3 ms·
> rebrand themselves as "Spectrum" in markets where they already had a presence (such as New York City) Is that a nice way of saying they're rebranding themsel
by ssharp 10y ago
> rebrand themselves as "Spectrum" in markets where they already had a presence (such as New York City)
Is that a nice way of saying they're rebranding themselves to anyone already familiar with the brand. The assumption being anyone familiar with the brand has a negative image of it :)
- lukasbarton 10y agoThis is generally the goal of any re-branding. It would be illogical to attempt re-branding against a successful, known property.
- danvasquez29 10y agoit could be that the licensing fees on the name are a significant enough drag on revenue, and/or the agreement has an expiration date and there's an expectation that the licenser won't renew the agreement. I've been a part of situations like that. You can try and get ahead of it like TW is doing now where you create the second name ahead of time and try to build up the recognition and awareness around it in advance.
- jdmichal 10y agoTime Warner Cable was bought by Charter, and the Spectrum "rebranding" is Charter's existing name for cable services. If there are continuing licensing fees for using the Time Warner name, I don't see why Charter would continue using it over its own brand name.