48 CHAPTER 2 BRANDINGA brand strategy in which diff erent brands are used for products or product ranges in the
same product category is called multi-branding. Th is is frequently used by companies like
Procter & Gamble and Mars. Procter & Gamble, for instance, has a number of diff erent detergent
brands. However, the traditional multi-branding companies also use brand stretching. For
instance, Fairy and Dreft are brands used in both dishwashing liquids and laundry detergents.
Th e advocates of multi-branding argue that this strategy permits fi ner segmentation and
positioning. Each brand is fully capable of building its own personality and perceived benefi t
and of appealing to the specifi c segment it is targeted at. Th e obvious disadvantage of this
strategy is that individual brands cannot benefi t from the leveraging eff ect of existing brands.
Companies using the multi-branding strategy will also be inclined to use new brands
when they introduce a product in a new product category. But introducing new brands may
also be called for when none of the company’s brands is suitable for use in the new product
category. For instance, Toyota established a new name for its luxury car range, the Lexus.
Wesftern brand ftThfinkfing Thas mafinfly been sThaped by Procfter & Gambfle, , Henkefl and
Mars. Th e key feature here was diff erentiation: every possible segment should be serviced with
a new brand. Japanese brand thinking, on the other hand, used to focus on harmony and loyalty:
trust, authenticity, credibility and expertise is based on the company and the values it stands
for. Th erefore, all products refer to the company and are not stand-alone items.^30 In the 1990s,
some claimed that the corporate brand would be the only successful option for brand building
in the future.^31 However, this does not appear to be true, at least not as far as fast-moving con-
sumer goods are concerned. Comparing brand strategies of the 20 top suppliers of UK grocery
retailers (involving about 400 products) between 1994 and 2004 showed a signifi cant drop in the
use of corporate brands to the advantage of mixed brands. More than 60% of the products used
some form of mixed branding in 2004. Th e researchers assume that the reason for the recent
shift away from corporate brands can be sought in risk avoidance (inspired by recent scandals
that broke brands like Enron), the need for precise targeting and the benefi ts of mixed branding.^32
When a company introduces a product abroad, it can also choose between an extension
or a ‘new brand’ strategy. If the existing brand has the required global characteristics, is
already known in the new country, or if the company is committed to building global brands
( Photo 2.1 ), a global strategy will be used. Globalisation increases the value of the brand (see
below) and enables the company to benefi t from transnational effi ciencies in advertising, since
TV channels targeted at consumer segments in diff erent countries, such as Eurosport and MTV,
increase the ‘footprint’ of ads broadcast through these channels. Examples of global brands
are Coca-Cola, Nike and Gillette. Global brands can range from being globally consistent to
locally adapted. Gillette is consistent around the world because men’s shaving needs are,
world wide, more or less the same. YouTube can be situated in the middle of the continuum:
it has global reach, but pursues a localisation strategy because it realises that people sharing
the same culture will be more likely to share content. McDonald’s is locally adapted: it does
use the same logo and colours, but adapts its service and products to fi t local needs. For
example, it is an upscale delivery service in Brazil, off ers teriyaki chicken strips in Japan, and
its German coff ee shops are better than Starbucks.^33building a strong corporate brand. Next, it focused on better quality, a nicer design and innovation. To be visible to users
24 hours a day, seven days a week, the company chose first to focus on a new line of mobile phones and digital TVs.
These are also products with which consumers are more likely to form a strong bond. Building a strong image in
these categories opens doors to other categories. Samsung’s strategy is clearly paying off. Currently Samsung holds
17th place in the Best Global Brands ranking, leaving Sony behind in overall brand value in 35th place. Samsung has
become the clear leader in flat-panel TVs and continues its focus on mobile devices. Through a strong flagship
brand strategy around Galaxy smart phones and tablet devices under the Android platform, Samsung hopes to gain
a strong foothold in the market. Also in other markets, such as digital appliances, digital imaging, IT solutions, B2B,
and especially semiconductors, Samsung continuously offers innovative and relevant solutions.^29M02_PELS3221_05_SE_C02.indd 48M02_PELS3221_05_SE_C02.indd 48 6/5/13 2:59 PM6/5/13 2:59 PM