A Comprehensive Analysis Of Burberry S Rebranding Strategies 1854-2014

A Comprehensive Analysis of
Burberry’s Rebranding
Strategies; 1856-2014
FASUYI OMOLORO SIJUWOLA
A dissertation submitted to the
University of Bristol in accordance with the requirements of the degree of Masters of Science for
an advanced study in Management in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Law
Word Count: 15,711

2
Abstract
Being in the age of the consumer; staying relevant in any industry is becoming more and
more of a difficult task. The success of any business, which has a positive correlation with
brand loyalty lies in the company’s ability to adequately satisfy the needs of the consumer,
therefore, in achieving this, rebranding strategies which are made up of evolutionary
(minor) and revolutionary (major) changes becomes just as important as any other strategy
implemented in a company. This study therefore sought to discover how rebranding
strategies affect company performance, how past successes or failures of a company’s
rebranding strategies shape its future strategies and the role of customer perception in
determining the success or failures of these strategies. In carrying this out, the study used
Burberry as a case study, because it is a heritage brand, popular for its ‘bust and boom’
periods that are tied to the strategies taken on. The study therefore looked at Burberry’s
rebranding strategies from 1856-2014 and discovered that the effects of rebranding
strategies cannot be predicted as the short-run and long-run effects often differ. The study
also showed how companies leverage on their past successes and failures by incorporating
these into new rebranding strategies to be taken on, and finally it showed that rebranding
strategies adopted exclusive of its consumers, irrespective of its brilliance, would
inevitably yield negative results.

3
Author’s Declaration
I declare that the work in this dissertation was carried out in accordance with the
requirements of the University’s Regulations and Code of Practice for Taught Programmes
and that it has not been submitted for any other academic award. Except where indicated
by specific reference in the text, this work is my own work. Work done in collaboration
with, or with the assistance of others, is indicated as such. I have identified all material in
this dissertation which is not my own work through appropriate referencing and
acknowledgement. Where I have quoted or otherwise incorporated material which is the
work of others, I have included the source in the references. Any views expressed in the
dissertation, other than referenced material, are those of the author.
SIGNED: DATE:

4
Table of Contents
Abstract..............................................................................................................................................2
Author’s Declaration ........................................................................................................................3
List of Tables .....................................................................................................................................6
List of Figures....................................................................................................................................6
1.1 Rebranding Strategies ................................................................................................................7
1.2 An Overview of Burberry...........................................................................................................8
1.3 Rebranding Strategies in Burberry.........................................................................................10
1.4 Justification of Study ................................................................................................................12
2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................13
2.1 Rebranding Strategies ..............................................................................................................13
2.1.1 Classifications of Rebranding Strategies .........................................................................14
2.1.2 Reasons for Engaging in Rebranding Strategies..............................................................16
2.1.3 Pros and Cons of Rebranding Strategies..........................................................................17
2.1.4 Factors and Issues to Be Examined When Considering Rebranding Strategies ..............19
2.2 Rebranding Strategies and Positioning...................................................................................21
2.3 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................22
3 Methodology.................................................................................................................................24
3.1 Method .......................................................................................................................................24
3.2 Methodology..............................................................................................................................24
4. A Case Study of Burberry’s Rebranding Strategies; 1856-2014 ............................................27
4.1 The Thomas Burberry Era; 1856-1997...................................................................................27
4.1.1 The Initial Positioning......................................................................................................27
4.1.2 The Rebranding Strategies...............................................................................................29
4.1.3 The New Position.............................................................................................................32
4.2 The Bravo Era; 1998-2006 .......................................................................................................33
4.2.1 The Need to Rebrand .......................................................................................................33
4.2.3 The Results of the Rebranding Strategies ........................................................................38
4.3 The Ahrendts Era; 2006-2014..................................................................................................40
4.3.1 The Need to Rebrand .......................................................................................................40

5
4.3.3 The Results Attained........................................................................................................44
4.4 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................45
5. Discussion ....................................................................................................................................48
5.1 Summary of Findings / Implication for Businesses................................................................48
5.2 Recommendation for Further Research .................................................................................51
Bibliography....................................................................................................................................52

6
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Classifications of Rebranding
Strategies……………………………14
Table 2: Burberry’s Financial Position From 2005-
Date…………………………………..43
List of Figures
Figure 1: Burberry’s Advertisement
Flier………………………………………………….27
Figure 2: Burberry’s Product
Pyramid…………………………………………………..…34
Figure 3: Summary of Burberry’s
Strategies…………………………………………...…..46

7
1 Introduction
1.1 Rebranding Strategies
Rebranding is the process in which a company makes revisions ranging from a change in
name, logo, packaging or targeting and positioning decisions with an objective of
accommodating its present consumers more effectively, attaining a differentiated identity
and ultimately to reach an overall better position in the market (Adusei, 2013; Dibbie,
2013). In most cases, the decision to rebrand is borne out of the company’s constant need
to keep up with its target market and in some cases to expand this market. However, it
could also be a solution to brand-avoidance by customers. As Lee, et al. (2008) posits it,
the customer’s perception of a brand plays a huge role in determining the level of
patronage, and therefore, when this brand image (i.e. how the customers perceive the
brand) becomes a negative one, it becomes imperative to change it. These strategies could
be evolutionary in which case they are just minimal changes such as a change in logo
colour or revolutionary i.e. a change in their marketing strategies, especially their
Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning (STP), which is effectually followed by a change
in name (Adusei, 2013; Muzellec and Lambkin, 2005). Strategic rebranding is a very broad
concept which consists of two major areas i.e. corporate rebranding and product
rebranding. This thesis would however be focussing on the product rebranding strategies.
When a company decides to take on a rebranding strategy, the common issue that arises is
whether or not the rebranding decisions being carried out would negatively affect existing
brand loyalty (Liu & Tang, 2009) and an example of this can be seen in Tropicana’s
decision to make an evolutionary change by altering the package of their product. This
simple decision led to a 20% drop in sales in the first month, and eventually, the company
was forced to return to its initial packaging design (Nissen, 2013). Although, the
company’s aim to refresh its brand image via the aesthetic changes was plausible, the
reason for this failure can easily be traced to the company carrying out a rebranding

