Revealed yesterday by the New York Post, as part of DC Comics’ “relaunching” of its entire line of superhero characters in September, Superman himself is going to be a little more casual than most of us are used to. The man of steel is set to nix his trademark blue spandex, red underwear and flowin g cape for a short red cape, blue t-shirt and... jeans? I’m not a huge comic fan, but even I balked a bit at the sacrilege.
This image makeover made me think of some other infamous rebranding efforts that were met with negative reaction, despite intentions to “freshen up” the company’s image:
Tropicana: When the orange juice brand redesigned its cartons, sales plummeted by an unprecedented 20 percent. Two months later, the company was back to its original design. While I haven’t heard any analysis of just why it was so unsuccessful (the company refused to comment), my initial reaction was that the simplistic design looked an awful lot like the generic store brands. Let's face it, it's hard to market a generic product at a brand-name price point.
GAP: Perhaps the poster child for failed rebranding attempts, the company rolled out a new logo on October 6, 2010 in an attempt to create a more contemporary feel. The public outcry was so great that the company reverted to the previous logo only a week later. Rumors circulated that the temporary rebranding was simply a publicity stunt, but the executive in charge of the change resigned just a few months later, leading one to believe it was just a really, really bad idea.
Aol. What was once the leader in Internet services, has struggled over the years to compete with the likes of Google, MSN and Yahoo! In 2009, the company revealed its new look: Aol. [period] – superimposed onto images of goldfish, a rainbow, a tree, etc. Unfortunately, this new and confusing identity (some asked, “dot-what?”) failed to capture the company’s new direction as a smaller and more nimble provider of premier online content.
Speaking of “dot-what,” I used to work for a company that shall remain nameless, but whose earlier advertising campaigns included a jingle with a barber shop chorus singing “dot com.” For years, the company was divided on whether or not to embrace or reject that association. Those in favor believed it was brand recognition gold, as evidenced by the fact that you probably know exactly what company I’m referencing (can you tell which side of the debate I was on?). Those against it, felt it pigeonholed the brand as just an online service, when in reality, the company offered a sizeable chunk of business offline. I left the company before the debate was settled, but I have noticed recent advertisements seem to be missing something...
What do you think? Do you think DC is setting Superman up to look like a kid playing dress up on Halloween, or do you think the image makeover is a welcome one? What about the other brands mentioned – how would you do things differently? Any other major branding blunders come to mind?
Amanda Hoffman can be reached at ahoffman@sterlingpr.com. Follow her on Twitter @hoffmandy.
(Tropicana image via AdvertisingAge; Superman image via New York Post)
Comments