3 ms·

Reputational damage is pretty easy to limit for companies that can control what news a huge majority of people see.

• mrguyorama 2y ago
  If the "Craftsman" brand of tools didn't go completely out of business despite removing the lifetime warranty and just slapping the brand name on cheap chinese tools, then "Reputational damage" does not exist.
  • markovs_gun 2y ago
    Yep. Reputational damage is a thing of the past in a world where everyone is completely bombarded with useless and incorrect information 24/7. Maybe it was never a thing at all, and companies merely assumed it was as a theoretical. Either way, I have never seen any brand actually suffer long term because of their reputation.
    • mixmastamyk 2y ago
      Tarnished brands change their name these days.
  • mewse 2y ago
    Pedantry: "Craftsman" was never a company and didn't "go out of business". "Craftsman" was originally a store brand used by Sears, under which it sold tools that Sears contracted various third parties to produce. In 2017, Stanley Black & Decker purchased the "Craftsman" trademark from Sears (Sears Holdings at the time), giving Sears a long-term royalty-free license to continue producing and selling tools under that trademark (I think that license lasts for about another decade at this point? And then there'd be a small royalty payment for using the trademark beyond that point.) As a result, several different stores now each carry tools all called "Craftsman", they're generally not the same tools; different stores sell different tools produced in different places, and all sell their own versions of the tools under the same "Craftsman" brand name. This undoubtedly causes absurd levels of consumer confusion. As you say, it's absolutely causing tremendous reputational value for the trademark.