Research from the University of Notre Dame (“Lyft” vs. “Lift”: Consumers are less likely to support brands with unconventional spellings) has shown that consumers are less likely to support unfamiliar brands with unconventional spellings. Consumers perceive unconventionally spelled names as a persuasion tactic or a marketing scam, thereby making them view the brand as less sincere. The researchers who study psychological responses to marketing messages suggest that choosing unconventional spellings may backfire. However, the study finds that there is no backlash effect when a company’s motive and purpose for selecting the uniquely spelled name is perceived as sincere. An example of this would be when a brand name is being crowdsourced by consumers rather than chosen by the company. In some cases unconventionally spelled brand names may even be more suitable when consumers want a memorable experience such as a restaurant made entirely out of ice at a vacation destination.
The findings of this study might seem unlikely. Most consumers would think that the factors that would attract a customer would be the value proposition, the packaging, the cost or the promotion strategy. But, this study clearly shows that spelling, albeit a small consideration, is a major part of brand awareness and building trust at first glance. Another interesting facet of this news article is the idea that brands really need to prioritize the brand name when creating new brands or even new products and preferably conducting some market research on the brand name ideas. This idea also emphasizes the customer centricity model which posits that the closer the brand is to the customer the better it can understand their needs and create products accordingly.
There are two main considerations for effective brand management. The first consideration is that choosing a brand name for a new product or service is one of the most important brand elements to consider. Brand names create an identity for the company and help it stand out from the competition but also the brand name infiltrates itself in other areas such as brand awareness, trustworthiness and value. The second consideration comes right out of the findings of the study: companies should clearly communicate a sincere origin story during their introductory marketing campaigns when choosing unconventional spelling for new brands.
7-Eleven went to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT), sidestepping the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario (AGCO) to which they had initially applied to for their liquor license. This has allowed them to have their liquor license approved at more than 50 stores once a routine inspection is passed.
What makes this interesting is the shift in how 7-Eleven is attempting to reposition itself in the consumer’s mind. Historically, 7-Eleven has positioned themselves as a convenience store. However, with this new licensing approval, 7-Eleven introduces its licensed restaurant format in which adult guests will be able to have an alcoholic beverage when having a lunch or dinner from the chain.
This is a case of 7-Eleven trying to get ahead of the curve for when Ontario may allow convenience stores to sell alcohol to go. By already having a license in place, it would expedite their ability to have liquor sales. Considerations for brand management as they enter this new phase in the marketplace include:
How does 7-Eleven maintain a safe space and prevent overconsumption while serving alcohol?
How does 7-Eleven prevent drunk driving given that many stores are linked to a gas bar?
How does 7-Eleven define itself – is it a convenience store or a restaurant?
Has the 7-Eleven target market changed? Will this change the perception of the 7-Eleven?
These above considerations will have a major impact on the brand as it makes this transition to serving alcohol within its store locations.
Allstate is one of the largest insurance companies in the world. It offers a wide range of insurance products, including auto, home, renters, life, and business insurance.
The company has a strong presence in the insurance industry and is known for its marketing campaigns, including the popular Mayhem commercials featuring unexpected and chaotic situations. I always enjoy these, as I am a big fan of “Law & Order SVU” and Dean Winters–who personifies Mayhem in the Allstate ads–was a main cast member for many years.
The latest in the series features a teenager asking his girlfriend, Stacey, to be his date at the prom in a very romantic, but risky way. My daughter has been sending me videos of all the “promposals” that have happened at her school this year, so this particular commercial caught my attention.
Briefly – He writes “PROM?” under her window using candles, which he has lit so that she could see them at night. Unfortunately, Mayhem was there, anticipating that things will heat up. When a candle accidentally falls to the ground and a leaf starts burning, the fire soon expands to Stacey’s house. A tragedy was, luckily, avoided thanks to the early intervention of her father, who shows up with a fire extinguisher.
Mayhem warns homeowners that, if they don’t have the right home insurance coverage, they could end up paying for this kind of damage and urges them to get Allstate.
I feel this, and the previous Mayhem commercials are effective due to several key factors:
The Mayhem character is a personification of various unexpected and chaotic situations that can occur in everyday life, that people can relate to. The character’s mischievous and unpredictable nature captures viewers’ attention and creates a lasting impression. This memorable character helps Allstate’s commercials stand out among other advertisements.
The Mayhem commercials employ humor to engage and entertain viewers. The character’s witty and sarcastic remarks, combined with the absurd scenarios he creates, often elicit laughter from the audience. Humor helps create a positive association with the brand and makes the message more memorable.
