Two Brands for the Price of One
Interesting piece in today's New York Times on how the impending arrival next week of a "branding mash-up" between J.C. Penney and the Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation might confuse each company's brand image in the minds of consumers. The new clothing line, called American Living, will be featured exclusively at Penney's; its ad campaign will work hard to make the Polo/Penney connection via such tried and true Lauren components as photography by Bruce Weber.
While the potential for boosting Penney's cachet and Lauren's bottom line seems obvious, it's left some brand consultants wondering if the deal's really going to be as win/win as it's being presented. “May I remind you that Wal-Mart ran ad pages in Vogue?” the article quotes Robert K. Passikoff, president at brand and consumer loyalty consultancy Brand Keys. "The ads were lovely, but no one would buy the clothing.”
This got me to wondering what other brand-conscious companies think about the American Living deal. When does it make sense to try and expand your brand's impact with a business arrangement with another brand -- and when should you say "no thanks" to such an opportunity? Is there a real threat of losing your own brand's reputation if certain goals aren't met? Is it okay to risk losing a little of your brand's "soul" if the trade-off is higher sales?
A lot of people believe that a rose is a rose is a rose, of course. Though Ralph Lifschitz, for one, might dispute that.
Related Entries
- Thrill or Spill? Customers Ride the Netflix Roller Coaster
- Taking a Proactive Approach to Social Media Complaints
- CCO Council's Curtis Bingham: Critical Success Factors for the CCO
