—the Coke bottle. What does a Pepsi bottle look like?

Coke is a leader and acts like one. They execute a lot of marketing elements very well, from aggressive advertising and promotion, to highly effective distribution, to pairing themselves with other wholesome leading brands like McDonalds, NASCAR, American Idol and the Olympics. And Coke knows its brand story. Visit their web site and they’ll tell you. Click on a link and they’ll have their customers tell you. They keep their brand story alive and well and linked to American life in good times or bad. Coke keeps us going. It’s always the right time for a Coke.

      

Yes, Coke, I brand-love you. You have elevated your brand of sugar water to the status of cultural icon, yet I can fill up anytime I want for less than a buck. You are the amazing, infallible super-brand. In fact, you said it best with your slogan from many years ago, and it’s still true today: Coke is it.

—Dave Taylor, Taylor Brand Group

 

Request Info

See our or enter your information below to send us a quick message and we'll reply in one business day or less.

Your privacy is ensured. We will never sell, disclose, or trade contact information.

Naming the Store Brand

         

Every Sunday I go through the circulars in the paper looking for new products. I usually spend a lot of time with the ads from the national drug store chains (Walgreens, CVS, and Rite Aid). Recently, I observed that each chain seems to have a radically different philosophy on store brand naming. And while this observation isn’t earth shattering, it exposes the marketing strategies (or lack thereof) of each chain.

For example, check out the allergy section. The big brand names like Benadryl®, Claritin® and Zyrtec® all have store brand/private label competition. Walgreens naming protocol for its store brand is pretty straightforward and seems to be designed to help a consumer find the Walgreens knockoff of the branded product. You can buy Wal-dryl, Wal-itin, and Wal-zyr, and the packaging is color coded to make it easier.  This is a very consistent strategy that is designed to make life easier for the consumer and also designed to build the “Wal-“ prefix as a brand.

          Non-Drowsy 24 Hour Allergy,Tablets          

                    

At CVS, you have to be a well-informed consumer or a doctor to get it right because CVS attempts to align symptoms with branding. For example, the CVS version of Benadryl is called Allergy, while the CVS version of Claritin is called Non-Drowsy Allergy Relief (non-drowsy being a key benefit of the active ingredient in Claritin), and the Zyrtec knockoff product is called Indoor/Outdoor Allergy Relief (Zyrtec is the only brand with indoor/outdoor allergy claims).

                                     

At Rite Aid, you almost have to be a pharmacist to get the right brand. The first branded product to go generic was Benadryl and Rite Aid called the knockoff Rite Aid Allergy Medication. When the next generation allergy drugs went generic, Rite Aid had to improvise and so now you need to know the active ingredient to get the right brand (Rite Aid Loratidine and Rite Aid Cetirizine for Claritin and Zyrtec respectively). 

How about gastrointestinal products? Looking at four big brands, Zantac®, Metamucil®, Pepto-Bismol®, and MiraLAX®, and their knockoff brands at the drug chains show inconsistency at all three chains:

Branded: Zantac; Metamucil; Pepto-Bismol; MiraLAX

Walgreens: Wal-Zan; Wal-Mucil; Soothe; SmoothLAX

CVS: Acid Reducer; Natural Fiber Laxative; Stomach Relief; PureLAX

Rite Aid: Acid Reducer; Natural Fiber; Pink Bismuth; Laxative

So what is going on here? Walgreens, which appeared to be building the “Wal-“ prefix as its store brand champion, seems to have abandoned that philosophy in some parts of the store. CVS, which had been focusing on product benefits, gets dragged down into generic category descriptors in gastrointestinals. And Rite Aid is all over the place.

Doesn’t anyone worry about having a consistent branding strategy for the store brand? It sure would make life easier for us confused consumers! Hey Walgreens, CVS and Rite Aid…do you need some naming help?

- Mark Prus, NameFlashSM

Are Your Business Signs and Brand on the Same Page?

