There is no point in finding meaning in Brand Communication Assets, simply because consumers don’t care.
Why does this cow appear in the beer ads? Why not?
Why use a chicken as an ambassador for a milk brand? Why not?
Why use this no-meaning name for a brand name? Why not?
It’s not uncommon for marketing consultants to preach the need for a meaningful logo, something that communicates by itself from day one. Ries and Trout used to argue that brand names like ‘Head and Shoulders’ were much better than meaningless names like ‘Pantene’ or ‘Vosene’. We marketing people tend to take our brands, and logos, very seriously and tend to assume that consumers do too, but this is misguided out-of-touch thinking.
Brands, and their distinctive assets, identify – that’s it. They (potentially) ensure that people know it is you, not someone else advertising. They allow people to repeat-buy you, to see you on shelf.
Consumers rarely stop to think about whether the logo looks nice, trustworthy, or conveys any other connotation. Few people (outside of the marketing industry) ponder….
- Why America’s largest most famous burger chain has a Scottish name ?
- Why one of Australia’s largest banks is named after…
View original post 153 more words