When advertisers inadvertently promote other companies

You've probably seen the teaser ads for Bell's "er". The logo here is part of their new branding which was discussed in the Torontoist a couple of days ago. What I wanted to talk about is a simple non-scientific survey that we did with 12 people at our local Starbucks. Not necessary a focus group nor directed by any organisation other than just my idea that sometimes an advertisement can potentially unintentionally promote another company. When asked about the "er" logo and asked what company they think this comes from, the response of 8 out of the 12 was "Porter Air" rather than "Bell." The rest ranged from "I don't know" and "why are you asking me" to "Maybe its an error" or "I've not seen the ad." Were the ones who answered "Porter Air" said so because of the colour blue? Is it because it is branding that's already known?

Rebranding research can be tricky because of the many factors involved in ensuring that another brand will not be confused with their rebranding. Cross-industry research is important to capture perception on other company brands so as not to lose momentum caused by teaser ads. There was a lot of money involved in the new Bell ads, it would be great to see how Porter Air's stock would have gone up with the residual perception of brand reference but they're a privately held company so we'll just have to see if they take advantage of it. Maybe have a partnership with Bell (free wifi's using the Bell Network in their lounges for example) would be a great idea and can turn this potentially-viewed-as- misplaced-perception of branding around.

TAGS: Advertisement, Bell, Marketing, Promotion

Bookmark / Share