• Save
Executive summary brand Management: Virgin
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Executive summary brand Management: Virgin

on

  • 18,641 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
18,641
Views on SlideShare
18,638
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
17
Downloads
0
Comments
2

1 Embed 3

http://www.linkedin.com 3

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • Could you pleas email me this over to my email address too...K.L.S1984@HOTMAIL.COM, thank you.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
  • can you please mail me the ppt at bhavukk.choudry@gmail.com
    Thank you :)
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Executive summary brand Management: Virgin Executive summary brand Management: Virgin Document Transcript

  • -345440-257810<br />TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
    • CHAPTER 11.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY…………………………………………………………………………42.0 LITERATURE REVIEW2.1 OVERVIEW OF BRAND EXTENSIONS………………………………………………………5 2.1 EXTENSION ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES………………………………… 73.0 UNDERSTANDING OF BRAND EQUITY FOR SUCCESSFUL BRAND EXTENSIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………….83.1 CONSUMER MEMORY…………………………………………………………………………… 93.2 BRAND AWARENESS………………………………………………………………………………103.3 BRAND IMAGE……………………………………………………………………………………… 103.4 BRAND ASSOCIATIONS………………………………………………………………………….113.5 BRAND PERSONALITY……………………………………………………………………………114.0 EXTENSIONS CONSIDERATION4.1 BRAND FIT……………………………………………………………………………………………134.2 BRAND LEVERAGE……………………………………………………………………………… 13CHAPTER 25.0 DISCUSSION (VIRGIN GROUP)5.1 VIRGIN OVERVIEW……………………………………………………………………………… 155.2 VIRGIN EXTENSIONS…………………………………………………………………………… 166.0 VIRGIN PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL6.1 VIRGIN ATLANTIC………………………………………………………………………………… 216.2 VIRGIN TRAIN……………………………………………………………………………………….226.3 VIRGIN MEDIA……………………………………………………………………………………….237.0 VIRGIN SUCCESS AND FAILURE FACTORS7.1 SUCCESS FACTORS……………………………………………………………………………… 247.2 HITS AND MISSES………………………………………………………………………………… 248.0 VIRGIN EQUITY………………………………………………………………………………….. 279.0 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………………….2910 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………… 30
    • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
    S<br />tretching brands intelligently onto relevant products that reiterate core brand values have enabled consumers to embrace the brand as part of their day-to-day lives. Marketing practitioners and academics have emphasized on developing methods and product launches strategies through brand extensions in today’s economy (Stegemann, 2006). Many companies have confronted failure and many have succeeded in this case.<br />The prior literature review suggests theoretical section of brand extensions and the factors affecting brand extensions. The second part suggests Virgin Group’s success and pitfalls of brand extension in today’s era from the perspective of the consumer. This research study is undertaken to uncover and articulate the definition of the hidden brand positioning of Virgin Group in the mind of the consumer and to develop a review on Virgin’s performance appraisal.<br />
    • LITERATURE REVIEW
    2.1 OVERVIEW OF BRAND EXTENSIONS<br />A<br />s market environment has become more dynamic and competitive, companies are compelled to come out with new products (George, 2008). Aaker (1995) suggests that a useful source of growth is the ‘Ansoff’s Product/Market Expansion Grid. <br />Many corporations manage to look for new opportunities to boost their sales and profits by focusing on Ansoff’s model of framework in order to make their extensions successful. Figure 1 categorizes strategies in accordance with the existing or new products and the target current or new customers or markets. <br />Few companies avoid launching new products due to the magnitude of marketing efforts required and, huge cost required (Seyama, 2006; George, 2008). Studies have shown that existence of companies with a large product or brand portfolios have found a wise strategy to leverage on the power of brands to launch new products in the market. This strategy is known as BRAND EXTENSION. Therefore, it can be defined as “the allowance of the existing brand to diversify and leverage by penetrating into new product category by new product development in order to increase the rate of new acceptance and purchase intention to consumer that creates positive images and strengths of existing brand” (Juda, 2007. Chaternatony and McDonald (1998) clears out by highlighting the fact that the production of new brands are compelling companies to move towards stretching their existing name into new markets.