8
strategy in isolation of its consumers, as a survey carried out after showed that its
customers thought that the new design was inconspicuous and did not stand out like the
previous one. The most reasonable solution to this is to carry out a survey on the level of
customer innovation i.e. how open your present customers are to changes in the brand, in
what areas and to what extent (Liu & Tang, 2009)
1.2 An Overview of Burberry
“Burberry is a global luxury brand with a distinctive British identity that designs, produces
and sells luxury products. It has over the decades built a reputation for craftsmanship,
innovation and design since its invention of the gabardine over 150 years ago”.
-Burberry Annual Review (2013/2014)
Burberry is a British fashion company, founded in 1856 by Thomas Burberry after which
he created the Gabardine, a very highly durable, comfortable coat, perfect for all kinds of
weather (Burberry, 2015). Over the years, this product gained acceptance and popularity
due to the promotional strategies employed by the company as well as its features, which
made it perfectly suited for the military. As a result of these two factors, this product was
added to the standard military attire and was also worn by popular explorers such as Major
F.G. Jackson, Roald Amundsen and Aviator Claude Grahame-White during their
expeditions (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004). Due to this trend, the company added a few new
features such as epaulettes, straps and D-rings to make the coat better suited to their target
market.
After their next historical landmark i.e. becoming a publicly traded company in 1920, the
Burberry check was registered as a trademark and incorporated into the trench coats. At
this point, they had also opened a branch in Paris, hence becoming an international brand.
Their popularity rose even more as they continued to cater to the needs of both civilian and
military men and women (Burberry, 2015). As a result of its reputation and success, it was

9
acquired a UK retailing group called Great Universal Stores (GUS), awarded a Royal
warrant by Queen Elizabeth II in 1955 and also became the official outwear supplier for
the British women’s Olympic team shortly after (Mills, 2001). Following the acquisition,
in 1970 the company entered into a licensing agreement, with a Japanese company, Mitsui
overseen by Sanyo Shokai, in order to cater to the market in that region (O’Connell &
Distefano, 2011). However, the company’s profits soon became heavily reliant on the
international market and this became evident in 1997 when the Japanese economy took a
downturn, as this resulted in a drop of the company’s profit from £62m to £25m, a fall in
profit further aided by their decision to license the brand (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004). The
company began signing off its license from the year 1980 to several companies and this
resulted in the logo being found on all sorts of items such as whiskey, lingerie, pillows,
cookies and chocolate bars, but the most detrimental one was it being seen on disposable
diapers for dogs (Grant, 2001).
In 1997, Rose Marie Bravo was appointed as Chief Executive Officer. One of her first
decisions included eliminating the price discrimination strategy across their markets i.e.
selling their products at cheap prices in Europe compared to Japan, she also reduced the
licensing activities that took place, employed Gucci designer, Christopher Bailey and also
signed up popular actress Kate Moss to represent the brand. These decisions helped to
transform the brand to a trendier one (Mills, 2001). However, she also expanded their
range of products significantly in order to provide ‘something for everyone’, which,
although plausible, soon began to affect the company negatively as they began to receive a
lot of bad publicity and soon their identity changed from that of a luxury design to one
used to identify Chavs (Neate, 2013). The Chavs being members of a British sub-culture
that that started in the early twenty-first century made up of young, low-class, brash
individuals popular for wearing imitations of famous designers had a complete opposite
image of what the Burberry brand was meant to confer (Mason & Wigley, 2013).

10
In 2006, Angela Ahrendts replaced Bravo as the company had reached an all-time low for
that era due to the new image associated with the brand. In attempts to revive the company,
Ahrendts limited the amount of clothing and accessories that had the brand check design to
10% as this was the leading cause of counterfeits. She also bought out the Spanish
franchise in order to further restrict the amount of counterfeit products available in the
market. Next, she signed up actors such as Emma Watson and Eddie Watson as the face of
the brand, in order to appeal to the younger generation and also used Romeo Beckham on a
couple of magazine adverts. She has since been able to continually increase company
profits, bringing it from £163m at the beginning of her tenure, to £456m at the end
(Burberry, 2015).
1.3 Rebranding Strategies in Burberry
Between the year 1856 and 2014, Burberry has experienced several Bust and Boom
periods which can all be attributed to the strategies and business models adopted by the
company at each of those time periods. These periods can be classified in to three. I.e.
1856-1997, 1998-2006, 2006- 2014. Prior to 1997, Burberry was branded as a design for
the military and the middle-aged conservative British citizens (Burberry, 2015). However,
this market started becoming less lucrative and there was a need to make a decision on
whether to stick to their core customers or reposition the company in a bid to expand their
target market, a decision which is more complicated for companies such as Burberry which
is a heritage brand. The company decided to reposition the company, which was why Rose
Marie Bravo was appointed and over the ten years that she spent in Burberry, she was able
to successfully do this (Mills, 2001). She took on the revolutionary rebranding approach
and made a lot of changes that aimed at repositioning the brand from one which
predominantly stood for Gabardine coats, to one which appealed to the younger generation.
The aim was to ensure that Burberry was viewed as a trendy brand, hence the extension of
the target market to include the younger generation via the introduction of the new lines

