WHY SLOW TAKE OFFS ARE BEST FOR BRAND BUILDING: "There are two theories for launching a new brand.
Theory A (for airplane) is the airplane launch. Your new brand rolls slowly down the runway for thousands of feet and then after a massive effort your brand slowly lifts off the concrete. After your brand is airborne for awhile, it starts to accelerate into its cruising altitude.
Theory B (for big bang) is the rocket-ship launch. Your new brand takes off like a rocket and then coasts into orbit.
Should you use massive advertising to launch a new brand? Or should you just use PR?
Big bang for advertising
Advertising favors the big bang launch because ad programs are traditionally launched with a big bang. That's the only way to create enough attention to get above the noise level.
PR has no choice. It has to use an airplane launch. PR programs are invariably rolled out over an extended period of time. That's the only way PR can deal with the needs of media focused on scoops and exclusives. (You can't call up the media and say: 'Everybody run my story on Monday. I'm launching my new brand with a big bang.' That's not the way the media works.)
What about the real world? Do new brands take off like a rocket ship? Or do they take off like an airplane?
Take a typical new brand in the beverage industry. This brand took four years to break $10 million in annual sales and another five years to reach $100 million.
Red Bull's airplane liftoff
The brand is Red Bull, a brand built primarily by PR and a brand that took off like an airplane, not like a rocket ship. (Today, Red Bull does $1.5 billion in annual worldwide sales.)
Take Microsoft, for example. It might be hard to believe, but the brand took even longer to get off the runway than Red Bull. Microsoft took 10 years to exceed $100 million in annual"

Enter your search terms Submit search form