Loading summary
Transcript44 lines
- [00:01]
A
Consumers skip ads, but they don't skip rewards. Fetch drives performance. With over 12.5 monthly active users and over 11.5 million receipts scanned daily, capturing 88% of household spend, your brand becomes the reward, earning real engagement, verified purchases and loyalty. Fetch America's reward app, where brands are the center of joy. Hello listeners. Today is Wednesday, October 1st. Welcome to eMarketer's weekly retail show, Reimagining Retail, an Emarketer podcast made possible by Fetch Rewards. This is the show where we talk about how retail collides with every part of our lives. I'm your guest host, Susie Deva Kenyon, and on today's episode, we're going to talk about how not to rebrand. But before we do that, let's meet today's guests. Joining me for our episode, we have analyst Rachel Wolf joining me in our New York City office.
- [01:03]
B
Hey, Susie.
- [01:04]
A
Hey, Rachel. And we have senior analyst Zach Stamborg joining us virtually from Chicago. Hey, Zach.
- [01:10]
C
Hey, guys. Can you believe it's October already?
- [01:13]
A
No, as I was thinking that as I was saying it, I was thinking that, too.
- [01:17]
C
Yeah. How did that happen?
- [01:18]
B
I know. I was thrown off by the Halloween candy in grocery stores in August.
- [01:23]
A
That's true, too. That is very true, too. Well, I'm so glad that you're both here because this is one of the topics where we know that hindsight is 20 20, but there are definitely some signals marketers can be looking out for to get ahead. So let's get started. On today's episode, we're going to talk about rebrands and more importantly, how not to do them. The spark for this one came from Cracker Barrel's recent logo change that set off a a firestorm of backlash for folks who missed it. They swapped their long standing old country store logo with a front porch figure and the traditional script for a simplified modern wordmark that stripped away the heritage people were, many would say, emotionally attached to. So the result? Customers revolted, sales slipped, and within a short week, the company reversed course. But Cracker Barrel isn't the only brand that stumbled from Gap's infamous logo flop to Tropicana's packaging debacle. There are plenty of cautionary tales. And also on the flip side, some brands have nailed the evolution, like Old Spice or Burger King, proving that change can actually work if it's done right. So today we're when does a brand need to refresh versus a full rebrand? How much does nostalgia matter? Do consumers even notice? And probably the most important, how do you avoid turning your Loyal customers into critics. So with that, I think we should start from the top. You guys, is there a difference between a brand refresh or a full rebranding? And how do you decide which to do?
- [03:01]
B
So, I guess starting with the first question, right? What's the difference between brand refresh versus full rebrand? For me, brand refresh, it tends to be the way I see it, is like a visual update, right? You're updating your logo, your frame font, your colors, maybe even your slogan to be more in line with the times, as it were, to try and keep up with what your competitors are doing. Whereas a full on rebrand, certainly there is the element of the brand refresh changing your visual messaging, but also I think it's overhauling your brand strategy even, and your identity as a company.
- [03:34]
C
Yeah, I totally agree. I think it's like one is just cosmetic and the other is a fundamental rethinking or repositioning of what the brand is, who its target audience is, what its mission is, and what is it seeking to achieve.
- [03:54]
A
And that totally makes sense. So what do you think triggers the rebrand?
- [03:58]
B
I mean, one example that I think about a lot is in the luxury space. I think this was like, you know, maybe the 2015s or so when you saw all of these luxury brands start to update their logos at the same time. And I think there's almost an element of fomo, right? Like your competitors start doing it, and so you feel like you need to adapt in line with what everybody else is doing. So I think that is definitely one motivator. And, you know, maybe even to a certain extent, kind of explains what Cracker Barrel was trying to do.
- [04:23]
C
A rebrand, I think, is often, often stems from the, the company or the brand's recognition that, like, what they're doing isn't working anymore. They need to get people's attention in a new way and maybe shift their business model a bit or shift who their target audience is. So it's a more fundamental rethinking of who they are and what they want to be, rather than just a more cosmetic, their brand looks dated sort of shift.
- [04:55]
A
Right. And it sounds like if we think about Tropicana, remember when they switched out the packaging and then they had the little orange and they even went with different advertising, and that was totally a debacle. Chaos ensued. There is something about packaging too, right? That could cause a rebrand positive or negative.
- [05:14]
B
Yeah. I mean, so much about packaging is, you know, like familiarity. Right. Like, people were familiar with how the Tropicana brand looked. And so, you know, even without thinking really, like you could go to the place in the store, pick out the brand and put in your shopping cart. But then you change the way it looks and people are like, is this really the same product that I was buying? So there is a sense of confusion that can arise if you are too drastic with the way that you approach your rebrand or refresh.
- [05:39]
A
So before we move online with the too drastic and get back to Cracker Barrel, let's talk about an example that each of you admire who's done a good job in a refresher rebrand. Zach, I'm going to start with you.