11
with attractive styles and prices for their new market. Also, she transformed the company
from one known solely for the production of clothing to a more diversified one as they now
produced Umbrellas, perfumes, etc. and even licensed the brand for the production of
Whiskey (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004).
This rebranding strategy which had three major tenets i.e. brand management, product
design and sourcing and brand distribution was implemented by 2000 and by the third year
after this, the success was evident as their profits had increased by 630 percent i.e. from
£18.5m in the year 2000 to £116.7m in 2003 (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004). However, the
licensing agreements and amount of products with the brand logo soon became a problem
as it meant that counterfeits could easily be made, hence showing that even the most
successful and well thought out rebranding strategies might not always be the best in the
long-run, which therefore means that it has to be a continuous process (Neate, 2013). The
luxurious brand image that Burberry had attained over the years however disappeared
quickly as the Burberry logo soon became a symbol for the Chav culture which was just
emerging at the point and because the Chavs were popular for wearing a lot of Burberrys’
items, the check design soon became a way of identifying them, therefore calling for
another urgent rebranding (Mason & Wigley, 2013).
Due to the state of the company, in 2006 it required another revolutionary rebranding
strategy and it therefore brought on a new CEO, Angela Ahrendts whose first task was to
again reposition the company from ‘chav brand’, to its old image of a luxurious brand.
This involved a re-evaluation of their target market and the most effective positioning
strategies for this market. Therefore, they bought out all of the licensing agreements,
restricted the use of the brand logo on its products and reduced the number of lines and
products that they offered as a means to ensure that all of their products met the luxurious
goods criteria, they also amended their promotional strategies by placing their adverts in

12
the right magazines, using well-known actors and actresses and also returned to their
premium pricing strategy (O’Connell & Distefano, 2011)
1.4 Justification of Study
There exists a plethora of literature that examines strategic rebranding; corporate and
product (Adusei, 2013; Dibbie, 2013; Lee, et al., 2008). However, this study would be
looking at it from a different approach. It would be carrying out an in-depth study on a
company and seeking to find out why and how managers carry out rebranding strategies
overtime in relation to the needs of its customers, the challenges they face and how they
overcome them. By carrying out an in-depth study, this paper would be filling a gap in
literature because it would not only show why and how rebranding strategies are taking on,
but also how past failures and successes shape future rebranding strategies and the role of
customer perspective in achieving these successes or failures. In doing this, it would be
using Burberry as a case study, using their history to depict how these work. It would
therefore be asking the following questions:
 What are the effects of rebranding strategies on Company’s Performance?
 How do past successes or failures of a company’s rebranding strategies shape its
future strategies?
 What is the role of consumer’s perspective in determining the (lack of) success of
the rebranding strategies adopted at various points?

13
2 Literature Review
2.1 Rebranding Strategies
Keller (1999) defines rebranding as a necessary strategy needed by companies to maintain
or enhance brand equity in relation to the changes taking place in the environment,
amongst their customers and in the company itself. The rebranding process should be a
continuum in order to keep up with the environment and the needs of the customers, (Daly
& Moloney, 2004) with the aim of creating a new beginning for the company and
increasing its chance of a positive image or building on this (Stuart & Muzellec, 2004).
To be successful, businesses require not just a good quality of the goods and services
rendered but also a strong brand image (Todor, 2014) that remains attractive to the
consumer irrespective of the changes in its external environment or one that is also able to
change with the environment (Liu & Tang, 2009). A research carried out by ISPO (2015)
posits that 90% of consumer purchase decisions are made subconsciously and what
determines the chosen product is the customer’s outlook on the brand image of the product.
Similar results were also obtained from Moisescu’s (2009) work which suggests that there
is a positive correlation between the level of brand awareness and purchases, and the
intensity of this increases based on the durability of the product.
It is important to determine the image that the company aims to achieve because, as with
any other type of strategy, rebranding strategies must have a specific objective that the new
brand image, which has perfect fit with the environment is to achieve (Todor, 2014). As
can be seen in the following companies, this objective differs. For example, Burberry’s
rebranding aimed at changing the image of the brand from one worn by Chavs to a
luxurious brand, Harley-Davidson changed from one without durability to the most reliable
motorcycle brand, Target went from a discount store to a top-notch store, UPS went from

14
‘big and boring’ to ‘personal and innovative’ and Lucozade changed from a drink taking
when ill to an energy drink (Acquino, 2011).
2.1.1 Classifications of Rebranding Strategies
There have been several forms of classification of rebranding strategies in literature. For
example, Dale and Moloney (2004), classifying it based on the level of change, have
Aesthetics, Repositioning and Rebranding, which represent minor changes, intermediate
changes and complete changes respectively. For the first category, they suggest that the
company only changes the brand appearance in order to refresh the brand image as can be
seen in the case of Pepsi, apple, etc. changing the design of their logo. The second category
goes a step further by actually changing their practices mainly either their pricing, product,
place or promotional strategies and this can be seen in the case of UPS which improved the
services rendered and communicated this to their customers. The third category is all
inclusive and involves all of the stakeholders being aware and involved in this change as
can be seen in the case of Burberry, which changed its product, pricing, place and
promotion strategy.
Muzellec and Lambkin (2006) however created a different model to explain rebranding
strategies and classified it into two categories i.e. Evolutionary and Revolutionary
rebranding. According to them, the evolutionary rebranding startegies are so minute that
they are mostly unnoticeable to outside observers and this is usually in form of a logo
change. This can be likened to Dale and Mooney’s Aesthetic changes. The second category
which is the revolutionary rebranding is a combination of the repositioning and rebranding
changes suggested by Dale and Mooney and involves the same type of changes suggested.
Based on the evidence gotten from their study, Muzellec and Lambkin (2006) also
classified the rebranding strategies into tactical and strategic rebranding based on the driver
of the change i.e. either administrative convenience or actual strategic decisions
respectively.

15
Keller (2000) however looks at it from another angle and offers annother classification of
rebranding, suggesting that rebranding can occur on all three levels of corporate hierachy
i.e. the corporate level, the business unit level and the product level (Opuni, et al., 2013).
But classification can in some ways be likened to Dale and Moloneys’. The product level is
similar to the Aesthetic changes, but could also include changes to the product itself rather
than just the design of the product. For example, Harley-Davidson improving on the
quality of their product (Keller, 2000). The business unit rebranding is identical to the
intermediate changes as it also involves a change in the product as well as in the customer
services provided and the corporate rebranding is usually more internal. It represents a
change in the operations of the company, their values, their mission and their goals. It
usually calls for a change in practice of the entire company and is majorly accompanied by
a change in company name (although this name change also takes place in product
rebrands) (Opuni, et al., 2013). An example of this can be seen in British Airways and their
‘putting people first’ campaign which involved a change from the inisde (employees) out
(customers) and changed the way things were done in the company (Street, 1994).

