Is sub-branding or rebranding always the way out?
I have been reading the ‘22 immutable laws of marketing’ and the book talks about how creating a new and separate brand for a new line of product(s) is a better strategy than pasting the main brand name on each product line. Take Coca Cola, for example. They have multiple products in the market but each with its own brand - Dasani, Fairlife, Simply, Maaza, Minute Maid etc. And compare this with GE which has its brand name pasted on each product line. Al and Jack argue, in the book, that Coca Cola’s strategy is better than GE’s.
With this context in mind, I read about Black and Decker, their product portfolio, and market performance in the 1980s and I am forced to think if only a new branding strategy would have solved the problem for B&D?
B&D was losing market share in the Professional-Tradesmen segment of power tools to Makita. But I feel that more than branding there actually was an issue with product quality. B&D’s own research showed that their saws and sanders were underdeveloped as compared to other brands, and they were merely competitive in drills. And these three segments accounted for 80% of the total market segment.
I think the answer to B&D’s problems would have been a combination of rebranding and improved tool quality.