- [05:50]
C
Yeah, sure. So in 2021, Kia did a pretty dramatic rebrand where they scrapped the red Kia logo that had an oval around it and went to a very modern sort of geometric silver shape that's kind of, sort of spells out Kia but kind of looks like kn. And it was interesting because on the one hand a lot of people misread it as K N. On the other hand, that also like, kind of worked in its favor because it drove a lot of people to pull out their phones and search like, what is kn? And so it generated like a lot of buzz, some media attention and just people talking about the brand in that I don't think people had ever quite talked about Kia. But like the bigger picture of what they were doing is they were fundamentally rethinking what Kia is. They were repositioning it from a budget friendly brand to a real forward looking car company. And what they did was they coincided that logo change with a rollout of a whole lot of cars or vehicles that fit that future looking positioning, whether it was the EV6 or the three row Telluride. And they all had, they shared that sort of futuristic look. And so it, the thing about it was was the rethink of the logo matched the identity that they were seeking to grab. And so it made sense. And the proof is in the pudding because like their sales have gone up and to the right since they did the rebrand. So it's worked and it has shifted the company's brand perception as well.
- [07:49]
A
It's so interesting because I think that's the key, right, is they threaded all of it together and it really was a repositioning that perhaps their customer was ready for. So I'm going to pause on that thought. We'll get back to it. But I do want to hear, Rachel, what is your example of a brand or company that did a really good job?
- [08:06]
B
So my example is Uber. And, you know, to unpack this, we're going to go back in time a little bit to 2017, which was a pretty bad year for Uber. It was mired in all kinds of controversies about, you know, then CEO Travis Kalanick and the culture that he fostered at the company. There were various investigations into nefarious business practices. So the company was really kind of in the middle of this existential crisis. I would say there was a real question about how it would move forward. But then 2018 rolls around and they decide they need to do something different. And so they have a new CEO and they have a new logo. But I think more importantly than that, they also changed their whole value system and their mission statement as a company. And, and so what I like about this rebrand is that it wasn't just an aesthetic rebrand. Right. Like putting lipstick on a pig or, you know, shifting corporate strategy from, you know, being more than just a ride hailing company. It was also a cultural reset that was about rebuilding trust among drivers, employees, riders, you know, all of these different stakeholders. And it has been really successful. I mean, since that point, the company has really, I would say, gotten over that hump very well and is a successful, profitable business today.
- [09:26]
A
Right. And so again, another example of it was an all in kind of shift. Right. And so then what do we think happened at Cracker Barrel? What. What is it that they missed? Was it the audience research wasn't thorough enough? Was it that the stakeholders weren't ready? What happened there?
- [09:42]
C
I think they forgot about who their core customer was. So they wanted to attract new customers, but you also have to retain your current customer base. And so they were making a whole lot of moves for that new customer, but they forgot about the core customer who is very accustomed to walking into a Cracker Barrel and having it feel very familiar with all the knickknacks on the wall. They don't want a clean, sleek space, which we left out talking about like the shift. They were also remaking what the actual restaurant looked like. So it was the logo looked different, the restaurant looked different, everything seemed different. And it all happened, I think, much too fast.
- [10:29]
B
Yeah, I think for me, it's a failure on two fronts. One is the failure to understand your core customer and what they're looking for. But I think it was also a failure in that, you know, what they were moving toward was not something that would have necessarily resonated with the audience that they were trying to get. Like, my personal opinion is that I felt like the new logo was very Blah. The same with their store redesign. I think if you're looking to attract Gen Z, for example, I don't think blah is what's going to do it. So you're both alienating your existing customer base and not doing enough to attract the customer that you want.
- [11:02]
C
It kind of reminded me of when Ron Johnson came into JCPenney and just completely remade what JCPenney was, turned JCPenney into JCP, tried to make it more like the Apple Store, got rid of coupons, and all of those things were not at all what the core J.C. penney customer was. And it wasn't really clear who the new JCPenney customer would be. And so he was trying to just replicate the model that he put in place with the Apple Store without a fundamental understanding of the core audience.
- [11:41]
A
Right. And so it sounds like we've made that really clear delineation between if you want to rebrand successfully, you really need to understand who your core customer is. And if you're trying to move them then or get a new core customer, then you have to make sure that your new look and feel, vision, mission statements all match back. So that might have been. It wasn't just that it was too stark of a contrast. It just didn't appeal to their newest base that they were trying to get.
- [12:09]
B
Yeah. I think if they were really committed to it, if they really had a strong narrative behind it, they could absolutely have doubled down and said. Said, you know, this is the direction that we're heading in. But because they were also. Because they were wishy washy about it. Right. And so I think that also sent the message that, you know, this was too big of a departure for them.
- [12:27]
A
So what about a brand? Do we have any examples of brands who are like, nope, this is our new logo, this is our rebrand, and we're sticking to it.
