One of the most critical aspects is respecting the identity of the source corporate, that fixes the brand limits: the product names, for example, will belong to the source brand semantic area and they will include the brand peculiarities.
It could trigger problems related to bid too much the brand to the real world, with no chance to convey it in an imaginary one. The name “Virgin Atlantic Airways” is for sure less intriguing than “Volare” one.
In case you want your low-positioned brand released in the hierarchy, you should adopt an endorsing brand strategy, linking the corporate name to the brand through a simple “by”.
Typical examples of this relation could be fashion company perfumes, (Eternity by Calvin Klein) or fashion company stylists such as Guess by Marciano.
Corporate and brand correspond
In this case one brand supports several products on different markets and each item distinguishes itself from the others by its own communication and features.
The Illy coffee is an example of corporate/brand/product, Yamaha is a strong and reliable brand in motorcycling as well as in musical instruments frame of reference; Philips markets its brand hi-fi, computers, consumer electronics and electrical components.
The slogan “the company brand is the future” becomes a value capital for consumers, just think to brands such as Harley Davidson, able to devise a relational world providing a social and ideological universe.
Main advantages
All products can appeal to the same brand popularity and join international economies of scale.
If entering new markets the brand awareness high level could be extremely valuable to spread through distributors and consumers with no effort to build it up.
Brand celebrity can even be enough to become successful in small areas or where advertising and marketing efforts are not necessary.
Main disadvantages
It’s difficult to release the consumer polarization in new market segments.
Possible negative effects of a product failure in a specific market/area on its corporate.
Corporate and brand don’t correspond
A typical case is given by Unilever: this company has made the one-brand/one-product policy its branding philosophy, because it appears with different brands in varying product classes, each one with a specific and clear positioning without showing the corporate name. The company is visible only in one market and it’s trying to be leader in its product class without binding its name to any market segment.
The policy benefits
One benefit is the chance to join new segments without necessary involving the corporate name.
This will entail an almost absolute freedom to enter new markets, avoiding that possible failures undermine corporate and its brands reliability.
We can quote Procter & Gamble as well; at the end of ‘800 indeed it introduced on the market the Ivory soap, then it joined other segments, keeping its different identities autonomous: from the soap powder (Dreft, Tide, Dash) to the toothpaste (Crest) up to the French fries (Pringles).