<br />Literature related to the downside of brand extension is limited and the findings shows incongruence (Sullivan, 1989). The compelling study of Aaker and Keller (1990) reveals no considerable evidence of the brand name that can be diluted by unsuccessful brand extensions. In contrary, John (2006) argues that brand extension failure do occur when the existence of inconsistency of product category and brand belief occurs. Moreover, the downside of brand extension occurs when the emergence of difficulty in connecting with the existing brand is realized. For example, companies such as Harley Davidson perfume, Virgin Cola and Bic Underwear. Haig (2003) brings up few extension failures where advertising budgets will also not cover the loss. This may dilute and harm the core brand image of the parent brand.<br />Many writes (Keller, 1998, 2003; Aaker, 1991; Seyama, 2006; Martinez and Pina, (2010) assumes that exploitation of the brand equity can take place when entering into new markets, capitalizing on recognition, goodwill and any positive associations. For instance, Virgin moving into airlines, financial service, radio stations, and bridal services; Caterpillar, extended from heavy machinery into shoes, clothing and handbags and Bic, extended into disposable lighters and razors and many more (Court, et.al., 1999). Recommendation can be put forward by saying that caution needs exercising. However, Bic’s extension into perfume was unsuccessful, as it has moved too far from its core values.<br />2.2 EXTENSION ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES<br />The advantages of successful Brand Extension have been identified by Taylor (2004) that focuses on the aforementioned strategy. Firstly, the emphasis on the remaining strong brand is used to “promote a new product” that makes it less critical to create “brand awareness and brand image.” Brand extension creates association with the main brand that communicates its specific benefits of the innovation for better Consumer Knowledge. Secondly, Keller (2008) mentions that the consumers form inferences and form expectations over time about the performance of a new product. These inferences may improve, strengthen, and create uniqueness of the extension’s brand associations in order to Improve Brand Image. Thirdly, it is convenient to convince retailers to stock and promote to increase consumer demand for a new product and Increase the Probability of Gaining Distribution and Trial (Temporal, 2010). Besides facilitating acceptance of new products, brand extension provides positive Feedback to benefit parent brand in ways such as clarifying brand meaning to consumers. For example, Hunt’s means “tomato, Nabisco means “baked cookies, and crackers” and ESPN means “sports.” (Martinez and Pina, 2010).Hence, it can be said that THE single most desirable outcome of a successful brand extension to ‘ability to bring something to the party’. <br />An alternative scenario realized is the dilution of the existing image of the brand. Past researchers (Volckner and Sattler, 2006, 2008; Taylor, 2004; Aaker, 1990) have highlighted that it can be an advantage for the extension, however, it demonstrates a huge risk for the existing brand because the brand image can be diluted. McCarthy and Milberg (1993) explain further by purporting that this ‘reciprocity effect’ can dilute the brand capital due to undesirable association, hence can tarnish the image of all the brands. Secondly, Cannibalization can also be realized when brands are positioned in a close market (Aaker, 2004). Thirdly, a disaster may occur which cannot be controlled by the firm (Aaker, 2004). Higher extensions lead to more number of damages. For instance, Firestone tires used for the Ford Explorer were potentially unsafe.<br />3. UNDERSTANDING BRAND EQUITY FOR SUCCESSFUL BRAND EXTENSIONS<br />Franzen and Moriarty (2009) in their study assert that to make introduction of a new entry less expensive by trading on, an established brand name is required to leverage the ‘brand equity’ of successful brand promises. Aaker (1991) has provided the most inclusive definition of brand equity given below.<br />In essence, the brand value can be a halo extending beyond the current product category to other product classes (Park and Zaltman, 1987). Therefore, it can be viewed in terms of the brand focused marketing effects of those activities. It is believed as to how consumers understand, perceive, and evaluate the brand’s ability to stretch over time by considering the brand as a combination of three components (Pitta and Katsanis, 1995; Motameni and Shahrokhi, 1998): financial aspects, brand extension and consumer behaviour. For example, When Pepsi launched a diet cola in the market, it “extends” its brand equity which means that everything that has been put into has gone into building the Pepsi generation product called Diet Pepsi (DiFrisco, 2009).<br />3.1 CONSUMER MEMORY<br />The fundamental basis of brand equity is consumer memory. Much of the cognitive literature has been devoted to the study of consumer memory structure. Experts (Keller, 2008; Leiser, 2004) have described brand equity in terms of components of brand knowledge by building resonance. Motameni and Shahrokhi (1998) agree that consumer knowledge may drive the differences that manifest themselves in brand equity. Moreover, users belief focuses on the nature of this relationship and the extent to which consumers feel connected with the brand, also known as ‘in synchronization’(Figure 4). To summarize, with brand resonance, consumers may have high loyalty, high awareness and associations due to a close relationship with the brand.