- [12:33]
C
Yeah. So Jaguar is embarking on a rather dramatic rebrand that re envisions just about everything about the company. And they are sticking to their gun. And the reason that they're doing it is because they're not trying to keep their current customer base. They expect to go after an entirely different customer base by going after. They're going all electric and they're looking to target younger, affluent consumers. And so they're very comfortable, if only like, 10, 15% of their current customer base sticks with them because they want to be something different. And so a fundamental rethinking of what Jaguar is, who it's seeking to attract, makes sense for it.
- [13:20]
A
I love that example. Right. It's so important to remember at the root of what you're doing, why you're doing it. Does nostalgia play a role as a limiting factor or is it an asset for some of these brands trying to refresh?
- [13:32]
C
I think it kind of depends on the brand. Right. I mean, a brand like Cracker Barrel is all about nostalgia, whether it's like authentic nostalgia or this faux nostalgia that it seeks to conjure up with the look and feel of its restaurants.
- [13:49]
B
I think nostalgia is a tricky emotion to build a brand around because it is limiting. Right. Like as Cracker Barrel found, you know, you try to move the needle too much and then you just end up, you know, getting stick from both sides. So I think it might work better as a marketing tool rather than a branding tool, if that makes sense.
- [14:09]
C
It all depends, though. I mean, I think like Burger King has leaned into nostalgia really well by taking a page from its past, but also seeking to spin it forward by just introducing new elements into a look and feel that reflects some of the old look and feel.
- [14:29]
A
Yeah, I noticed their hamburger bun is a little plumper now. They, they did a rebrand not so long ago. Remember, they had the second to last re was that blue circle around them. And I don't think that resonated very well at all. And so now they went back to the hamburger. But if you look at it in great detail, it's a little plumper the burger bun than in previous iterations. It is really interesting how a slight sort of font and iteration on a bun or a star like the Macy's star can have an impact and feel more modern. But it does bring me to the next question that, that I find fascinating is do consumers notice? We spend so much time thinking about it, but do consumers even notice these changes when they are not stark?
- [15:12]
C
I don't think so. But I also think that's okay. I think small iterative steps are important for keeping the brand feeling fresh even when somebody doesn't notice it. Because if you don't take those steps to modernize or over time as your competitors do, then your brand starts to feel stale.
- [15:34]
B
Yeah, I agree. And there's some interesting stats from this is Adobe Express from May. So only 34% of consumers first notice a logo when looking at a brand. So it's important. But that gives brands, I think, a lot of scope to make small changes without necessarily drawing the same kind of attention or scrutiny that Cracker Barrel did.
- [15:58]
A
So if you think about Cracker Barrel or any other brand, or as you're thinking about doing a Rebrand. I mean, sometimes it's really important to rebrand. Right. And to be more modern. But what are some of the risks that. How can you mitigate the risks of a rebrand so that you end up more in line with what Apple has done or Old Spice versus the latest example?
- [16:19]
B
I think the most important thing is to have a clear story to tell. Right. The reason that you're updating your brand shouldn't just be, we needed a new logo. There has to be some sort of narrative behind it that consumers and people within the company can get behind to promote it and to make it successful.
- [16:37]
C
Yeah, I completely agree. And I think it's about ensuring that the inside matches the outside, so to speak. It's not just cosmetic changes, but when you're making a big rebrand that you are fully reflecting the fundamental shift in that is seeking to occur within the company or the brand.
- [16:59]
A
And if it's okay, I'm going to throw one in too, in that I think it's really important to do like a logo audit or a brand vision audit and do some research. Talk to your customers. Talk to the customers. You're trying to get into your fold to make sure that whatever you are touching, if it's that sacred piece that you don't actually touch it so that you don't upset everybody, that just brings.
- [17:21]
C
To mind, like, also, like, stand for something and don't be boring. I think, like, that was the challenge with the Gap example that you brought up, is that it just felt so dull that it was like, well, what is this? Like, it was so easy to ignore. And that's the whole point of a logo, is to capture your attention. So ensure that, like, you're capturing people's attention, which seems obvious, but apparently is.
- [17:50]
A
Not capture attention in a good way. I agree 100%. Yeah, absolutely. And it's just a reminder that a logo is just one piece of the brand puzzle, but it's one that people do notice. So testing and learning before you make big moves can really help you. Unfortunately, that's all the time we have for today. Thank you, Rachel.
- [18:08]
B
Thanks, Suzy.
- [18:09]
A
Thanks, Zach.
- [18:10]
C
Yeah, thanks for having me.
- [18:11]
A
And thank you, listeners. And to our team that edits the podcast, please leave a rating or review and remember to subscribe. I'll see you for more reimagining retail next Wednesday. And on Friday, join Marcus for another episode of behind the Numbers, an emarketer podcast made possible by FetchRewards.