Hopefully you enjoy riddles. It is late Sunday afternoon, 4:30 pm to be exact. Too early for valet parking at Fogo de Chao, a wonderful Brazilian steakhouse, so you drive two blocks and enter a parking lot with the following sign:

                                 

You had a very nice dinner and now you're ready to leave the parking lot at 6:15 pm. Based on the above sign (and contract, by the way), how much do you owe the parking attendant? Instead of humming the Jeopardy thinking music theme song, might I suggest you consider humming the 1970 Five Man Electrical Band tune "Signs" during your calculation. And for any '70s challenged folk, I'll prime the pump for you: "Sign, sign, everywhere a sign, blocking out the scenery, breaking my mind, do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?"

Simple sign, simple question, simple answer, right? I thought so, at first, but apparently not. Well after the fact, my rather informal survey yielded four different answers from four different people:

  1. $3.50
  2. $6.50
  3. $11.00
  4. $14.50

So, what is your answer? One of the above, or none of the above? I chose Door No. 2.

OK, because I entered the lot before 5pm and was ready to leave the lot after 5pm, I offered to pay $6.50, for spending 1-2 hours in the lot, but was told I had to pay the $11.00 "Weekend Night Rate" to exit the lot, unless I wanted to call the police and convince them otherwise. Really.

After a rather frustrating face-to-face discussion with the attendant and an even more frustrating telephone discussion with the night manager on duty (this guy seemed to be a Five Man Electrical Band fan with a heavy emphasis on the "can't you read the sign?" lyrics), I declined the offer to call 911, paid the $11.00, and took it up with parking lot management bright and early on Monday morning. After speaking with a total four different employees, I was left with the firm conviction that they "knew" I owed $11.00, because they "knew" what they meant the sign to say, yet my fine legal training told me otherwise because neither the "Night Rate" exception (enter after 5pm) nor the "Weekend Day Rate" exception (valid 5am-5pm) applied to my situation.

Anyway, this negative brand experience got me thinking about how important good, clear, and accurate signs are to building favorable and positive brand experiences. It also got me thinking about what makes a good sign, and putting aesthetics and design aside, because those topics are better left for our talented pool of Guest Bloggers, I came up with two key elements: (1) simplicity; and (2) accuracy. In fact, I submit that if either is lacking it can lead to a negative brand experience -- one where the sign and the brand the sign represents are out of sync or not on the same page, so to speak (assuming, of course, one promise of the brand is a favorable experience).

By way of dramatic contrast, the favorable brand experience I had at Fogo really reinforced and illustrated this point. Indeed, one of the "signs" that Fogo is known for is the two-sided disk -- one side red, the flip-side green. Everyone at the table gets one. The Fogo disk sign easily satisfies the simplicity portion of my two-part sign test:

"Each guest uses a two-sided disk to control the pace of their meal. The green side signals the Gaucho chefs to bring out skewers of sizzling fire-roasted meats to carve at the table. The red side indicates a stopping point. Turning back to green lets the Gaucho chefs know to start offering the meats again."

Not only is the Fogo disk sign simple, it is accurate too. The Gaucho chefs don't bother you when you desire a "stopping point," (perhaps to loosen your belt) unless someone sitting next to you plays a childhood prank by quietly flipping your disk back to green, as my giggling children learned quickly, and as the Gaucho chefs seem to have seen more than a few times before. So, the Fogo disk sign reinforces the Fogo brand and creates at least the opportunity for a positive brand experience because it is both simple and accurate.

As an aside, for you trademark types who enjoy riddles, no, it doesn't appear that Fogo views the two-sided disk as a trademark, at least it hasn't attempted to register it as one yet, despite owning two other rather interesting non-traditional trademarks, including five vertical skewers of meat surrounding a campfire, and a chimney design. I'm thinking that the above quote from Fogo's website would make it rather difficult to overcome a functionality refusal on the two-sided disk, at least as a non-conventional trademark.

Anyway, to wrap things up, back to the parking lot part of the story. The fourth person I spoke to, the person with whom "the buck stops," had a much different view of the parking lot brand than the previous three. So, not only can poor business signs get in the way of positive brand experiences, but obviously, employees who don't live up to the company's brand promises can too. I was eventually told "we want to keep you as a customer," despite what the others said. In fact, I was mailed a full refund (more than I asked for) and I cashed the check a couple of days ago, just in time to feel safe running with this blog post. And, in case you're wondering, I am also informed that the sign is being "re-done," so let's just consider this whole exercise a public service.