Rebranding Gone Wrong: 5 Cases That Backfired Spectacularly

Rebranding requires strategizing by firms to change their image, identity, or perception in the market. Most often, firms carry out rebranding processes in order to revitalize their appearance, attract new market segments, address specific negative publicity, or meet the demands of fluctuating market conditions.

Changes usually include the alteration of the brand name, logo, marketing programs, and the whole idea of a value proposition. However, the process of rebranding is not without complications, leading to unexpected complications.

One of the greatest hurdles to be crossed when it comes to rebranding is aligning with the target audience. Suppose a company were to come up with a new image of itself. In that case, it could no longer resonate with its old customers and become unacquainted with potential markets.

As a result, the brand would just leave consumers indifferent or confused regarding the brand's core message. Extensive market research and analysis must be done regarding the expectations and manifestations of the selected clientele at times before any changes are anticipated.

Moreover, rebranding also threatens to diminish the existing financial value of the brand. Most strong brands built quite a base of loyal customers over years of trust and recognition. Changes introduced abruptly make customers feel that the brand does not connect to their values or needs. Haggle-free disjointed transition is also likely to sow negative perceptions that can hinder healing.

5 Rebranding Cases That Backfired Spectacularly

A backlash from loyal customers can also get nastier to the brand when it interprets the whole program as being driven by greed. The consequence of this backlash is usually seen in the form of negative media campaigns against the brand on the social network. As much as this backlash manifests in declining sales figures, it hurts the business's productivity.

This fact calls for organizations to investigate what makes the difference between a successful and an unsuccessful rebranding exercise regarding risk management. These evaluations will hence be pivotal in learning from subsequent case studies illustrating poor example pitfalls from poorly executed rebranding initiatives.

This post about Rebranding Gone Wrong is inspired from a blog post of Branding.net.in about Top 5 Branding Failures stories. You will like to know about top brands and their comeback to the industry.

Case Study 1: Gap's Logo Redesign Fiasco

The retail behemoth Gap decided to reposition its visual identity, almost recklessly, in 2010. They gave a new logo redesign as a fallacy that they were modernizing for the new consumers to look up and attempt to align with the aesthetics of the brand in current designs. As it turned out, the launch proved to be a spectacular misfire and a cautionary tale when it comes to rebranding.

Anticipated by a great many, the new logo-touted as a sleek font and small, seemingly unnecessary, blue box, was unleashed onto the public. Its reception turned sour with overwhelming negativity; customers flooded social network sites with complaints, and many felt outrightly betrayed by a beloved brand. Even the association-which might risk being mediated with Gap's logo-had a strong emotional bond judging by the high number of fans supporting it. Barely a week after the new logo was introduced, the dire straits in which that statement found itself was glaringly obvious: Gap misread by a mile the level of sentiment from their customer base.

The incident brought out important lessons on the overall effect of legacy branding on consumer perceptions when it comes to any rebirth. Completely disregarding the strong emotional ties that people associate with current logos might trigger a serious backlash. The immediate response on social media accentuated the case for companies that go through such exercises to critically engage their constituents. 

A logo is not just a design; it is also central to a brand's identity. Gap would reinstate the original logo after all. This memory shall remain in history and in the legacy of Gap-the time when Gap began with cautioning innovation, a clear course. The fiasco proved that to rejuvenate a brand's image, deep engagement with consumer emotions was required, as well as an understanding of the brand's heritage.

Also Read: How to Build a Content Marketing Funnel for SaaS Businesses

Case Study 2: Pepsi's 'Live for Now' Campaign and Backlash

In April 2017, Pepsi launched an advertising campaign called Live for Now that featured a supermodel named Kendall Jenner and intended to fuse the brand with the current social justice movements. In the advertisement, Jenner left a photoshoot to join a diversely composed group of protesters who eventually offered a police officer a can of Pepsi instead of shooting him in the eye. While appealing to deliver a collective call for social awareness, the campaign was nipped in the bud from planned hostility regarding its insensitivity to serious issues by audiences worldwide.