<br />-Adapted from Keller (2003) <br />3.2 BRAND AWARENESS<br />Reast (2005) cited in the study of Keller (1993) mentions that brand equity is conceptualized by using an associative memory model that focuses on brand knowledge, brand awareness and brand image, which is described as a set of brand associations. Juda (2007) notes that many companies use-aided and aided awareness to gauge the extent to which consumers have positive image about their products and services; higher the awareness levels, larger the market share. Pitta and Katsanis (1995) and Hem (2001) state that the manager’s primary task is to enhance brand awareness, then build on this foundation and shape a salient image composed of a group of positive associations in order to assist companies to strengthen brand extensions. Considering Farquhar’s (1989) approach brand awareness may influence consumers’ perceived risk assessment in their buying decision process due to similarity with the brand and its features. <br />3.3 BRAND IMAGE<br />The extant literature conducted by Martinez and Chernatony (2004) states that brand image attenuates multi dimensional concept but there is no consensus on how to measure it empirically. Study shows that posing a theoretical method is measurable for brand equity that observes brand image as the perceptions reflected by brand associations held in consumer memory (Johnson et. al., 2000). Henceforth, three primary aspects of brand image that determines different consumer responses leading to extensions are favorability, strength, and uniqueness of brand associations. Brand extensions require positive brand image to define a target market, determine a product’s position, and measure the market response. In Contrary, companies may confront negative brand image that can be disastrous. Most of the literature emphasis shows that negative impact and wrong communication strategy may dilute brand image and equity, which may change the beliefs and association in consumer’s mind (Farquahar, 1989). <br />3.4 BRAND ASSOCIATIONS:<br />According to Keller (1998) “brand associations is an informational node that is linked to the brand node in memory that has the meaning of the brand for consumers”. These associations consist of perceptions of the brand quality and attitudes towards the brand. Many writers (Park et.al., 1993; George, 2008; Leiser, 2004) have hypothesized that perceptions of the consumer towards the brand are multi dimensional, yet few being similar. An empirical study executed by Seyema (2006) delineates that consumer evaluation of brand extension is the transfer process that conveys core brand associations to extensions. In essence, the core brand may provide salience, evaluation, and relevant associations that are valid within the product category and contributes a well-defined brand image to an extension (Keller 2003). For example, Heinz obtained Weight Watchers and launched the Weight Watchers low calorie products. Aaker (2004) mentions with respect to brand associations that extension conveys high quality associations to circumvent advertising battles rooted in product specifications. For example, Hewlett Packard that has extended its name to numerous products like printers, scanners, televisions and many more (Broniarczyk and Alba, 1994).<br />3.5 BRAND PERSONALITY<br />Aaker (1997) defines brand personality as “the set of human characteristics associated with a brand.” To launch a new product through brand extension strategy, she mentions that the conveyance of the brand personality from a current brand to a new product helps to differentiate from competing brands’ products. This results in enhancing the success, creating a set of unique and favorable associations in consumer memory, building and enhancing brand equity and reducing the risk of the new product. Certainly, Jeong and Jung (2009) mentions that a well-established brand personality results in strong emotional attachments of consumers towards the brand, greater trust, and consumer loyalty, thus providing differentiation (Aaker and Fournier, 1995; Diamantopoulos et.al., 2005). Surprisingly, prior research relates associations from product that explains self-expressive functions of a brand (Figure 2.9). For instance, Nike relates to ruggedness. Recommendations can be made by saying that not all brands are suited to capitalize through brand extensions. <br />
    • Adapted from Aaker(1990)
