On a recent shopping trip, I couldn’t help but notice some interesting brand extensions inside and outside the stores.
My encounter inside involved Burt’s Bees . The brand encompasses a wide variety of lip balms, lotions, cosmetics, and personal body care items. (pets, too). Yet I discovered a new addition to the lineup:…
As a frustrated and bored Minnesota Vikings fan, Monday Night Football last evening caught my attention with the division battle between the Green Bay Packers and the Chicago Bears. In case you missed it, the Packers lost to the Bears, despite the Packers typical home field advantage at the legendary Lambeau Field.
As we have written before, any brand extension requires the necessary due diligence to mitigate the risk of a serious trademark conflict. And, from a trademark perspective, both strength and scope of rights necessarily expand as the number of different goods and services sold under the brand grows.
If recent marketing research on…
–Dan Kelly, Attorney
I enjoyed Brent’s “I’m with the Brand” post last week, in which he detailed being turned off by overzealous fandom of some popular, or perhaps trendy, brands. I can identify (although I have no qualms about being, or admitting that I am, an “Apple Core”).
This week, I read about a situation…
One good thing leads to another, or perhaps, vice versa (then again, maybe not):
Odds are, you probably are familiar with the logo on the left, but maybe not the history behind the brand and company it represents. Apparently, a guy named Jimmy John Liataud founded Jimmy John’s Gourmet Sandwiches in Charleston, Illinois, in 1983, and since then, has grown his successful franchised restaurant business to more than 1,000 locations in 38 states, including many in Minnesota.
And, I’m guessing most of you haven’t encountered the logo on the right, so, hat tip to Ed, who guessed right that it would capture my interest. Apparently, a second generation family business called Jimmy’s Johnnys was founded in the northern suburbs of St. Paul, Minnesota, four years before Jimmy John’s came into existence, all the way back in 1979.
Branding conflict? Trademark problem? Antitrust problem via brand extension and vertical integration (for tongue-in-cheek reasons that will become more apparent far, far below)?
Need more information?
What if Jimmy’s Johnnys isn’t selling sandwiches at all, but assuming its position in the food chain, by helping dispose of them, through this business (answer below the jump):
It appears that energy drink brands have found another way to expand or extend their reach while still getting their active ingredients into the bloodstreams of consumers. This past weekend I encountered the Amp brand, not only in the refrigerated cases of convenience stores, but also at the grocery store check-out register, side by side with other traditional chewing gum brands. Some other blogs have …
In November, I wrote about how Gatorade’s 2009 re-branding as G has been a complete failure. G was an ill-conceived approach to slowing sales in 2007 and 2008. It damaged brand equity, confused consumers and didn’t reverse the trend of falling unit sales.
In the final paragraph of my last blog, I noted that PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi said the company is planning a “massive Gatorade transformation” for 2010. I recommended that Gatorade should follow the model of Coca-Cola when they decided to retire New Coke. By doing this, Coca-Cola admitted their mistake and moved on by hitting the reset button on their brand.
Initial details of PepsiCo’s 2010 “massive Gatorade transformation” have been made publicly known here, here and here. Gatorade’s brand strategy for 2010 seems mediocre. Although they are making some positive changes, other moves indicate that they still don’t understand how to successfully market their brand.