Critical updates on branding, video, and how to combine them to drive brand value.

The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding

14 / The Law of Subbrands

If we're being honest, when your core brand is successful, the temptation to use that name to launch a new product, a new service, or an entirely new line is enormous. After all, you've already spent the time, money, and energy to establish trust and awareness. Why start from scratch?

That's the logic that leads to subbranding. You take your established, powerful name and tack a modifier onto it, hoping the old name's magic transfers to the new thing, whatever it is.
​
In The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding, the authors, Al and Laura Ries, are not subtle about their feelings toward that idea.

The Law of Subbrands / What branding builds, subbranding can destroy.

Subbranding is essentially the opposite of good branding. Branding is about owning one strong idea or attribute in the mind. Subbranding attempts to dilute that idea by stretching the name across multiple, sometimes conflicting, concepts. You see where this is heading?

The authors put it this way:

The Allure of the Subbrand

Management loves subbranding because it sounds like having your cake and eating it, too. You get to leverage the equity of the famous core brand while moving into "new territory." The book provides classic examples like:

• Holiday Inn trying to go upscale with Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza.
• Cadillac trying to go small with the Cadillac Catera.
• Waterford trying to go cheap with Marquis by Waterford.

The authors point out the absurdity of this from a customer perspective. Their example, "Did anybody ever walk into a Cadillac dealership and ask, 'Don’t you have any smaller Cadillacs?'"

In the decades since the book was written, we've seen this law broken with both spectacular failures and damaging long-term consequences:

• Google Glass: Google tried to leverage its strong core brand into an entirely new, unproven category. The technology failed to find a market, and the Google name didn't save it.
• Starbucks Sorbetto: In a clear attempt to stretch the Starbucks experience beyond coffee, they launched a frozen sorbet line. It confused customers. Starbucks is about hot, rich, coffee-based experiences, not cold, fruity desserts. It was quickly retired.
• Uber Eats: While highly successful, this subbrand required massive advertising and positioning to separate itself from the core ride-sharing function of the Uber brand. If the company were truly following this law, it would have given the food delivery service a completely separate, unique name to own the delivery category.

What Customers Really See

Regardless of what marketing departments call it - subbrand, masterbrand, or megabrand - the customer sees things simply.
​
When an automotive manufacturer lists Avenger, Intrepid, and Viper under the Dodge umbrella, the manufacturer calls Dodge a "megabrand." But what does the customer call it? The customer calls the car a Dodge Avenger or a Dodge Viper.
​
As the Rieses state, "You can’t apply your own branding system to a market that sees things differently. What the manufacturer sees as a brand, the customer sees as a model. What the manufacturer sees as a megabrand, the customer sees as a brand."
​
When you feel the need to create a subbrand, you're chasing the market, not building the brand. You're effectively admitting that your original brand can't successfully make the leap, so you try to attach a new idea to it and hope for the best.
​
The takeaway is simple - think like a customer. If a new product is fundamentally different from your core brand's original attribute or idea, give it a new name and let it build its own brand power.
​
One final thought from Al and Laura Ries:

​You can purchase The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding on Amazon.
​
​Do you have too many "subbrands" and need to simplify your positioning and portfolio? We can help you focus. 🎯

​​​

5651 N Lydell Ave #170225, Milwaukee, WI 53217-4504
​Unsubscribe · Preferences