    4. EXTENSION CONSIDERATIONS<br />3308350521335Franzen and Moriarty (2009) mentions in their book that there are various key factors to consider in completing brand extensions using brand extension strategies. <br />4.1 BRAND FIT: <br />Various brand extension researchers have acknowledged the comprehensive study of perceived fit as an idea of increased proximity between parent brand and extension. Furthermore, Volckner and Sattler (2006) mention that being a primary element of extension evaluations, however there is no consistent definition in the literature. Perceived fit was conceptualized as the similarity or overlap of product features between the parent brand and extension category and the consistency of the brand concept (Aaker and Keller, 1990). The multiple factors that may influence the result of brand extension are the perceived fit between the parent brand and the extension and the characteristics of the parent brand used for the extension (Dawar, 1996). It can be said that if the perceived fit is higher, the extension category may share important product attributes with the parent brand category that involves better evaluation of extensions and credibility gain amongst consumers. For example, a cheese cracker extension from a potato chip parent brand would tend to fit because of the dry and salty taste (Keller and Aaker 1990). In contrary, a poor fit may lead to the loss of differentiation and decrease in credibility of the firm (Buil et.al.,2009). <br />4.2 BRAND LEVERAGE: Even more important than fit to the success of an extension is leverage. (Tauber, 1988) clearly notes that perceived fit seems to have the character of a precondition whereas brand leverage takes a strong hold on success factor. Taking an example of Philips mobile phones, it had been the component supplier to manufacturers of mobile phones, keeping all the necessary technology at its disposal (Court et.al., 1999). The craze to break through to a position between the top three brands, Nokia, Ericsson, and Motorola, Phillips had not even managed to reach the top ten due to no leverage at all. <br />Tauber (1988) designates the concept of fit as deceiving, as consumers are positioning different products under the same brand; however, the relevance of that brand for the individual extension becomes more limited. Also, marketers are willing to leverage the brands’ equity to create line extensions, vertical extensions, brand extensions, and co-branded products. John (2006) illustrates few examples shown in Figure 4. <br />-Adapted from John (2006)<br />5. DISCUSSION<br />VIRGIN: BRAND STRATEGY OR EGO TRIP?<br />Taylor (2008) notifies that brand extensions beyond the original market remains a hot topic for many marketers. Little is known about the influence of brand diversification on the strength of brands like Virgin. Researchers (Aaker, 2004; Keller,2008) have found the effects of brand extensions on the perception of brands, but when it comes to their influence on market positions in unrelated markets, the business has to face few contributions, which has been assumed that most companies have limited insight into this issue. <br />5.1 VIRGIN: OVERVIEW<br />Virgin Group Ltd. is a leading British branded venture capital conglomerate conceived in 1970 by the tycoon, Sir Richard Branson. The Virgin Group has grown as one of the most successful businesses in sectors ranging from mobile telephone to transportation, lifestyle, travel, financial services, media, music, and fitness (Virgin, 2011) as it stands for value of money, quality, innovation, fun and a sense of competitive challenge. However, not many companies can be compared to Virgin Group in doing A-Z of brand extensions (Juda, 2007). It can be said that Virgin Group flies high with brand extension and extends out in a diverse categories by simply attaching the brand name “Virgin” in every extended product they launch in the market. According to Virgin (2011), Virgin has managed to build 200 individual companies with total of $5 billion in turnover. The formula and the recipe acquired by Branson on taking his company has spread and grown so rapidly is by brand extension- the strategy to penetrate new innovative products and services in the market arena at faster rate than ever. Nevertheless, for Virgin one mistake of product can lead to dilution of brand portfolio (Thompson, 1993).<br />5.2 VIRGIN EXTENSIONS<br />“I believe there is almost no limit to what a brand can do. You can ignore those who go on about brand stretching."<br />- Branson, (1998)<br />The main rationale undertaken by the Virgin Group is to branch out into various feasible markets and extend the Virgin brand name further at a low cost where stature could be relied upon in order to reduce barriers to entry into static markets. Virgin aims to provide better quality products than any competitors in a complacent market by focusing on innovation and differentiation that has sacrificed short-term profits to gain long term growth (Ritson, 2002). Branson commenced his business, the Virgin Group by launching the following.