16
A summary of these classifications can be seen in the table below
Table 1: Summary of Classifications
Classifications Authors Types
Based on degrees of
Change
Dale and Maloney
(2004)
Aesthetics, Repositioning and Rebranding
Muzellec and
Lambkin (2006)
Evolutionary and Revolutionary
Based on level in
Corporate Hierarchy
Keller (2000) Corporate level, Business Unit level and
Product level.
Driver Muzellec and
Lambkin (2006)
Tactical and Strategic
2.1.2 Reasons for Engaging in Rebranding Strategies
The findings of the research carried out by Liu & Tang (2009) show that Customer
innovativeness, brand associations and improvement in customer based brand-equity have
a positive influence on patronage which is why companies engage in them. From their
research they found that customers who are risk-averse and innovative are usually open to
changes and even welcome these changes as it reflects their personalities. Also, their
research showed that when these rebranding strategies portray an image that the customers
can identify with, they are more likely to patronize the company more frequently and even
purchase in higher quantities and lastly, they found that when rebranding is done
effectively, it improves the customer based brand-equity and this culminates in stronger
brand loyalty.
In relation to this, Lee, et al. (2008) drawing from de Chernatony & Riley’s (1998) article
define a brand as a maketing tool with which companies are able to communicate the

17
values that they represent and based on these values, customers either accept the brand or
avoid it. Brand avoidance is a situation in which individuals deliberatly choose not to
purchase an item because they do not identify with it rather than other factors such as its
price or convenience (Lee, et al., 2008). A perfect example of this can be seen in the case
of Burberry in which individuals avoided the brand simply based on the identity attached
to it rather than its price or proximity. When this happens, it becomes imperative for the
company to change this brand image which is exactly what Burberry did.
Other more popular reasons for rebranding include, a change in structure due to mergers
and acquisition (Muzellec & Lambkin, 2006), to keep up with the pace of change in
environment or target market (Opuni, et al., 2013), increase target market (Goi & Goi,
2011), to increase profits, (Singh, et al., 2012) to prevent or reduce competition (Muzellec
& Lambkin, 2006) and under-performance (Kapferer, 2012). Most companies believe that
rebranding is the solution to under-performance, however, as Goi & Goi (2011) posit, this
is not always the solution and research that such hasty rebranding decisions done in
isolation of the stakeholders perspective is the reason for the failure of the strategy (Singh,
et al., 2012, Opuni, et al., 2013).
2.1.3 Pros and Cons of Rebranding Strategies
After a rebranding strategy is implemented, the consumers of the product receive this
information and engage in an imposed or voluntary change (Oreg & Sverdlik, 1991) which
is usually based on their assessment of these changes. I.e. they could have a positive,
negative or univalent disposition towards this change (Ing, 2012). However, given that the
rebranding process is a complex process that requires a lot of resources (Goi & Goi, 2011),
when companies decide to engage in it, it is due to the positive results they hope to achieve
via this.

18
When carried out effectively and at the right time, apart from results stated above, the most
prominent result is an increase in its brand equity or brand loyalty. For example, in 2004,
Dove started the ‘real beauty’ campaign that rebranded the company i.e. it transformed
from the traditional skin care company that propagates a particular standard of beauty to
one that stood for reminding people that they are beautiful in their skin, irrespective of
their race, height or size. As a result of this, the brand has received over $150 million in
free media time, won several awards and is now identified as one of the few brands that
customers feel they can relate to, because they understand them (Celebre & Denton, 2014).
Another positive result gained from rebranding is an ability to refresh its image in the
minds of its customers because according to Bhushan (2013), when consumers see signs of
rebranding such as a change in logo, it is taken as a signal of change in operations in the
company. Therefore, for a company that suffers from brand avoidance, a rebranding
strategy could lead to customers reconsidering their decision to avoid the brand and if the
new values are in line with those of the customers, the company might be able to regain
these customers. Also, for industries where innovation is key, frequent evolutionary
rebranding can serve as a means of communicating change and therefore make the
customers believe that the company is not being stagnant or lagging behind in its practices
However, as Ing (2012) stated, rebranding does not always receive positive responses and
this is evident from the results obtained from companies. In 1997, British airways had one
of the most prominent rebranding disasters when they decided to change the design of the
tailfins of their planes from the classic British outlook to one that represented world art, in
an attempt to recognise all the countries on their route (Druce, 2010). The major problem
with this strategy was that the company did not take into consideration the fact that the
former design gave its customers a sense of patriotism. In addition to this, it was also seen
as a form of breach of trust amongst its employees because they had received pay-cuts just

19
before this (Hatch & Schultz, 2008). Therefore, as a result of these negative responses, the
company ended up losing £60 million and abandoning this strategy in 1998.
The phrase ‘if it is not broken, don’t fix it’ comes into play when considering the reason
for the failure of most rebranding strategies. For example, in 2008, Pepsi decided to change
their logo, and this simple, almost unnoticeable change cost the company $1 million. This
change was seen as purposeless and not meaningful, but the company was able to keep this
logo without any negative effect on sales (Male, 2010). This was however not the case for
the company SciFi, which in 2009 decided to change their brand name to one which was
hippy and could trademarked. They chose the name Syfy and the response was completely
negative and the company was ridiculed on several platforms as the new brand name is a
slang word for syphilis combined with the fact that their viewers were not sure how to
pronounce the new name (Suddath, 2010).
Also, early in 2001, Royal Mail decided to change their name to Consignia, a name that
was expected to depict what the company was about in a way that the name post office
could not. However, this rebranding strategy also led to the loss in jobs of 17,000 of their
employees and cost the company £1.1 million, as a result, the negative responses generated
by was not surprising. They therefore had to change the name back to Royal Mail which
cost the company another £1 million, therefore leading to the loss of £2.1 million due to a
poor strategy being implemented (Senior, 2003).
2.1.4 Factors and Issues to Be Examined When Considering Rebranding Strategies
In light of the possible negative responses, it becomes imperative to consider some factors
before engaging in a rebranding strategy.
Hess and Story (2005) posit that managers no longer seek to promote individual
transactions but a consumer-brand relationship, which is why they seek to gain consumer
loyalty. Since rebranding strategies are targeted towards the consumers of a product, it

