Brand Failures

Tired brands 271
Perhaps no market in the world is currently changing with more speed than
photography. More and more consumers are trading their standard photographic
cameras for digital alternatives. Many experts have predicted that it
is only a matter of time before the entire camera market goes digital.
Kodak, however, is a name intrinsically associated with conventional
photographs. When most people think Kodak, they think little yellow boxes
of film. They don’t think cutting-edge digital technology.
According to Harvard Business School professor John Kotler, the market
shift towards digital photography constitutes ‘a howling, horrifically difficult
challenge’ for the brand. ‘For a century Kodak had too much success and too
much market share. It was as bad as IBM at its worst.’
How has Kodak responded to this challenge It entered the digital arena
in 1995 with the creation of the Kodak Digital Science brand. However, the
following year saw the company invest heavily in conventional photography
with the development of the Advanced Photo System (branded as the Kodak
Advantix system). This new system offered various advantages for the
consumer, including a choice of three print formats.
However, the development of the Advantix cameras and films was extremely
expensive for Kodak. Between 1996 and 1998 the company invested US
$200 million in the system, only to discover it had distribution problems.
Not enough retailers were interested in stocking the cameras and films, and
there were not enough places where the Advantix films could get processed.
Some brand commentators, including Al Ries and Jack Trout, have
questioned the logic behind the decision to invest so heavily in conventional
photography – albeit advanced conventional photography – at a time when
the market was starting to head towards digital photography. ‘Wouldn’t it be
better to let the old system die a natural death and use the money to build a
new digital brand’ Ries asks, rhetorically, in The 22 Immutable Laws of
Branding.
Kodak stuck with Advantix though, and its persistence paid off, at least in
the short term. By 1997 its Advantix product range accounted for 20 per cent
of all Kodak sales. However, it looks unlikely that Advantix will be enough
to stop photography customers ‘going digital’. And the investment in the
Advantix system has only served to reaffirm the association with conventional
photography. Even now, too few consumers are familiar with the Kodak
Digital Science brand. As Des Dearlove and Stuart Crainer explain in The
Ultimate Book of Business Brands, the company needs to change its competi­