The Chronology of Brands (Jeremy Sampson)

Having a glorious past is no guarantee of a prosperous future, but a successful past helps build a winning culture. Brands that have built positive equity and a loyal customer base command an envious position.

When companies start out they are not immediately brands. That takes time. South African history is littered with those who announced the launch of a new ‘instant’ brand only to see it quickly slide into oblivion. A reason we argue that for something to survive for five years is special and just the start, as around 90 percent of all start-ups will have disappeared by then.

Young countries such as South Africa, Australia, Mexico, Brazil, Singapore and Taiwan invariably have their oldest brands represented
by banks or telephone companies. Whilst global brands continue to colonise the globe. Brands used to be limited to products, then services, now companies, people and countries. The concept of people as brands is well established, but as with all things, this gives rise to those who arrive without trace or substance. They tend to disappear in the same manner. In London earlier this year, quietly reflecting in a Prêt A Manger I came across the following; “The idols of today are unmistakable – self-esteem without effort, fame without achievement, sex without consequences, wealth without responsibility, pleasure without struggle and experience without commitment.” Rabbi Dr. Jonathan Sacks.

Whilst marketers create and grow brands, it can be argued they are ultimately owned and shaped by the customer. However the word ‘customer’ has become too broad for some groups such as P&G, who now talk of customers, consumers and purchasers. And when you think about it, whilst one person could be all three of these groups, so could indeed be three seperate groups with differing demands and needs.

Certainly, brands that remain relevant generate a security of income for their owners that will be the envy of the competition. In uncertain
times, as business cycles turn down, as they must do from time to time, the certainty that strong brands bring to financial results keeps the analysts content and ensures future viability.

Additionally the ‘brandscape’ is getting ever more complex as brands are being used as a form of instant ‘brand-aid’ to repair damage. Brands can challenge, motivate, be ethical, green, an employer of choice, something to invest in, a legacy, something to avoid at all costs, and something to be seen with. A friend you can trust.

Some would argue that brands have become too important in our lives, that they are overly powerful and influential, but the thing about  rands is that we make them what they are, and they touch our lives continually in different ways. There are some who claim to still march to the tune of the anti-brander, yet when you enquire into the intimate details of their private lives, not surprisingly, it emerges that they are much more brand reliant and conscious than initially they were prepared to admit. In some cases they simply didn’t realise the influence brands exert on their lives.

Look into the homes of those over seventy, and you will find their brandscape differs from those a decade younger. Drop a couple
more decades and the under-forties will differ again. Get to those underten and they already have their brand friends. The challenge for many brands is to span as many decades as possible, by being adopted early and then staying relevant.

Take the ten most valuable brands on the planet (Best Global Brands, Business Week / Interbrand 2007) and it may be a surprise to find an  average age of 87 years. Ten brands from four countries, with seven coming from the US. Mercedes-Benz started out, and continues to be,  focused in the world of automotive, Coca-Cola remains in soft drinks whilst Finland’s Nokia has evolved over the years.

Those who think that keeping a brand relevant is easy should reflect on those that have got into trouble. Immediately, Motorola springs to mind with Kodak not far behind. Many have written about the miracle of the sustainability of top brands. Writing on brandchannel.com, Barry Silverstein points out that to survive top brands have to battle “Massive shifts in consumer preferences, changing business environments and the evolution of marketing from print to electronic to interactive.” All top brands have a diet of innovation, diversity, leadership and resiliency. A point about top brands is that they have all made mistakes and stumbled, yet have the momentum and ability to pick themselves up and resume business as usual.

Prompted by seeing some research on the UK top brands, carried out by Nielsen in 1995 (Chart 1), Interbrand Sampson decided to mirror the launch date of SA’s Top 50 Brands in 2002 (Chart 2). We were surprised to see how similar the results were. Six years later we decided to examine what had changed (Chart 3). Many of the local so-called top brands tables are open to challenge, as indeed is this one. However no one has bought their way in, adspend was ignored, and awareness levels were just the beginning not the be all and end all. We sat down, discussed at length which brands were born in South Africa, which were achieving iconic status, and which had a future. We were very careful to ensure the discussion included a spectrum of people from our rainbow nation.