20
becomes imperative that maintaining customer loyalty be at the heart of all rebranding
strategies, by giving utmost attention to the consumers and their views about the changes
being made (Fournier & Yao, 1997). In doing this, Makasi, Govender and Madzorera
(2014) propose that the best way to ensure that consumers are not lost during the
rebranding process is to ensure that they are involved in every step of the way via
promotional strategies and research about their perceptions after each revolutionary level
of an evolutionary change. Most of the popular failed rebranding strategies can be traced to
companies not taking into cognisance the consumer’s perspectives. For example, as
mentioned earlier, Tropicana’s rebranding failure was solely due to this factor. This can
also be seen in Anderson Consulting changing their name to Accenture and carrying out
every research possible about this name change apart from customer’s perception which
left the customers confused as to what the new name meant, hence, the backlash. However,
in their case the post-rebranding promotional strategies carried out proved effective for
them and the company regained customer acceptance.
Also as Hatch & Schultz (2008) explained, there is a possibility of a Vision, Culture and
Image (VCI) misalignment between the company and the different products that it offers
and this is important as consumers take the brand image seriously when making purchasing
decisions. For example, Unilever offers a variety of products that include Dove, Axe and
Fair and Lovely (Unilever, 2015), and in 2004, Dove began the real beauty challenge
which has stated earlier, sought to instil confidence in women by making them know that
they are beautiful irrespective of their appearance, however, its other products contradict
this. For example, Fair and lovely is targeted at dark skinned women and is ‘intended to
make them more beautiful’, while Axe had the ‘Bow Chicka Wow Wow’ campaign that
sexualized women immensely thereby backlash for Dove’s campaign.
Moreover, when a company decides to rebrand, it takes on the risk of the possibility of
abandoning its values. As mentioned earlier, a brand portrays the values of a company,

21
therefore (Lee, et al., 2008), when a company decides to rebrand, it is very easy for it to
deviate from its present values and the result of this is usually reduced brand loyalty or
brand avoidance. Evidence of this is seen in British Airway’s rebranding of their airplanes
tailgate design (Hatch & Schultz, 2008).
In addition to these, the company also risks a possibility of deviating from its success
formula or even over extending the brand (Lee, et al., 2008). This is even more important
for heritage brands, as most of the time, the customer loyalty is tied to the brand image and
a deviation from this can be disastrous. The classic example of this can be seen in the case
of Burberry which in an attempt to rebrand decided to license out the use of their logo for
the production of all sorts of items outside its core such as whiskey (Moore & Birtwistle,
2004). They also deviated from their success formula by going from a brand that that only
offered up-scale and expensive items to one that offered ‘something for all’. The
consequence for this was grave in the sense that it not only affected their sales figures, but
also the brand equity (Mason & Wigley, 2013).
Most importantly, when any form of rebranding takes place, without effective
communication of the change, it usually gets a negative or univalent responses from the
customers and as Bhushan (2013) posits, most of the rebranding failures could have been
avoided if the target market actually understood the idea behind the new brand. Dibbie
(2013) suggests that in making sure that your consumers understand these changes, not
only should the company have test markets for the new brand, but they should also test
these changes via customer surveys before actually carrying out these changes.
2.2 Rebranding Strategies and Positioning
Based on Dale and Moloney’s (2004) classification, we have aesthetics, repositioning and
rebranding with each level of changing encompassing the one before it. However, when
companies rebrand, a common mistake made is leaving out the repositioning aspect or not

22
carrying this out effectively (Jobber, 2003) and as Dibie (2013) explains when this is not
carried out, the identity elements of the rebranded product no longer fits the true nature of
the product. This is because when a company rebrands, it mainly decides to expand its
target market or to more effectively cater to its existing target market (Opuni, et al., 2013)
and this in isolation from a repositioning strategy would culminate in the failure of the
strategy.
This can be seen in Burberry’s case. In 2005, the company decided to rebrand to a
company that had ‘something for everyone’ and hence they changed their target market to
one that accommodated the mass market by having different products with different prices.
However, what they did not take into consideration was the fact their competitive
advantage was that the brand and the checked design stood for luxury and therefore by
making this brand available to everyone, the diminished their brand equity (Burberry,
2015; Mason, 2013; Moore & Birtwistle, 2004).
2.3 Conclusion
From the review of the literature, the paper found that rebranding strategies is a well
examined topic and several authors have continuously contributed to the various aspects of
the topic. For example, we have the different classification of rebranding strategies i.e.
based on the level of change (Daly & Moloney, 2004; Muzellec & Lambkin, 2006), the
corporate hierarchy level (Keller, 2000) and the driver of the change (Muzellec &
Lambkin, 2006). The paper also looked at the reasons why companies engage in
rebranding strategies and found that although the list is endless, the reasons can be
classified into two i.e. Internal and external factors (Tevi & Otubanjo, 2013). Next, it
examined the advantages and disadvantages of taking on rebranding strategies and found
that although very strenuous, the results to be derived are very significant if the company is
able to implement it effectively in doing this, the company has to consider a plethora of
factors, the most significant of which is the customer’s perception. The paper also

23
reviewed the relationship between rebranding strategies and the life cycle of a product and
the role it plays in either elongating or shortening it, depending on how well the rebranding
strategies are carried out and finally, it looked at the repositioning in rebranding and how it
is key if the strategy is to be successful.
However, throughout the review of the literature, there was no evidence of in-depth studies
on rebranding strategies being carried out in a single company or studies looking at how
past successes or failures shape their future rebranding decisions and if these future
decisions end up being positive or negative. This paper would therefore be filling this gap
via looking at Burberry’s Rebranding Strategies.