Critics and consumers alike complained that the ad cheapened social justice and minimized the struggle of activists working hard to bring about change. There were views also that Pepsi was trying to gain relevance with the younger population through opportunism, utilizing the imagery and emotions that surround peaceful protests. Social media was fired up with accusations as users posted photos of police brutality and other historical civil rights instances that the ad evoked.

Thus, Pepsi pulled the advertisement, quickly issuing a public apology in front of a furious public. Leaders of the company believed that it was a big mistake to have connected its product to grave societal issues without a commitment toward them. This situation serves as a deterrent for brands that wish to be part of the conversation of current social relevance: it should be real and demonstrate depth of understanding. Not gauging correctly what is happening at the moment can bring a lot of reputational damage, as can be seen in this example.

The fallouts of the Pepsi 'Live for Now' campaign focus on a salient truth: that brands must learn to approach social issues sensitively and informally. Prudently, companies should keep away from all superficial stakeholder walking and strive for genuine engagement when the topics at hand are really messy. The blunder touched more than just the reputation of the brand but also spoke to the interests represented in a very complex, delicate balance that is needed to really be effective at getting involved with social movements in a responsible way.

Case Study 3: New Coke's Disastrous Launch

1985 introduced New Coke, historically considered among the most infamous rebranding efforts. Such has demonstrated the balancing act required of brands to try to maintain with their loyal consumers. In its attempt to compose itself better with Pepsi as a competitor, Coca-Cola undertook the painful prerogative of changing its original formula, believing a sweeter mix would entice young customers. This change, however, alienated a very significant portion of its clientele who so identified with the original taste of Coca-Cola. The immediate and great backlash was:

Discontent reflected from consumer voices manifested not just in organized protests but also in an avalanche of letters sent straight to the Coca-Cola Company. Betrayed customers argued that the switch was against the contextualization built into the decades-old loyalty and nostalgia attached to the original Coca-Cola. It's not just a threat for future reference on what could go wrong with such rebranding. More importantly, this cosmic backlash communicated the literary attachment that has always been there with brand loyalty.

A more responsible Coca-Cola management was aware of the danger. It took prompt action to restore the old recipe under the name of "Coca-Cola Classic" almost immediately after the first launch of New Coke. This gave a strong rebound in customer satisfaction and made the company re-evaluate its reputation with its core consumers. Branding, as the New Coca-Cola debacle teaches, depends on two essentials: consumption awareness and risk factors inherent in losing valued customers through innovatively abrupt requirements.

This experience, in fact, marked the beginning of Coca-Cola's change in brand strategy from that day onward, emphasizing the conservation of its original product while innovating other varieties around it. The New Coke episode lives on as an enduring case study in American enterprises on the dangers of ignoring an established brand identity in favour of current trends.

Case Study 4: Uber's Rebranding Attempts Amidst Controversy

It has not been that smooth an operation for Uber, which also happens to be one of the biggest ride-hailing platforms in the world. From sexism allegations to toxic work environment reports about the company, with accompanying scandals, these things have caused their many attempts to change the face and make amends with the outside world. To remedy these and many other things, changes in the executive board and new plans were introduced to make such culture better in the workplace.

One of the major housing was in 2017 when Dara Khosrowshahi was hired as the new CEO. He became a leader not in the same aggressive and highly controversial manner as all previous management. Khosrowshahi instead symbolized a new direction for the company, endorsing more accountability and transparency with statements and commitments to the public on improving the internal culture and the face of customer service. Included in this initiative are the diversity and inclusion agendas and some health and welfare issues of employees intended to remediate the adverse images to which the body has been subjected over the years.

However, these initiatives have not always worked in favour of the company; Uber failed in such an exercise. Although Khosrowshahi had big dreams for an Uber that looked new and unlike what it had achieved in the past, the pace with which he and his administration's brand new beginnings turned with controversies was rather slow. The air of negative press continued to hang over the brand, impeding transformation efforts. It was still suspect to the public, especially with the change of management and the supposed cultural establishment.