<br />6. VIRGIN PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL<br />6.1 VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIRWAYS <br />Virgin considers customer feedback to improve the customer’s experience through innovation (Virgin, 2010). For instance, Virgin has completed the installation of new reinforced cockpit doors across their fleet that represents another important landmark in Virgin Atlantic’s on-going program of security enhancements (Grant, 2005). BusinessWeek (2009) reports that profits accrued at Richard Branson's Virgin Atlantic last year reached up to more than $100 million due to fuel hedging and good sales of premium seats, despite the carnage in so much of the global aviation industry. Vinnedge and Nash (2009) inform that the rise of sales and business class seats helped Virgin Atlantic to increase their performance, launching as a rigorous price-cutting strategy. <br />6.2 VIRGIN TRAIN<br />According to Virgin Train Customer Information (2011) 86.9% of train services arrived at the destination with the respective given time and reliability was 98%. There has been continuous improvement in infrastructure performance; however, some aspects have fallen below expectations in 2010. Virgin (2010) mentions the fact that they continue to work with Network Rail for further reliability and operational improvement by engaging at senior levels with Office of Rail Regulation and Network Rail in order to monitor current performance against their Joint Performance Improvement to avoid signalling failures in future. <br />6.3 VIRGIN MEDIA<br />Velaigam (2011) in his article reports that when Virgin merged with Virgin Mobile, NTL and Telwest, the company found itself with a mixed inheritance of business intelligence, which made them to realize the importance of pulling them together in a rapid pace. Virgin Media Business Launch (2010) reveals that Virgin Media’s business division would be rebranded as ‘Virgin Media’ Business with immediate effect to provide a platform for the launch of faster business broadband products. Guha (2011) mentions in his article that Virgin Media has the best ever results in 2010, upbeat about 2011.It has managed to add robust number of new subscribers and higher average spending by customers. It has been posted that introduction of new products and services will continue to drive modest revenue growth and robust cost control (O’Reilly,2011). <br />7. VIRGIN: SUCCESS AND FAILURE FACTORS<br />7.1 SUCCESS FACTORS: To determine the success and failure factors behind these brand extensions, one can consider Virgin’s brand extensions strategies, which firstly being Private Ownership of Virgin as a mail record business in the initial stage. The company floated on the stock exchange with a turnover of £250 million. Later, it ventured out by getting into partnership with other companies in that field. Secondly, Virgin preferred to choose its own Brand Outlets to handle the business in order to avoid any sort of brand dilution that would affect the brand image of the brand Abdul (2010). Thirdly, in regards to Virgin Atlantic, Sir Branson designed an airline that embodied two elements in mind: lower Competitive Prices and high quality and better services by serving better meals, offer more entertainment, friendly and enthusiastic flight crews and innovative activities like spa like lounges in its hub airports replete with showers, haircuts, massages, and manicures. Moreover, Virgin Atlantic offers a first class experience at business class prices (Virgin Atlantic, 2010). Recommendations can be made by saying that Virgin has been reinforcing its current brand image and brand equity as the sole strategic aim, considering that the higher the association the better the brand fit. Another aspect of the recommendation is that the brand name ‘Virgin’ uses a mono brand strategy to cover a wide range of industries. We have to understand that the corporate strategy of the Virgin Group is to operate like a venture capital firm based on its brand name, “Virgin”, which creates synergies from hierarchical relationships and interaction of the corporate office with customers and business units. Hence, by leveraging on the Virgin brand, it has established distinction and prominence in the minds of the consumers that has led to market penetration and entered new business areas effectively. <br />7.2 HITS AND MISSES: Many branding experts have described Virgin as a ‘philosophy’ or ‘lifestyle’ brand that can extend into any field, unbound by banalities such as functional product performance (Frei et.al., 2001; Kapferer, 2008). This dodgy logic can be summed up into the following quote (Taylor, 2008)<br />-114935104775<br />righttopProf. Mark Ritson of London Business School suggests that there have been numerous failures such as Virgin Cola and Vodka, Virgin Railways (Inefficiency in the system) and Virgin Financial Services (lack of enough funds).’ There are two questions any brand must pose when considering an extension. Firstly, is its brand equity appropriate to extend to a different sector of the market? Can they make money there or not? One factor to be considered is that just because a brand is extendable, does not mean that it will succeed against external forces such as competitors, scale economies and supplier relationships. <br />When Virgin translates the umbrella concept from ‘irreverent, fun and value fighter’ into ‘compelling and competitive products and service’, in this case, Virgin extensions have worked well. It is argued that Virgin Atlantic’s success is not down to people flying on it because they buy into a philosophy, but due to its competitive prices and high quality services offered that delivers differentiation. In contrary, Virgin Vodka crashed because it lacked brand added value and brand awareness. The aforementioned statement can be critically evaluated by asking two provocative questions. “Where were the challenges and the irreverent fun when Virgin Vodka was launched? Virgnali (2001) argues that the only element that kept the product going in the market was its cheap price, leading to heavy price cuts. This resulted in the failure of Virgin Vodka in the market. Another extension is Virgin Cola, the most stunning example of an inability to consider both sides of the brand extension issue. Virgin Cola achieved only 3% share in the UK market, despite a price 15-20% below Coca Cola and Pepsi. Experts say that Virgin Cola lacks recognition of the brand, productivity and the inability to sustain heavy cutthroat competition (Vignali, 2001; Kapferer, 2008). <br />Recommendations can be made by outlining the fact that brand extendibility highly depends on brand fit and leverage. For Virgin, launching new products like Virgin Cola and Virgin Vodka may only benefit in pursuing a brand extension strategy such as brand equity, business growth, cementing core brand attributes, create brand awareness but these products will have no brand value if a brand extensions does not fit with the core brand, which may result to failure of brand extension. A key question that can be raised is “What was Virgin thinking before launching these products?” Hence, Virgin should focus more on its brand fit and leverage in order to gain success as it is the primary cause for success in any kind of business. Moreover, assumptions can be made that Virgin has utilized its own perceptions of the core brand as a benchmark to determine if a brand extension has the potential to fit with the brand. <br />Another section that can be highlighted is that Virgin should be less diverse because brand name alone is not enough. What Virgin does is to invest and develop real expertise, which is trying to limit risk by directly contradicting signal to customers. There is a question ‘How can Virgin be enterprising when Sir Branson’s value adding process is to limit risk? <br />Hence, Virgin’s extended brands should possess three factors shows below. <br /> <br />-Adapted from Aaker (1990) & Tauber (1988)<br />8. VIRGIN: BRAND EQUITY <br />Virgin creates a differential effect and a positive customer based brand equity when customers react favourably to its products. Its approach to markets and its operations have different ways to capture attention. Its aim is to ‘unblock’ markets and liberate customers from meaningless choices between dominant market leaders. Virgin results in a differentiated product range which is totally different from those of its competitors, targeting a younger audience and better value for money. In essence, Virgin Atlantic was the first to offer a Volvo-chauffeured collection service for its business class clients and a bathroom service at the arrival airport that created a cost effective and differentiation to the company leading to brand awareness and brand loyalty (Keller, 2008).<br />Sir Richard Branson’s personality goes hand in hand with Virgin’s strong brand reputation. Study shows that 96% of UK consumers are aware about the brand and is associated amongst consumers with Virgin’s commercial proposition that is “innovation, quality, fun success, and trust”(Mahr, 2005). Virgin is more inclined towards fun as Richard Branson quotes that Virgin’s identity has led to the recognition across multiple businesses in such a way that he quotes “I don’t think of work as work and play as play. It’s all living” (Branson, 2010). Virgin stands out to its pervasiveness and creates unique brand equity, which has become difficult for competitors to replicate. Hence, Richard Branson quotes that “be different by being different”.<br />Conceptualizing on Virgin brand’s personality, one can say that, “it is a brand’s outward face” (Diamantopoulos et.al., 2005). The writer comments that more than its outward face, it is an inner soul as it reveals its multi-dimensional features. Virgin Atlantic is a great example in this case. The brand’s hot red colour indicates “aggressiveness, rebellious, passionate and value.” (Virgin, 2010) The specific strategies and materials personalize products delivering super values for service measures and brand loyalty to Virgin brand. Moreover, it does not matter what type of business Virgin is, however, the autographed Virgin identity red and white colours are incorporated within the business unit’s visual identity.<br />Like all other companies, Virgin’s values and purpose are consequences of Sir Branson’s values, vision. Its vision and mission statement reveals, “If there is philosophy that runs through every Virgin Company, it is the desire to be different by being better. Better quality, better service and better value”. This statement itself stands to create conditions for archetype that Virgin will creditably be associated it.