24
3 Methodology
3.1 Method
For the purpose of this study, the method that shall be used will be a case study. The paper
would present a case study of Burberry, providing an overview of its rebranding strategies
from 1856 to 2014. The case study would be divided into three different time categories
i.e. 1856-1997, 1998-2006 and 2006 to 2014. For the purpose of this study, these time
periods would be referred to as the Thomas Burberry era, Bravo era and the Ahrendts era
respectively in order to make references to each one clear. Furthermore, for each of the
categories, the author would be examining the position of the company at the beginning of
the era, the reason for repositioning, the target the company aimed to achieve via the
rebranding strategy, the strategies and tactics taken on by the company in a bid to achieve
its objectives and finally the result attained.
Unfortunately, there are very few academic journals examining Burberry’s rebranding
strategies so the case study would be generated from information mainly sourced from the
company website as well as other established online sources.
3.2 Methodology
Rowley (2002) drawing from Yin’s (1994) study gives two criteria that have to be met if a
case study is the appropriate method for carrying a study i.e. it should be seeking to ask
‘why’ and ‘how’ questions and it should be one that the information can be sourced from
different sources which the investigator has no control over. This study meets these
criteria, showing that the case study is the best way to carry out this research because as
stated earlier, the purpose of this research is to find out how rebranding strategies affect
company performance, how past successes or failures of a company’s rebranding strategies
shape its future strategies and the role of customer perception in determining the success or
failures of these strategies. Furthermore, Yin (2012, pp. 4) defines a case study as ‘a desire
to derive an in-depth understanding of a single case in its real-world context’ and adds to

25
the list of criteria proposed by Rowley (2002), saying that the focus of the study should be
the real-world context of the case in point, all of which this study involves.
This study would be taking on an in-depth approach rather than an inter or intra industry
approach for three reasons. First, there already exists a plethora of articles examining
rebranding strategies across companies in the one industry (Bhushan, 2013; Makasi, et al.,
2014) and across industries (Opuni, et al., 2013; Singh, et al., 2012; Tevi & Otubanjo,
2013) but none looks at a single company overtime. Also, by looking at Burberry overtime,
the study would be filling a gap in literature by showing how a single company can adjust
its positioning strategies to the needs of its customers and how it achieves such results. It
would also show how a company can learn and make decisions based on its past successes
and failures while also examining the significance of customer perception and heritage
brands in the decisions made and the results attained. Moreover, by taking on a in-depth
study, the study would be overcoming one of the common limitations attributed to case
studies i.e. it does not go into enough detail (Yin, 2012).
Furthermore, by sourcing the information from the company website, newspaper articles,
reports, etc., the study would be able to get substantially objective information thereby
restricting another limitation attributed to case studies (Rowley, 2002).
Finally, as mentioned earlier, the study would be categorised into three eras; Thomas
Burberry era, Bravo era and the Ahrendts era. The name assigned to each era is that of the
CEO during the time period and these three time periods were chosen because they
represent the three distinguished time periods of Burberry’s history and each include
periods of busts and booms experienced due to the rebranding strategies taking on. Also,
they each have a single theme which guides the strategies taken on and although these are
lengthy periods of time, they would aid the study in discovering the full (short and long-

26
run) effect of each strategy taken and from each of these eras, we would see that the type
of strategic decisions carried out under each CEO differed and so did their results.

27
4. A Case Study of Burberry’s Rebranding Strategies; 1856-2014
4.1 The Thomas Burberry Era; 1856-1997
4.1.1 The Initial Positioning
The luxurious heritage Burberry brand that we have today was founded in 1856 by 21-yr
old Thomas Burberry and from its inception, it was clear that this was going to be a luxury
brand (Burberry, 2015) and to achieve this, the positioning strategies i.e. the place,
product, promotion and pricing strategy had to be appropriate. In terms of the place
strategy, being a new company and given the year of inception, Thomas Burberry’s place
strategy was limited to the location of the company. As a result, he decided to open his first
store in Basingstoke which in 1856 was prominent for its industrialization and thriving
businesses in different industries due to the fact that its good roads brought about at least
37 coaches a day into the town and the newly established railway station made it an even
more common commute (Applin, 2013). For the product strategy, Thomas Burberry
drawing from his expertise in the drapery business and his distaste for sub-standard low
quality products began to sell high-quality ready-made and bespoke suits (St. James Press,
2002), thereby attracting consumers in his chosen target market and eventually, in 1879, he
produced the Gabardine. Cooper (1979) examined the factors necessary for the success or
failure of a new product and concluded that ensuring every level of the product anatomy is
catered for helped in launching a successful product. Likewise, the Gabardine helped
strengthen the product strategy because every level of its product anatomy was catered for;
the core of the product was a need to replace the mackintosh which was an ill-fitted,
restricting and easily worn out coat being worn at the time. The tangible product could not
be compared to anything that existed prior to it; it was the first waterproof, highly durable,
light-weight, breathable coat which was perfect for all inclement weather conditions to be
made (Matić, 2014). Furthermore, due to the promotional strategies implemented by
Thomas Burberry, the gabardine inferred high social status on those who wore it.

28
The promotional strategies employed by Thomas Burberry led him to be popularly referred
to as shrewd marketer (St. James Press, 2002). Burberry utilized all the best mediums of
advertisement available to him; first, they had a very informative flyer that stated all of the
core-advantages of the product in a bid to create product awareness.
Figure 1:Burberry’s Advertisement Flier
Source: Burberry (2015)
After this, he went on to get ‘product ambassadors’, who wore the Gabardine especially on
major expeditions, the first of which was Major F.G. Jackson who was famous for
mapping parts of the arctic circle, during which he was wearing Burberry (Burberry, 2015).
Furthermore, Burberry created a marketing campaign with the slogan ‘designed by
sportsmen for sportsmen’ (Matić, 2014), which further drew people to the brand as it
created a brand image they could associate with.

