In the news: stories about two Canadian founders who believed they were above reproach and found themselves ousted from power.
American Apparel’s Dov Charney, dismissed for misconduct:
…and Dennis J. “Chip” Wilson, who inferred that Lululemon’s yoga pants were only sheer on women too big to wear them, is now brokering the company’s sale to the owner of the Vans and North Face brands:
Can a brand successfully emerge from the damaging antics of its founder?
Wilson (L) and Charney (R).
Neiman Marcus, (American sister to Canada’s Holt Renfrew), recently branded its rooftop so that people searching for it in satellite view would find the store more readily.
What else might be branded in view of consumers’ “new view”?
Via your classmate Neera, comes this fascinating public service announcement from VW. The brand ran an experiential, emotional campaign to demonstrate the dangers of texting while driving. As Neera notes,
“Throughout the commercial, you don’t know who the car maker is. They only show the VW logo at the very end. There is no indication that the car was or was not a VW model, or that VW cars are safer than others. But, by using a PSA along with the industry knowledge that VW is known for safety, the commercial really reinforces the brand image.”
Do you agree, or is the brand’s presence too subtle?
Where something is produced can be an important branding (or co-branding) tool–but it can also hold risk. What do you think of Gap’s initiative to produce its products in Myanmar (formerly known as Burma)?
Via your classmate Justin, the news is in that Lego is going to release a set of figures depicting female scientists.
I wonder how they’re going to get all of their lab equipment into the castle and whether it will bother the Prince? 😉