Good brand, bad brand, “rebrand”, you brand

This article first appeared May 10, 2011.

This past week saw the launch of Virgin Australia. Complete with Richard Branson on hand, this was touted as the “rebrand” of Virgin’s holdings in this part of the world into a single identifiable entity. If companies were cattle that may be true.

They are not. And so what occurred last week was a renaming.

A near as I can tell from the story, there was no major change to operations or to culture, no new products in a completely different category. The previously named Virgin Blue Group isn’t suddenly doing rental cars (though there is a space that could use some help Virgin style).

Brand speaking, when what you do stays what you do, then what you get is what you got, no matter what the label on the door (or plane) might say.

This isn’t a dig at Virgin Australia. The word brand in all its uses and abuses is everywhere. In the last week it seems I have even heard the word brand attached to everything from a terrorist organisation to the second most famous bearded man in the world (and if you can’t guess who is first then no Christmas for you).

Was Bin Laden a brand? Is Al Qaeda a brand?

By my definition “brand is the result of the promises you keep” so you would certainly have to look at both as brands. But there is something just a bit tough to stomach, when sitting listening to news announcers talk about what a reviled terrorist organisation can do to “rebuild it’s brand” after the death of its figurehead and presumed leader.

However, truth is that brands aren’t all kumbaya, good and togetherness. The promises some brands make and keep have serious consequences, but I don’t get to choose that. It would be a great world if every organisation operated with one eye on the bottom line and one eye on the greater good, but it isn’t happening and I don’t get to judge that.

It is an interesting and disquieting juxtaposition when Al Qaeda, Virgin Australia, Osama Bin Laden and Richard Branson are all considered brands (at least by news organisations). But perhaps in looking at that and seeing below the surface intentions and actions to what they share (brand wise) and can better understand what actually makes brands tick – and then start to use the word with more care.

See you next week.

Michel Hogan is a Brand Advocate. Through her work with Brandology here in Australia and in the United States, she helps organisations recognise who they are and align that with what they do and say, to build more authentic and sustainable brands. She also publishes the Brand thought leadership blog – Brand Alignment. is a Brand Advocate. Through her work with Brandology here in Australia and in the United States, she helps organisations recognise who they are and align that with what they do and say, to build more authentic and sustainable brands. She also publishes the Brand thought leadership blog – Brand Alignment.