Mayhem commercials vividly demonstrate potential risks and hazards that people may encounter in their daily lives. By showcasing various accidents, mishaps, and unexpected events, the commercials tap into viewers’ concerns and highlight the importance of having insurance coverage. This approach appeals to consumers’ desire for protection and resonates with their own experiences, making the message more relatable.
Allstate has maintained a consistent brand identity and messaging throughout its Mayhem campaign. The Mayhem character has become synonymous with unexpected disasters and the need for insurance. By consistently featuring Mayhem in their commercials, Allstate has built brand recognition and established a clear association between the character and the company. This consistency helps viewers quickly identify and remember the advertisements as Allstate’s.
Overall, Allstate’s Mayhem commercials effectively combine memorable characters, humor, relatable scenarios, emotional appeal, and brand consistency to capture viewers’ attention, convey the importance of insurance coverage, and create a lasting impression.
Recently, Twitter’s decision to remove the blue checkmark verification from the accounts of several high-profile celebrities and organizations has sparked a debate on whether being verified on Twitter still matters. For the longest time, the legacy blue checkmark provided the site’s users with a means to distinguish genuine notable account holders, such as celebrities and organizations, from impostors. However, following the acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk the platform has evolved and changed to a subscription-based service referred to as Twitter Blue. The service provides users with exclusive features and perks for a monthly fee of eight dollars. These exclusive features range from having a customizable app icon, color theme options, an “undo tweet” function, bookmark collections, and access to a dedicated customer support team (Gupta and Beykpour, 2021).
Movement from the Legacy checkmarks to the Twitter Blue subscription model has been met with mixed reactions from users, with some questioning the necessity of paying for additional features. One such critique comes from actor William Shatner who has criticized Musk’s decision by tweeting “Now you’re telling me that I have to pay for something you gave me for free?” (Lerman R and Siddiqui F., 2023).
In fact, the process of getting Twitter users to pay for the blue checkmarks is reminiscent of the Dr. Seuss story “The Sneetches,” where those without green stars are able to pay for the privilege only for the stars to then lose their special status. In “The Sneetches,” the author the story is intended to be a satire of discrimination. But looking at it from the real-world perspective, there is very little reason for users to pay for the blue checkmark. Organizations or businesses need to earn the trust of their audience and individuals with a celebrity status are famous for more than simply tweeting.
Over the past two years, reports suggest that Twitter under Mr. Musk’s leadership has been bleeding advertisers and seen a 40% decline in revenue (Singh J and Lunden I., 2023). This brings Twitter to an interesting stance where it must balance its desire to monetize the platform or maintain user satisfaction. Initially, the paid check mark was positioned by Musk to build a make a more egalitarian site. Although the subscription model can better serve its power users it has since then evolved to become part of the company’s plan to rebuild its revenue mode and reduce their reliance on advertising revenue as their only source of profit.
Twitter Blue subscribers will have access to exclusive features that non-paying users do not have access to. This would create a different user experience that could create a positive or negative feeling towards the brand. Hence, for effective brand management – Twitter must ensure that the features provided are worth the cost as users will only pay if they believe there is value for the subscription. It will be important for Twitter to identify what features users are willing to pay for and make sure that they are unique and cannot be found on other social media platforms.
The Canadian Football League (CFL), a longstanding pillar of the Canadian sports landscape for over six decades, is now facing a significant challenge as a considerable portion of its core fanbase enters their senior years. With approximately 30% of its supporters falling within the 55-plus age category, the league recognizes the need to attract and engage a younger demographic, while also exploring opportunities to expand its reach internationally.
Fortunately, the CFL benefits from the enduring popularity of live sports content, which continues to be a major draw for viewers. Even though many households look to trim their cable and streaming subscriptions, live sports viewing remains a major staple for many individuals. In response, the CFL is launching CFL+, a free live streaming service that will showcase select games throughout the year. The primary focus will be on markets that have yet to embrace CFL fandom or where broadcasting rights have already been secured.
As someone with a deep-rooted passion for football and a supporter of the CFL’s sustained prosperity, I find several reasons to appreciate this strategy for enhancing the CFL brand:- Non-alienation of the existing fanbase, sponsors, and broadcasters.- Engagement with younger audiences by meeting them where they spend their time, with minimal cost or investment requirements.- A low-risk and commitment approach undertaken by the CFL.
Recently, a TikTok Content Creator named Matt Rosenman has surged in popularity by exposing the branding and marketing strategies used by CPG companies to make their products appear more health conscious. Rosenman accepts ideas from viewers on suggested products to rebrand into “healthy choice” versions, then showcases his step-by-step process of how to rebrand Coke for example into “All-Natural Thrive Sparking Cola – with Natural Flavours, 100% Plant Based, Gluten-Free and Low Sodium.” Exhibit A
Rosenman, who is a graphic & web designer by trade; has created a niche viral sensation of instructional videos of how to rebrand the most unhealthy products, such as Doritos, Mountain Dew, and Cap’n Crunch Blue “Maple” Syrup, into health-food-sounding versions of themselves. Rosemen’s videos, which are predominantly available on TikTok are equal parts addictive, educational and unfortunately nefarious.
