Brand Failures
Brand Failures Brand Failures
56 Brand failures Clearly if Corfam was to become as big as it could be, it would need to be used by manufacturers of women’s shoes. It soon became clear, however, that the female shoe market was itself divided – between comfy, everyday shoes and ‘fashion’ shoes made for special occasions. For all Corfam’s strengths, it was not as flexible or ‘skin-like’ as ordinary leather, and therefore was not suited for those shoes designed for comfort or everyday use. So fashion shoes seemed to be the solution. And yet, even here there was a problem. A synthetic material called polyvinyl chloride (now known to us as PVC) was fast becoming popular owing to its extreme low cost. Vinyl shoes, which could be coloured or embossed very easily, were perfect for women looking for a ‘throwaway’ pair which may be worn once or twice at special occasions before being discarded. Furthermore, the leather industry was keen to dampen the appeal of Corfam by lowering its prices and improving quality. This factor, combined with the growing popularity of vinyl shoes, led to DuPont’s announcement in March 1971 that they were to withdraw Corfam. On 11 April 1971, the New York Times referred to Corfam as ‘Du Pont’s $100 million Edsel.’ Lessons from Corfam Improve on the original. For a substitute product to work it needs to be better than the original in the minds of consumers. Although Corfam was long-lasting, it lacked the flexibility and ‘breathability’ of leather. It also proved too expensive. Remember that there’s no such thing as a certain success. Corfam was, without doubt, one of the most thoroughly researched and developed products of all time. As such, DuPont felt that its prediction that by 1984, 25 per cent of US shoes would be made of Corfam, was a justifiable one. And yet, Corfam wasn’t even around to see 1984, having failed after just seven years. Compete on quality or value. When a product is unable to be the best in terms of either quality or value it faces an uphill struggle to convince consumers of its merits.
Idea failures 57 12 RJ Reynolds’ smokeless cigarettes The ultimate bad idea Cigarette manufacturers have often thought that the best way to build market share is to come up with new twists on the standard cigarette formula. For instance, Marlboro has had dozens of different varieties in its history, including Marlboro Menthol, Marlboro Lights and Marlboro Medium. Normally, cigarettes produce new varieties based on different levels of tar. For instance, in the UK the Silk Cut brand produced various low-tar varieties – Mild, Low and Ultra Low. The popularities of such low-tar brands has caused cigarette companies to think of ever more ways to try and convince consumers that their unhealthy and anti-social products aren’t as unhealthy or as anti-social as they might have thought. Similar strategies have been deployed in the beer market, with brands such as Bud Light, Coors Light and Miller Lite. However, some of these strategies take an extreme form. For instance, in the alcohol market there was the case of the beer brand which tried to sell beer-branded mineral water. The brand was Coors. The water it produced was called Coors Rocky Mountain Spring Water. It was launched in 1990 and survived only two years. In the cigarette industry, the extreme strategy belonged to RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company known for brands such as Camel, Winston, Salem and Doral. In 1988, when the anti-smoking lobbyists could finally claim the majority of public opinion was behind them, and when passive smoking had
- Page 14 and 15: 6 Brand failures market for which i
- Page 16 and 17: 8 Brand failures without trace are
- Page 19: Some brand failures have proved so
- Page 22 and 23: 14 Brand failures competitor. As it
- Page 24 and 25: 16 Brand failures In other words, C
- Page 26 and 27: 18 Brand failures Lessons from New
- Page 28 and 29: 20 Brand failures among employees t
- Page 30 and 31: 22 Brand failures years previously
- Page 32 and 33: 24 Brand failures Mustang was the s
- Page 34 and 35: 26 Brand failures 3 Sony Betamax Ac
- Page 36 and 37: 28 Brand failures and retailers, wh
- Page 38 and 39: 30 Brand failures 4 McDonald’s Ar
- Page 40 and 41: 32 Brand failures Lessons from Arch
- Page 42 and 43: 34 Brand failures
- Page 44 and 45: 36 Brand failures up with the idea
- Page 46 and 47: 38 Brand failures Factor two: cool
- Page 48 and 49: 40 Brand failures 6 Sony’s Godzil
- Page 50 and 51: 42 Brand failures the possible exce
- Page 52 and 53: 44 Brand failures 7 Persil Power On
- Page 54 and 55: 46 Brand failures But the advantage
- Page 56 and 57: 48 Brand failures easily, Pepsi rem
- Page 58 and 59: 50 Brand failures 9 Earring Magic K
- Page 60 and 61: 52 Brand failures Lesson from Earri
- Page 62 and 63: 54 Brand failures on it,’ wrote B
- Page 66 and 67: 58 Brand failures been officially r
- Page 68 and 69: 60 Brand failures ‘There are risk
- Page 70 and 71: 62 Brand failures 13 Oranjolt The d
- Page 72 and 73: 64 Brand failures 14 La Femme Where
- Page 74 and 75: 66 Brand failures patronizing. This
- Page 76 and 77: 16 Clairol’s ‘Touch of Yoghurt
- Page 78 and 79: 18 Maxwell House ready-to-drink cof
- Page 80 and 81: 20 Thirsty Cat! and Thirsty Dog! Bo
- Page 83 and 84: Barron’s Dictionary of Business T
- Page 85 and 86: Extension failures 77 21 Harley Dav
- Page 87 and 88: Extension failures 79 making up the
- Page 89 and 90: Extension failures 81 Keep it tigh
- Page 91 and 92: 23 Crest Stretching a brand to its
- Page 93 and 94: Extension failures 85 ‘No toothpa
- Page 95 and 96: Extension failures 87 24 Heinz All
- Page 97 and 98: Extension failures 89 Lessons from
- Page 99 and 100: Extension failures 91 the no-nonsen
- Page 101 and 102: Extension failures 93 Have a core
- Page 103 and 104: Extension failures 95 In the mid-19
- Page 105 and 106: Extension failures 97 every brand -
- Page 107 and 108: Extension failures 99 sales rose to
- Page 109 and 110: Extension failures 101 However, amo
- Page 111 and 112: Extension failures 103 29 Chiquita
- Page 113 and 114: Extension failures 105 A brand is
Idea failures 57<br />
12 RJ Reynolds’<br />
smokeless cigarettes<br />
The ultimate bad idea<br />
Cigarette manufacturers have often thought that the best way to build market<br />
share is to come up with new twists on the standard cigarette formula. For<br />
instance, Marlboro has had dozens of different varieties in its history,<br />
including Marlboro Menthol, Marlboro Lights and Marlboro Medium.<br />
Normally, cigarettes produce new varieties based on different levels of tar.<br />
For instance, in the UK the Silk Cut brand produced various low-tar varieties<br />
– Mild, Low and Ultra Low. The popularities of such low-tar brands has<br />
caused cigarette companies to think of ever more ways to try and convince<br />
consumers that their unhealthy and anti-social products aren’t as unhealthy<br />
or as anti-social as they might have thought. Similar strategies have been<br />
deployed in the beer market, with brands such as Bud Light, Coors Light and<br />
Miller Lite.<br />
However, some of these strategies take an extreme form. For instance, in<br />
the alcohol market there was the case of the beer brand which tried to sell<br />
beer-branded mineral water. The brand was Coors. The water it produced<br />
was called Coors Rocky Mountain Spring Water. It was launched in 1990 and<br />
survived only two years.<br />
In the cigarette industry, the extreme strategy belonged to RJ Reynolds<br />
Tobacco Company known for brands such as Camel, Winston, Salem and<br />
Doral. In 1988, when the anti-smoking lobbyists could finally claim the<br />
majority of public opinion was behind them, and when passive smoking had
Change language