Frequently brand owners find themselves in the position of wanting or needing to explain the thinking behind their name, mark, and/or brand. Sometimes the explanations appear publicly on product packaging, websites, catalogs, brochures, advertising, and frequently in press releases, or perhaps in statements to reporters, especially when trademark litigation concerning the brand is involved. Such explanations about the brand’s
From My Cousin Vinny:
Vinny Gambini: I object to this witness being called at this time. We’ve been given no prior notice he would testify. No discovery of any tests he’s conducted or reports he’s prepared. And as the court is aware, the defense is entitled to advance notice of all witnesses who will testify, particularly those who will give scientific evidence, so that we can properly prepare for cross-examination, as well as give the defense an opportunity to have his reports reviewed by a defense expert, who might then be in a position to contradict the veracity of his conclusions.
Judge: Mr. Gambini?
Vinny Gambini: Yes, sir?
Judge: That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection.
Vinny Gambini: Thank you, sir.
Not fair. That’s just how it feels sometimes.
You believe you have a sound position, a fine strategy or a winning campaign, all backed up by solid arguments. But then you’re overruled. And you’re left shaking your head and saying to yourself: “This is a winner. Why don’t they get it?”
I’m sure that’s how brand strategists and consultants, whether internal or external to an organization, feel at times when their proposals are rejected. In fact, I know that’s how they feel. I’ve been there.