Yeo Valley – How to reposition a brand in 2 minutes

Sorry to make this the third video in a row, but this is a super piece of brand repositioning. Thanks to Kelly Herrick of Abacus for sharing it – I certainly wouldn’t have seen it as I simply can’t bring myself to sit down and watch X Factor. Yeo Valley would hardly have been described as a happening, trendy and even cool brand, but they may do now.

But this is really clever. It works the organic angle, the natural, the beautiful people and youth all in one ad. My only complaint is the terrible dubbing of the girly farmers voice.

if this doesn’t help their sales and be a comparitive brand reposition to that achieved by Nick Kamen all those years ago with the Levi Ad, I don’t know what will.

They deserve all the success they get.

Advertisements

Waterstone’s – A ‘pointless’ rebrand

Waterstone’s appear to have rebranded from their old sharp pointy logo shown here:

Waterstone’s old logo - a nice pointy thing with some classic typography
Waterstone’s old logo - a nice pointy thing with some classic typography

And they have replaced it with this somewhat ‘pointless’ effort:

Waterstone's new logo - a rather pointless effort in every respect
Waterstone's new logo - a rather pointless effort in every respect

But I find myself asking why. They have 303 stores and to even replace the fascia and a few bits of POS around the store will cost them an absolute minimum of £10k per store to actually implement the change of logo. This gives them a bare minimum bill of £3.03 Million to update the stores. Cheap by some comparisons, but will it help them sell any extra books?

Not in my opinion.

Again, if we assume they made £2 on every book they sell (which seems highly unlikely), then that means they have to sell over 1.5 million extra books even to stand still. I can’t see a logo that looks like some old lady’s droopy appendages actually driving a single extra customer to buy from them, let alone to buy more and more from them.

Rebrands need to mark the change in a business and show that what it has done previously will be left behind in favour of it’s new way of behaving going forwards. If it is a line in the sand then this marking of the change can be beneficial. But not if the change is to make them look less authoritative and stylish than they did before.

In my opinion (and i’m happy for anyone and everyone to disagree with me), this is the worst sort of rebrand. A bad and pointless one that will continue to give our industry a bad name.