From an educational perspective, Rosenman breaks down the step-by-step rebranding process in each video. For the rebranding of the candy, “Sour Patch Kids” shown in Exhibit B, Rosenman starts with converting the insanely crowded background of the packaging into a plain solid-colour. Next, the “Sour Patch Kids” logo is made smaller, and monotone against the background to move it away from the primary focus. Next Rosenman emphasises the “Fruit” product title and adds “Fresh” for a more healthy presence.
Of course these come with a tiny “artificially flavoured” disclaimer for legal purposes. Artificially flavoured “Fresh Fruit” is just as real as artificially flavoured “Fruit” after all. For flavour names, he changed Strawberry to “Hand-Picked Strawberry”, Peach to “Ripe Summer Peach” and Grape to “Vineyard-Fresh Grapes”. Finally, Roseman adds an itemised checklist of technically correct product qualities that increase the “healthiness” sound of the product including, “Fat-Free”, “Gluten-Free”, “Cholesterol-Free”, “Vegan-Friendly” and “Mood-Boosting”. Rosenman defends the mood-boosting by saying, “Why not, I’m happy when I eat Sour Patch Kids.”
The final product is very convincing, and it’s not difficult to imagine seeing these healthy Sour Patch Kids next to the Smart Sweets brand of “health-conscious” candy in the grocery aisle. This is where we get into the nefarious side however, because in the end this video was curated by Sour Patch Kids Brand Team at Mondelēz International, Inc. They, through their official Sour Patch Kids Twitter account reached out to Rosenman as part of a deal to get their product featured. Rosenman even makes a tongue-in-cheek comment saying, “When these hit shelves, you owe me a royalty.”
Rosenman himself is a health influencer, and uses these very interesting and addictive videos to drive traffic to his own personal brand “No Cheat Day Needed.” Those who see the rebranding videos, and see what Rosenman has exposed are tainted with a newfound false sense of security. This works perfectly for Rosenman, who then uses that newfound trust to drive viewers to purchase his “real” healthy products through his affiliate marketing via content creation. There even is a section on his website titled, “Why you can Trust Me” (Exhibit C ) which is always a red flag suggesting they shouldn’t be trusted. Rosenman has a mountain of health blog content, recipes, and other videos that are all interwoven with affiliate links to purchase CPG products, protein powders and exercise equipment, while also selling advertising space throughout all his owned pages. For example, a seemingly innocent recipe for a “Meatless Crispy “Chicken” Sandwich is really an advertisement for Quorn plant based products (as seen in Exhibit D.) The recipe also includes the benefits of plant-based protein vs. animal, why this type of protein is on the “best” vegan protein sources, and other confirmation confirming statements supporting the product. Truly a remarkable con-job. By appearing to oust the primary con of the evil CPG companies, his con goes under the radar where he can profit as the hero.
Despite the underlying story, on the surface the videos are fun, educational and addictive. Who doesn’t want to see how “Flaming Hot Cheetos” can become “Artisan Cheetos with 100% Real Cheese”; or how Strawberry Pop Tarts can become “Skinny Pop-Tarts with Farm Fresh Strawberry Preserves.” One just needs to remember to think critically and remember Rosemen is trying to make a buck just like everyone else.
You can watch all Rosemen’s videos, and his affiliate-marketing infested other content through his TikTok Channel: https://www.tiktok.com/@mattrosenman
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Rosenman, M. (2023, April 2). TikTok x Matt Rosenman. No Cheat Day Needed. Retrieved April 8, 2023, from https://cheatdaydesign.com/tiktok
Earlier this year, Bud Light faced criticism for a marketing campaign that they launched. On April 1st, Dylan Mulvaney, a transgender TikTok creator, uploaded a video to social media promoting Bud Light as part of a March Madness campaign. She addressed that during the month, she was celebrating “day 365 of womanhood” and that the personalized Bud Light can was the best gift to receive in honour of this milestone.
The response to this campaign online was negative and many were sharing that Bud Light was focusing their marketing on individuals who are not their typical customers.
Alissa Heinerschied, vice president of marketing at Bud Light, expressed the need to attract young adults to the brand and believed that the way to do this was by putting an emphasis on inclusivity.
Now, the company is pivoting towards plans for a new marketing campaign in hopes of receiving a better response. This campaign will center around events such as concerts and sporting events and the Bud Light bottles will feature a camouflage design.