The historic actions of the company, namely by being aggressive in commercial competition and then dealing with driver grievances, have continued to create discontent among stakeholders. Such challenges demonstrate that even with well-strategized marketing efforts, there must be some transformational changes within the organization to manage issues that have been entrenched over time. In fact, Uber's story stands out as perhaps the strongest illustration of the perils associated with rebranding amidst long-established controversies and public sentiment.

Case Study 5: J.C. Penney's Image Overhaul Failure

Then, in the year 2011, J.C. Penney introduced a very bold strategy of rebranding. Under the aegis of this much-hailed CEO named Ron Johnson, such plans would transform the time-treasured department store into what could potentially be called a 21st-century, edgy outsider shot at a younger demographic and a more modern distance compared to that which marks the brand today from its old images. Johnson undertook the elimination of sales and coupons, thus proving the most basic break with the marketing techniques that J.C. Penney had been associated with since its very founding. This not-so-simple attempt at simplifying the process instead turned off loyal customers conditioned to expect a regular flurry of discounts and promotions.

J.C. Penney attempted to switch to a model under which 'everyday low price' purchases were made due to customer refusal. Hence, the dive was steep in sales. Most customers had nothing to cheer about in failing sales activities. In one direction, everything was different from last price refusal to fresh sales tactics and then dampened almost all in disgust. Coca-Cola's revenue hit a nose dive, losing so many shoppers who felt subjective as being treated as untouched or considered less worthy of their shopping habits. This quintessentially demonstrates how a rebranding strategy can have the opposite effect.

This very change in strategy proved detrimental since the sales and market share nosedived drastically, and J. C. Penney had no choice but to abandon the entire revamped brand image, effectively rolling back to presenting coupons and sales events the customers relied on so dearly. J. C. Penney's case certainly indicates that establishing a successful rebranding process included an intensive study of the market and an accurate understanding of consumer expectations. Before making any considerable changes, it is imperative to understand what customers value in a brand and consumer loyalties developed, as it can bring catastrophic consequences, including loss of revenue and irrevocable damage to the reputation of the brand.

Related: How to Use Business Listing Sites for Online Marketing

Conclusion: Lessons Learned from Failed Rebranding

Much can, therefore, be learned from the case studies of rebranding gone wrong for any company considering following such a path. While rebranding offers many opportunities, it usually comes at great risk and calls for great caution.

One of the overall factors within a successful rebranding program has to do with consumers' attitudes. Listening to your customers before implementing changes can clarify their perceptions and preconceptions about an ideal brand. This can guide any organization in shaping a brand that successfully matches the customers' context. The absence of consumer insights always culminates in disconnection, seen in most discussed cases, which puts balancing between brand perception and consumer expectation as a key intention of adopting a customer-base approach.

This last lesson has to do with loyalty. Brands build on these most prominent touches over long periods, and, thus, change is abrupt; these valuable customers are more likely to be lost than retained. Hence, holding on to those aspects that contribute to loyalty even while transforming becomes fully critical. By rebranding, none of these should be lost. Instead, it should tell the same foundational stone, placing value on refreshing and renewing them, ensuring that loyal customers still feel such messages from the brand.

This is why alignment of the branding changes with the values of the customers is vital. A brand's drifting new approach and the brand's core belief for its audience will invite immense backlash from consumers. As studies show, Successful rebranding does carry the values that the target audience preaches as it builds up a stronger relationship with the brand.

Organizations scale back their rebranding initiatives while at the same time upholding best practices - that include intensive market research, relevant consumer engagement, and transparency at the brand value understanding point. While taking these steps, brands would be able to be buffered from the misfortunes witnessed in so many cases discussed above. These would prepare the brands to tend toward perfecting the act of their restructurings, bequeathing them patronage rather than alienation.