<br /> <br />9. CONCLUSION<br />This report advances knowledge of brand extensions in several ways. It also outlines the the ability to establish a unique identity created in today’s challenging and vying business world. Today, more and more companies are engaging in brand extensions in order to get several advantages. Few companies fear failure, hence, prevents from taking the plunge. The company that tops the list in brand extension is The Virgin Group. A comprehensive research has been executed on this brand, highlighting the success and failure factors and its performance appraisal. This finding, henceforth, harmonizes with the theory in the brand extension literature review. <br />Moreover, Brand extension is believed to be a very convenient approach to quickly get a foot or two in a new product and market category. Yet, transferring the core parent values to a new one is often difficult to carry out and one must have the knowledge not to cross the border in this case. Virgin proves this concept by knowing and understanding the strengths and weakness of the brand extensions, hence it is evident that the Virgin group stands as a successful international organization in the world. <br />10. REFERENCES<br />Aaker, D. A. and Keller, K.L. (1990) Consumer Evaluations of Brand Extension. Journal of Marketing. 54 (1), 27-41.<br />Aaker, D. A. (1990) Brand Extensions: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. Sloan Management Review. 31(4), 47-56.<br />Aaker, D. A. (1991) Managing Brand Equity. The Free Press: New York.<br />Aaker, J. L. and Fournier, S. (1995) Brand as a Character, a Partner and a Person: Three Perspectives on the Question of Brand Personality. Journal of Consumer Research. 22, 391-395.<br />Aaker, D.A. (1996) Measuring Brand Equity across Products and Markets. California Management Review. 38 (3), 102-20.<br />Aaker, J. L. (1997) Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3).<br />Aaker, D. A (2004) Brand portfolio strategy: creating relevance, differentiation, energy, leverage and clarity. New York: Free Press. <br />Abdul, R.(2010) Virgin Corporate Strategy Case Study. Available athttp://www.robabdul.com/. [Last Accessed on 2nd March, 2011].<br />Branson, R. (1998) Losing My Virginity. Three Rivers Press: New York. <br />Broniarczyk, S.M. and Alba, J.W. (1994a), “The importance of the brand in brand extension”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 214-28.<br />Buil I., De Chernatony L. and Hem L.E. (2009), "Brand extension strategies: perceived fit, brand type and cultural influences", European Journal of Marketing Vol. 43 No. 11/12, pp. 1300-1324.<br />BusinessWeek (2009) Virgin Atlantic Defies Airline Slump. Available at www.businessweek.com. [Last Accessed on 18th March, 2011].<br />Court, D. C., Leiter, M. G., and Loch, M. A. (1999) Brand Leverage: Developing a Strong Company Brand. McKinsey Quarterly.<br />Dawar, N. (1996), "Extensions of broad brands: the role of retrieval in evaluations of fit", Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 5 No.2, pp.189-207.<br />Diamantopoulos, A., Smith, G. and Grime, I. (2005) The impact of brand extensions on brand personality: experimental evidence. European Journal of Marketing. 39(1), 129-149.<br />DiFrisco, M. G.(2009) Brand Extensions Beware. How-to-Branding.com. Available at http://www.how-to-branding.com. [Last Accessed on 12th March, 2011].<br />Franzen, G. and Moriarty, S.(2009) The Science and Art of Branding. New York, USA: Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data. <br />Farquhar, P.H. (1989), "Managing brand equity", Marketing Research, Vol. 1 pp.24-33.<br />Frei, F.X., Farrar, H. R. and Hajim, C. (2001) Virgin Group: Filling in the Value Gap. Harvard Business Review.<br />Kapferer, J.N. (2008) Strategic Brand Management. 4th ed.,London: Kogan Page Ltd.<br />George, S. (2008) Leveraging Brand Equity for developing Appropriate Brand Extension Strategies. Final Paper. Karnataka, India: T.A. Pai Management Institute.<br />Grant (2004) Richard Branson and the Virgin Group of Companie. Available at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/. [Last Accessed on 19th March, 2011].<br />Guha, S. (2011) Virgin Media posts best ever results in 2010, upbeat about 2011. Finance News. Available at www.financenews.co.uk. [Last Accessed on 17th March, 2011].<br />Haig, M. (2004) Brand Failures: the truth about the 100 biggest branding mistakes. UK: Kogan Page Limited.<br />Hem, L. E., Chernatony, Leslie De & Iversen, Nina M., 2001. Factors influencing successful <br />brand extensions.<br />Jeong, S. C. S., and Jung, K. (2009) Effects Of Brand Personality Attitude, Perceived Quality On Brand Extension Evaluations And Brand Personality Changes. Field of Research: Marketing. Gwangju, Korea: School of Business. <br />John, D. R. J. (2006) Strategic Brand Management on Cutting Edge: Building, Leveraging, Identifying and Protecting Brands. Institute for Research in Marketing. Minnesota, USA.