As football fever sweeps the nation, it will not go unnoticed that like many tournaments or large events which were due to take place last year, UEFA Euro 2020 has retained its branding and logo from the previous year rather than updating it to the current year, 2021. In a statement, UEFA stated that this was due to the fact that the reference to the date could serve as a reminder to the world of how the footballing community came together during the pandemic. UEFA also stated that from a practical prospective it believed this decision to be more sustainable and that it would generate less waste. Whilst the following may be speculative, it can be assumed the there would be considerable costs associated with any rebranding, including the manufacture of more merchandise, re-negotiating agreements and updating advertisements. Whatever the reasons may be, UEFA approached the issue of a rebrand knowing what the practical effects would be and with a clear purpose of the message it wanted to portray to fans. This article looks at, what you may want to consider before committing to a rebrand and looks at an example of where a company had to carry out a U-turn due to the rebrand failing.
What you need to consider
· The first place you may want to start is reviewing what your brand actually consists of. This may include a logo, strap lines, distinctive colouring, the use of specific packaging and more often than not, your trade mark.
· It would be worthwhile considering why you are looking to rebrand; is it down to brand boredom, have your figures slumped due to a lack of consumer engagement? This is will determine the new vision that you have for your brand and the message you want to send to your consumers. As stated above in UEFA’s case, the retention of the reference to 2020 is in homage to the way the community came together. This would resonate with a large section of the public who have in one shape or another been affected by the pandemic.
· Considering market placement and competitor activities can also be a key consideration. This will give you an idea of what works successfully in your market, what you could do to stand out and possibly, what does not work with customers. At this stage you should be weary of drawing a distinction between being inspired by your competitors and moving so close that you are riding on their coattails. In some cases, companies have fallen foul of this and become liable for passing off, copyright infringement and/or trade mark infringement by sailing too close to the wind.
· It is also worthwhile considering what you will be leaving behind with a rebrand, such as the goodwill that you have generated, the customer loyalty to the brand and the possibility of any registered trade mark becoming vulnerable to revocation on the grounds of non-use. For further information on this you may want to consider our article ‘Goodwill and Trade Mark Survival’
· When you have an idea of the new branding that you want to adopt, consideration should be given to how you can protect this moving forward. This can include, potential trade mark registrations, the implementation of assignments to you from third parties for any intellectual property created and the availability of domain names.
Example of a brand U-turn
One of the most recognised U-turns in redesigns was that of GAP’s change to its logo in 2010. GAP has a unique navy blue, square background upon which there is the iconic elongated lettering spelling the word GAP. In 2010, it decided to refresh its look and redesign its logo by moving away from the classic square design to a design which spelt out the word GAP in bold black letters with a smaller blue square in the top right corner behind the letter ‘P’. This redesign followed the financial crisis of 2008 where the sales of GAP had slumped. It was believed that this change would make the brand appear to be more contemporary and modern whilst still giving a nod to the past. Following this change of logo, GAP experienced a massive social media backlash with blogs generating thousands of negative comments and twitter accounts calling for the reinstatement of the historic logo. GAP reinstated their classic logo within less than a week. This demonstrates that even multinationals with millions of pounds at their disposal can make the wrong decision and ultimately a brand’s success will be tested by the consumer.
Get in touch with an Intellectual Property specialist today
If you are considering refreshing your brand or have received correspondence from someone claiming that your brand is too similar to theirs, please contact Humna Nadim in our IP team who will happily go through your options with you on 0161 838 7816 or email humnanadim@kuits.com.
