Talk:Brand extension

Brands Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marketing & Advertising High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Discussion

thanks guys this paper is my research project.I dont know how to meet the WIKI's format...hope you can fix it thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xjack612 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It reads like one of my student’s research papers. There needs to be a new intro that clarifies the topic. That would help even if the logical flow is never established because of the many “opinions”. Brand extension is a concept - a type of new product. A definition does not lend itself to opinions. The opinions in the Wikipedia piece are all about whether it is a good idea. Billions of dollars of successes worldwide prove it is. Professor Tauber, Emeritus USC

Source

This article was primarily added to Wikipedia by User:Xjack612 on April 2, 2007.[1] as a more or less unformatted literature review paper. Some inline citations didn't paste properly with the text file, so some of the Further reading articles were probably used as citations for some of the text. Some citations are named specifically, but I can't find them in the reference list (e.g. Chen and Chen, 2000). I've labeled these "incomplete references". All help with cleaning up and verifying this article is greatly appreciated! --Busy Stubber 18:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article is really poorly written, one of the lowest quality articles I have read on Wikipedia. Sidemaniac (talk) 19:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The author who wrote this and did a literature review about brand extension did a great disservice. He obviously never conducted any brand extension work or developed any successful brand extension products. My brand extensions were developed for Nestle (Gerber Infant Formula), (Buitoni Refrigerated Pasta), MARS (Snickers Ice Cream Bars), Hershey (Reese’s Peanut Butter), Clorox (Clean-Up), (Toilet Bowl Drop-Ins) and (Disinfecting Wipes) and many others. Anyone with experience would know this Wikipedia misses the point. I don’t expect your editor/reviewers would recognize this. All of us have narrow expertise. And brand extension is a narrow topic. But why include sections or articles that do not help to educate the reader so he learns more about the topic. This is just like a masters thesis some grad student wrote who did not really understand the subject. I would be happy just leaving all the “viewpoints” and writing an introduction that explained what brand extension is, what are its benefits and the origin of the concept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandextension (talk • contribs) 07:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brand Equity section

Someone really needs to fix the grammar of this section; it sounds like it was written by someone with only a very basic understanding of English.

Brand Extension Failure

IMO, this section would benefit greatly from a simple example. I would offer the following: Rover used to be known for quality cars with a price premium. As the brand was stretched to include family cars (and, eventually, small cars), they lost their reputation for quality and were no longer able to obtain a premium price for their top-of-the-range cars - and this segment of the market was then lost to different brands. New Thought (talk) 23:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brand extension failure has been highly overdone. I mentioned “the risk of diluting the brand” as a comment in the first presentation I made in 1979 when I introduced the concept of Brand Extension. Since then I have observed that this rarely occurs. Here is why: If a brand extension is so inconsistent with the parent brand, it likely will perform poorly or fail in test market. It is true that brand extensions do change the consumer’s perception about brands. For example, my brand extension for the Clorox Company - Clorox Clean Up, Clorox Toilet Bowl Cleaner and Clorox Disinfecting Wipes completely changed the way people think of the Clorox brand which was only bleach. As a result, the company launched cleaning and disinfecting tools for the kitchen and bath.

The example the editor gave of Rover cars is not a brand extension; it is a line extension. Brand extensions are new products launched in different categories from the parent brand. Line extensions are in the same category. Rover’s later products are all cars, therefore line extensions. This is the problem with the Wikipedia article: It is confused and just a poor literature review. Thousands of brand extensions have been launched around the world proving the concept. If you really want wikipedia to accurately explain the origin and concept about brand extension, a complete rewrite is necessary. All I did was add a new intro so that people would clearly understand the four types of new products and clearly differentiate brand extension from the other types. At least this helps the reader understand what it is even if the many of the remaining academic articles are nonsense. Ed Tauber, PhD, retired professor of marketing, USC.