<br />Johnson, L.W., Soutar, G.N. and Sweeney, J.C. (2000) Moderators of the brand image/perceived product quality relationship. The Journal of Brand Management. 7(6), 425-33.<br />Juda, B. (2007) Brand Extension: The Benefits and Pitfalls. Knowledge Box. Jakarta , Indonesia: Bloomhead.<br />Keller, K. L. (1993) Conceptualizing, Measuring and Managing Customer Based Brand Equity. Journal of Marketing. 57 (1), 1-22.<br />Keller, K..L. (1998) Strategic brand management, Prentice Hall.<br />Keller, K. L. (2003) Brand Synthesis: The Multidimensionality of Brand Knowledge. Journal of Consumer Research. 29 (4), 595-601.<br />Keller, K. (2008) Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and Managing Brand Equity. Harlow. England: Pearson Education Ltd. <br />Leiser, M. (2004) Understanding brand’s value: advancing brand equity tracking to brand equity management. Handbook of Business Strategy. 217-221.<br />Mahr, J. (2005) Virgin. Brand Channel. Available at www.brandchannel.com. [Last Accessed on 21st March, 2011].<br />Martinez, E. and L. de Chernatony (2004) The effect of brand extension strategies upon brand image. Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.21, No.1, pp.39-50.<br />Martinez, E. and Pina, J. M. (2010) Consumer responses to brand extensions: a comprehensive model. European Journal of Marketing. 44 (7), 1182-1205.<br />O’Reilly, L. (2011) Virgin Media marks 2010 as its “best ever” year. The Marketing Week. Available at http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/. [Last Accessed on 2nd March, 2011].<br />Park, C.W., McCarthy, M.S., Milberg, S.J. (1993) The effects of direct and associative brand extension strategies on consumer response to brand extensions. Advances in Consumer Research. 20, 28-33.<br />Park, C.W., Milberg, S. and Lawson, R. (1991) Evaluation of brand extensions: the role of product feature similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of Consumer Research. 18 (1), 185-93.<br />Park, C.W. and Zaltman, G. (1987), Marketing Management, The Dryden Press, Hinsdale, IL.<br />Motameni, R, and Shahrokhi, M. (1998) Brand equity valuation: a global perspective. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 7 (4), 275 – 290.<br />Pitta, D. A. and Katsanis, L. P. (1995) Understanding brand equity for successful brand extension. Journal of Consumer Marketing. 12 (4), 51-64.<br />Reast , J. D. (2005) Brand trust and brand extension acceptance: the relationship. Journal of Product and Brand Management. 14 (1), 4-13.<br />Ritson, M. (2002) OPINION: Virgin’s brand power obscure its lack of success in extension. Marketing Magazine. Available at www.marketingmagazine.co.uk. [Last Accessed on 17th March, 2011].<br />Seyema, W. (2006) Factors of Successful brand Extensions in the FMCG Industry. Pretoria: Gordon Institute of Business Science. <br />Smith, D.C. and Park, C.W. (1992) The effects of brands extensions on market share and advertising efficiency. Journal of Marketing Research. 29, 296-313.<br />Stegemann, N. (2006) Unique Brand Extension Challenges For Luxury Brands. Journal of Business & Economics Research. 4(10), 57-68.<br />Sullivan M. W. (1989) Brand extensions and order of entry. University of Chicago, Working paper: Chicago. <br />Tauber, E. M. (1988) Brand Leverage: Strategy for Growth in a Cost-Control World. Journal of Advertising Research. 28(4), 26-30.<br />Taylor, D. (2004) Brand stretch: Why 1 in 2 extensions fail and how to beat the odds: a Brand gym workout. West Sussex, England: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.<br />Taylor, D. (2008) Brand extension ego trip?. The Marketer.<br />Temporal, P. (2010) Advanced Brand Management: Managing Brands in a Changing World. 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons Ltd. <br />Thompson, J. L. (1993) Strategic Management: Awareness and Change. 2nd ed.,Oxford: Alden Press. <br />Velaigam (2011) Broadband boosts Virgin Media. Investors Chronicle. Available at http://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/. [Last Accessed on 19th March, 2011].<br />Vinnedge, M. and Nash, J (2009) Virgin Entrepreneur. Available at http://www.editorforrent.com. [Last Accessed on 15thMarch, 2011].<br />Vignali, C (2001) Virgin Cola. British Food Journal. 103 (2), 131-145.<br />Virgin (2011) Virgin Group. Available at www.virgin.com. [Last Accessed on 18th March, 2011].<br />Virgin Atlantic (2010) Our Story Begins Here. Available at www.virgin-atlantic.com. [Last Assessed on 17th March, 2011].<br />Virgin Media Business Launch (2010) Virgin Media Eyes Growth with Launch of Virgin Media Business. Available at www.virginmedia.com. [Last Accessed on 6th March, 2011].<br />Virgin Train Customer Performance (2011) Virgin Train’s Performance. Available at http://www.virgintrains.co.uk/. [Last Accessed on 1st March, 2011].<br />Vockner, F., Sattler, H. (2006) Drivers of brand extension success. Journal of Marketing, 70 (2),18-34.<br />Volckner, F., Sattler, H. (2008) Image feedback effects of brand extensions: evidence from a longitudinal field study. Marketing Letter. 19, 109-24.<br />