It appears that Bud Light is a brand that was attempting to evolve and reach a younger demographic and they did not receive the response that they had hoped to achieve. On social media, opinions can spread like wildfire which can support or be detrimental to brands.
The creation of Airbnb in 2008 prompted an entire generation to imagine a new way to take a trip. Before this service when people wanted to take a trip they most commonly stayed at a hotel or another accommodation company whose main job was providing a place to stay (i.e. motel, traditional bed & breakfast).
This disruption allowed regular homeowners to make money from their homeownership. However, this form of hospitality service was not widely adopted until many years after its creation (Airbnb, 2023) as many people had reservations about staying with strangers and hosting strangers in their house. In the early years of Airbnb, such makeshift hospitality was only seen as worthwhile to very few target audiences, mostly people who were either in desperate need of somewhere to stay or were looking to save money (Business Insider, 2019). With past Airbnb marketing campaigns, they were able to mostly overcome these consumer objections, and this service was starting to be used by consumers looking for a premium or unique stay. However, the pandemic managed to undo most of this work. With consumers being required to stop taking trips and stay away from strangers. Additionally, consumer preferences shifted toward a need for a sanitary environment, especially for where they stay on vacation (Forbes, 2020).
This television advertisement starts out with an obviously creepy tone, showing three fuzzy monsters approaching and entering a house at night. It quickly changes to the next morning and follows these monsters in their daily activities, that by a human standard are very normal. There is also a change in tone as it becomes more light, calm, and friendly. The last scene in this advertisement shows these three monsters cleaning up and leaving the house. As they cross through the door to the outside, we see them turn from monsters to humans. The screen then fades to black, and the following messages are presented: “Strangers aren’t that strange” and “Try hosting.” Here Airbnb uses monsters as a symbol that people collectively understand to be scary or strange, to help change the way their potential users and providers perceive “strangers”.
Since Airbnb is a service that experiences a two-sided network effect, it’s important to them that both sides of this network are growing together (home users and home providers). This advertisement is an attempt to appeal to potential home providers to list their spaces on the Airbnb app. They are communicating their message to their target audience by giving them a “sneak peak” into the joyful experience they can help create for “strangers” who are not unlike themselves. They further play into this message of strangers not being strange, by having the movie this monster family watches be The Iron Giant. This movie’s main message is that just because something/someone looks, sounds, or acts different from you does not mean they are strange or scary.
Lululemon, one of Canada’s most well-known and beloved apparel brands, has recently signed an exclusive deal with the Canadian Olympic Committee. The deal gives Lululemon exclusive rights to be the supplier of Team Canada’s Olympic-branded clothing and gear until 2028. This involves the 2022 winter games that recently ended in Beijing, as well as the addition of the next three Olympic games that will take place in Paris, Milan, and Los Angeles, respectively (Evans, 2022).
While Karen O’Neill, CEO of the Canadian Paralympic Committee, mentioned that she was delighted with this partnership because it is “work being done to ensure accessible and inclusive clothing,” many Canadians seem to disagree. The high price points of the official Olympic gear are not accessible for many individuals who may not have the financial means to spend large amounts on what is essentially superfluous clothing. On social media, many users have voiced their opinions of frustration regarding the pricey Olympic apparel. For instance, one user stated, “My God. You’ve basically taken away the ability for any middle-class family to participate in the Olympics via clothing. 68 bucks for gloves? I used to buy these from the Bay for 15-20. Ridiculous. This is not what celebrating is about.” (Twitter @ChromeMonster).
The backlash that Lululemon has received can be connected back to the Customer Based Brand Equity Model. Canadians are finding it hard to justify the high price points for Olympic-themed gear that has relatively basic style, design, and physical features; this is an example of unsatisfactory brand performance as the functional needs of consumers are not being met. The credibility of Lululemon may also be tarnished, as many Canadians believe that the brand is stripping them of their patriotic Olympic traditions, an example of negative judgements towards the brand.
Despite the backlash received, Lululemon’s partnership with the Canadian Olympic Committee is actually a part of the brand’s diversification strategy in reaching an even larger target segment through a line extension into menswear. Being the official supplier of the Canadian team’s Olympic gear aids the company in generating nationwide brand awareness for its athletic wear and more specifically, generates brand salience for menswear, not just the womenswear that Lululemon is widely known for.
While it is evident that Lululemon has come under scrutiny amid their deal with the Canadian Olympic Committee, it is clear that this deal is a strategic branding move on the part of the apparel company. Whether or not consumers are satisfied with the extravagant Lululemon Olympic gear, the partnership is here to stay until 2028.
campaignforrealbranding 