If you’ve been watching the Olympics, you’ve noticed that Procter & Gamble has more airtime than Phelps and Bolt combined.
Yes, I said Procter & Gamble. Not Tide, not Febreze, not Gillette. P&G.
When did P&G start corporate branding? More importantly, why?
It used be that P&G never used its corporate brand. Unilever does. Nestlé does. S. C. Johnson (a family company) does. Johnson & Johnson does. Kraft does. But P&G? Now that’s new.
Well, not entirely new – P&G has used its corporate brand at the end of product brand ads in Japan for a decades. Consumers there are keen to know who they’re buying from, not just that what they’re buying will do the job.
That reasoning it seems, now applies to the whole world.
Or perhaps it is just that the cost of being a worldwide Olympic sponsor is now so enormous, that it can’t be borne by a single brand, even if it is a brand as huge and global as Tide (Ariel) or Gillette.
Does this mean the relegation of product brands to a second rung. Are corporate brands going to come to the fore? Will the consumer demand to know who they’re doing business with before they examine the brand promise?