We started with the 50 Top Brands we had agreed on in 2002 and then deliberated on what was new. Finally we removed two of the 50, added 16, coming to a list of 64. Why 64 you may ask? Well those were what we considered to be the top tier.



Pre 1900

It is a surprise to see Joko tea dating back to 1804, Nederburg to 1810, Mrs. Balls to 1852 and Sunlight to 1887. No one can argue that these four brands, all from different sectors, have continued to evolve and today remain in rude health. The fact that three belong to one group today is amazing. (15 brands or 23 percent of the total).

1900 – 1949

Fully 31 percent of the top brands come from this period. All Gold is from around 1900; Springbok Rugby, a shock to many, 1906; Klippies in 1938 and Koo in 1946. Being born in 1918, Madiba might have found himself eating Weet-Bix, launched by Bokomo in 1930. (20 brands or 31 percent of the total)

1950 – 1979
Around the world, the period after World War II, saw an explosion of new brands. 1950 was the start up of Sasol; Chappies were introduced soon after, Oil of Olay in 1953. Oil of Olay was first produced just outside Durban, but today is owned by Procter & Gamble and is one of its brand giants. New beer brands are notoriously difficult to launch and whilst Castle claims roots that go back to 1884, Hansa was launched in 1975. Some would say this was SAB’s last successful launch of a totally new beer in South Africa. (17 brands or 27 percent of the total)

1980 – 2004
You could argue that this period has seen more technical innovation than ever before. Certainly we live in exciting times. And it is this period in which we have seen the realisation of the huge financial value of brands. South Africa has seen the introduction of cell phone and network providers of which MTN and Vodacom are the two giants, one global the other more local. The Sun newspaper has exploded into life. New retailers like Mr. Price, financial products from Discovery and Outsurance, fast food like Chicken Licken and Nando’s, technologyfrom M-Net and cream liqueur brand Amarula, now number two in its category globally. Added to this are the budget airlines, with Kulula firmly  established and a brand of considerable value, but facing stiff competition. (12 brands or 19 percent of total).

Today, economies of countries are often gauged by the top brands owned by the country, and the guarantee of future income they have
the potential to generate. Where brands are assembled, manufactured or ‘made’ is increasingly irrelevant. Does South Africa have regional or
global brands? Is it best at delivering in business-to-consumer (B2C) or business-to-business (B2B), service or product? This information is not always easy to uncover. That said the banks are led by Standard, fast food by Nando’s, retailers by Shoprite and products by Amarula. Currently, the leader of the pack appears to be MTN. These five brands are certainly giants, and their ages are 138, 21, 29, 19, and
14 respectively. This augers well for the future.

Electronic brands went through a wave, gobbled up huge amounts of cash, and then in most cases reverted to their parent brands. The most visited electronic site in South Africa is reputed to be Standard Bank’s, but who remembers Blue Bean and what was reported to be a R60 million or was it R 80 million ‘stumble’. Some argued that it was a waste of money, but I think it better to think of it as ‘learning fees’. Remember, one of the core characteristics of top brands is innovation and that will always have a risk attached.

As I write this the world has already celebrated Nelson Mandela’s 90th birthday on July 18 2008. Indeed judging by the concert in London
and the array of events, he is more appreciated there than here, which is very sad. He is certainly South Africa’s, and Africa’s most famous brand. His steadfast dignity and integrity seems increasingly lonely compared to the legacy he left behind. Coupled to Mandela, we have 46664, something certainly striving to attain brand status, but with a way to go.

Reviewing the ages of brands, it is fascinating to see when and where they came from, and to think that in the last 24 years we can only identify
12 truly new brands indicates how difficult it is.

—————————————————————————

Jeremy Sampson is Group Chief Executive of Interbrand Sampson, part of the Interbrand Group, found in 36 cities around the world, part of Omnicom the largest marketing group in the world.

He has advised many bluechip clients, travelled to many parts of the world, speaking at many conferences and business schools, writing numerous papers and broadcasting regularly on television and radio on branding and reputational issues.

 Email This Post
 Print This Post