29
The earliest data on the sale price of the Gabardine that exists in literature shows that in
1933, it was sold for £15 (Matlach, 2011) and although this was more than 80 years after
the introduction of the product, it is safe to assume that the price was either higher
considering the cost of production at inception or the same, due to possible inflation that
occurred over the years. The value of £15 pounds in 1880 is approximately £450 pounds
today, which shows that Burberry adopted the premium pricing strategy, making it clear
who its target market was.
By positioning the product appropriately for its target market, Burberry became one of the
two successful businesses that came out of Basingstoke in the long-run (Applin, 2013) and
began its journey towards expansion of which the first step was opening a new store in
London Haymarket, which again was a good location considering its target market. It also
registered the “Equestrian Knight” trademark in 1909 and continued to use this till the mid-
1990s.
4.1.2 The Rebranding Strategies
As the company entered the new century, it began to make several aesthetic and
repositioning degrees of changes at several intervals by leveraging on the brand name,
which had gained remarkable value in less than 50 years due to Thomas Burberry’s
appropriate strategies and the quality of the products offered. By continuously utilizing
product ambassadors for the promotion of the gabardine, Burberry clothed Roald
Amundsen and his men between and 1903 and 1906 during their Northwest Passage
expedition (Burberry, 2015). Several individuals including Sailor John Franklin had
attempted this Northwest Passage transverse, but none of them had been successful due to
the brash weather in the Arctic, therefore, the success by Amundsen who wore the
Burberry Gabardine gave the product international recognition (Payne, 2014).

30
The new publicity gained via Amundsen’s successful voyage therefore served as the
foundation for the first product rebrand undertaken by the company in this era because it
leveraged on the trust it had gained from its consumers and began to move from producing
just outdoor coats and clothing’s, to producing a range of outdoor and sporting equipment
(Grant, 2001), thereby following Soltani’s (2012) recommendation of making changes in
the growth stage of a product in order to keep it ahead of its competitors. This
repositioning strategy falls into Dale and Maloney’s tactical and aesthetic form of
rebranding as it was induced by a need to increase its target market and inevitably, its
profit, while making decisions that were strong enough to indicate an extended target
market, but not so intense that its initial target market felt the change.
In doing this, Burberry however stuck with its promotional strategy and within the next
thirty years, it had provided the sporting wear and equipment for popular and often
successful explorers such as Aviator Claude Grahame-White during his record breaking
less than 24-hours flight between London and Manchester, Roald Amundsen on his trip to
the south pole, Robert Scott on his attempt to reach the south pole, Ernest Shackleton on
his imperial trans-Antarctic expedition and many others (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004).
The result of this strategy was positive as it not only achieved the desired result but also
laid the pathway for the second repositioning strategy of this era. The success of this step
can be traced to Makasi, et al.’s (2014) recommendation for a successful rebranding
strategy, which is to consider the customers perspective in every step of the process, which
is what Burberry did; they made sure that the changes made were not those that could
affect the brand image i.e. how the consumers perceived the brand, as in those days, the
people who were rich enough to purchase the gabardine were usually involved in some
form of sport even if they were not professional sportsmen (Pergament, 2009)

31
When Burberry was about ten years into its first rebranding strategy, the First World War
started and due to the international recognition for the production of weather-proof, highly
durable products that the brand had attained via its ambassadors and the informative
promotional posters it had created just prior to the beginning of the war, which showed
how their trench coats were perfect for soldiers, Burberry became the official designer of
the service uniforms for the officers of the war. They made Trench coats, which had some
features of the gabardine such as its durability and ease of mobility and some other features
such as its Epaulettes which displayed the officers ranking and D-rings, which made them
even more appropriate for the soldiers as it helped them keep their weapons (Tynan, 2011).
Again, this repositioning strategy was tactical and aesthetic, in the sense that it was
implemented in a bid to grow the company and as Pergament (2014) posits in her article,
the world-class fame of the products offered by the company can be traced to them being
the official supplier of the British Army’s uniform. This strategy was a good one for the
company because most of the people who had gone to fight in the war were the elite (who
were the initial target customers), which meant that consumers wanted to be identified with
the brand even more because it now had a patriotic image attached to it (Tynan, 2011).
This was further strengthened by Burberry’s promotional strategy; taking account the
effect of Hollywood on its target market at the time, Burberry styled popular actors such as
Audrey Hepburn and Peter Sellers during their appearance on Breakfast at Tiffany’s and
Pink Panther respectively, and this increased their sales significantly as consumers wanted
to emulate these characters and identify with them (Tokatli, 2012).
Furthermore, around 1920, there was a change in the fashion industry instigated by the war
from the Edwardian style which was typically restrictive to a much simpler one as most of
the women had been alone, therefore causing a shift in gender roles as women became
more involved in office roles and the men who had come back from the war were also

32
looking for clothing’s similar to their uniforms, thereby making the Burberry trench coat a
popular choice amongst people even after the end of the war (McRobbie, 2015).
In line with the positioning strategies being taken on, Burberry had some developments
such as the opening of the Paris store in 1910 which made it an international company,
established outlets in the United States and South America a few years after and by 2015,
had begun exporting its coats to Japan (Grant, 2001; Moore & Birtwistle, 2004). However,
despite these feats and the two repositioning strategies carried out, their brand image was
still that of a company that produced luxurious outdoor wears and equipment, showing that
they carried their customers along in their rebranding decision.
4.1.3 The New Position
Given the success of the company, in 1955, it was acquired by Great Universal Stores
(GUS), a British Retail Conglomerate and with this acquisition, they began to expand their
geographic markets; they increased their exporting activities in the American and Asian
markets while also giving out licenses to several other companies (Burberry, 2015). At this
point, the company’s strategy was to increase its consumer base by catering to the needs of
their foreign consumers who loved the product due to the British culture that it represented.
The company leveraged on this by charging higher prices in the Asian market compared to
the British market prices and by 1960, export sales accounted for two-third of the company
sales (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004).
However, following the downturn in the Japanese economy in 1997, the company’s profits
fell from £62m to £25m and that was when the company realised that it had lost its old
glory in the British market because as the Barry Goldsmith (1994) said, “the first thing that
comes to one’s mind when you hear the name Burberry is a Man’s trench coat” (Grant,
2001).

