3foldComm

SyFy? Seriously, SciFi Channel? “Imagine Greater”, the new tagline launching side-by-side with a rebranded name this summer is meant to signify the embracing of more than traditional sci-fi genre, allowing fantasy, supernatural, paranormal, reality, mystery, action and adventure into the mix (which it already did).

What? Were there too many complaints about “Mansquito” or “Gargoyles: Wings of Darkness” not fitting the science fiction genre alluded to by the network’s name? Because I don’t think that’s what the complaints were about. For the last few years, SciFi has seen increased ratings, and delivered some actual top-notch programming (hello, “Battlestar Galactica” won a Peabody and addressed the UN!). So, where was the need?

There is a time and a place for re-branding (yeah, AIG probably needed to branding) as long as you do it well and thoughtfully (really, AIG, you went with AIU because that’s going to throw an angry public off the scent?). However, re-branding for re-branding’s sake is not always a great idea.

Take for example Pepsi and its family of products. Not to knock the hard work of whatever fellow marketing group created this new look, because I’m sure they put a lot of research and effort into it, but I hate it. Every time I see the new logo, it makes me want to get Coke. What was it that made the incredibly-recognizable logo from my childhood not good enough? It’s kind of like when my parents sold my childhood home one month after I went to college…an erasing of nostalgic connections. In fact, this blog claims there were more than 33 re-branded logos for major business icons in 2008, and I know that doesn’t include all the ones that have caused a double-take for me while I drive around town.

I admit, most of these new looks are very nice, and I’m certainly not arguing that reviving a company’s look isn’t a solid business strategy. I simply wonder if this epidemic of re-branding is change brought on by trend or truly represents change for a good reason. In any case, SyFy, come on?!