33
It is however important to note that this downturn was not due to the rebranding strategy
implemented but due to the company not implementing a new rebranding strategy to go
with the needs of their consumers who now wanted more than trench coats. The company
had focused on profitability rather than sustainability and had therefore not noticed that its
British market base had become very narrow as the brand image associated with it was that
of a Conservative British brand targeted towards middle-aged men (Matić, 2014).
4.2 The Bravo Era; 1998-2006
4.2.1 The Need to Rebrand
By the end of the first era, the Burberry brand had become a tired, dying brand in the eyes
of the British consumers due to their unwillingness to expand their product line and
accommodate the changing needs of their customers, therefore, the failing Asian market
which accounted for about 40% of total company sales did not help (Moore & Birtwistle,
2004). Furthermore, due to their licensing activities, the company began to lose control of
the quality of products being offered and soon after, there was a shift in customer’s
perspective of the brand image i.e. from a British firm known for its top quality products,
to and Asian brand whose quality and price was unreliable (Tokatli, 2012). Therefore, in
line with Opuni et al.’s (2013) suggestion of rebranding being the most effective strategy
for expanding target market or keeping up with the changes in the environment, the
company re-focussed on its core-market, the British market and sought to identify and
meet their current needs. In order to achieve this, their first decision was to appoint a new
CEO, Rose Marie Bravo (Grant, 2001).
Following her appointment in 1997, Rose Marie Bravo being a specialist knew the role of
customer perspective in the success of a company. After examining the brand image, a
strategy was created and the main tenets were improving on the product, Manufacturing &

34
sourcing, distribution and marketing (Strategic Decisions, 2005). To achieve this, her first
cause of action was to renegotiate the cumbersome licensing agreements and take the
company’s products out of the small retail stores, to the more important and luxury stores
like Harrods (The Economist, 2001). Next, she ended the grey market trading i.e. legal but
unofficial distribution channels because even though it was highly profitable for the
company, the Japanese grey market retailers whom the company sold the products to in
bulk began to offer the products at discounted prices in Asia and cheaper prices in Europe
(Needle, 2014), therefore creating irregular prices and damaging the brand (Bravo, 2000)
To achieve the next objective which was reinvigorate the dying brand via its products,
Bravo began to search for gaps in the fashion industry which the company could fill
(Burberry, 2003). She therefore brought on a new young Italian designer, Roberto
Menichetti to help the company produce new lines that would appeal to the younger
generation and together, they sought to tap into the core values of the company that the
consumers appreciated and develop these into profitable items. Therefore, drawing on the
high sales figures of their umbrellas and scarfs due to the incorporation of the Burberry
check design in their Paris Store in the 1960’s (Grant, 2001), they introduced Bikinis with
the company’s plaid design. They also focussed on their British culture, and produced ball
gowns which they decided to be innovative with by replacing their traditional plaid colours
with pink and grey (The Economist, 2001). Furthermore, they decided to adapt their core
product, the trench coats to the present taste of their consumers, so they introduced tight
body-hugging trench coats (Mills, 2001).
Although there is no evidence in literature showing that Burberry applied Makasi et al.’s
(2014) guideline for a successful rebranding strategy which involves carrying out
consumer surveys on the evolutionary and revolutionary changes being made, such as them
digressing from the traditional plaid colours or changing the fit of the trench coat, the

35
company however monitored the changes in sales figures, using this as an indicator of
product acceptance by their customers (The Economist, 2001).
In the journey toward achieving the set rebranding goals, Christopher Bailey, who had
worked in Gucci has the senior designer of women’s wear for five years was hired in 2001.
As mentioned earlier, Bravo sought to fill up every niche in the market and they therefore
created the Burberry Product Pyramid, which included four different levels of products
placed in hierarchy based on its price and degree of accessibility; Burberry Prorsum,
Burberry London, the diffusion brands (Thomas Burberry, Blue Burberry Label and
Burberry Black Label) and Burberry Accessories respectively (Burberry, 2002/03). For
each of the product levels, they further categorised them into the seasonal and continuous
products; the seasonal lines were made up of items available based on fashion trends, after
which it would be taken off the market forever, while the continuous ones were offered
year after year, however, if the demand for a seasonal product was very high, it would be
transformed into a continuous product (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004), which was another
strategy used by the company to gain customer’s perspective of products offered and
acting based on the information.
The Product pyramid showed the company’s extended target market which now included
people with various financial capabilities and different geographical locations.

36
Figure 2: Burberry’s Product Pyramid
Source: Moore & Birtwistle (2004)
The Burberry Prorsum which is a runway collection is displayed internationally four times
in a year in fashion shows held in Millan serves as a determining factor for what is to be
introduced in the other levels, while the Burberry London is a national ready to wear
collection that portrays the company’s lifestyle with a multi-generational appeal of the
company’s core products and has its local versions in Spain and Japan as these are core
markets for the company (Burberry, 2002/03). The next category are the diffusion brands
which are primarily sold outside the UK; the Thomas Burberry range is targeted towards
15-25 year olds in Spain, while the Burberry Blue and Black labels are sold exclusively in
Japan, with the former comprising of casual lines targeted towards younger women while
the latter is targeted at young professional men (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004). Finally, they
had the accessories category which included items such as caps, handbags, bikinis, stuffed
toys, belts, throw pillows, golf bags boxer shorts, cookies and crackers, liquor, children’s
wear, fragrances, watches, etc., whose prices varied in order to be able to provide
something for everyone (Grant, 2001) .

37
Communicating the changes being made in the company to their consumers was of
paramount importance if there was to be any significant result to be achieved, which is
why new marketing strategies which carried the customers along were implemented. The
first step taken was a change in name from Burberry’s to Burberry which was to mark the
new beginning in its products (Mills, 2001). To commemorate the name change, in the
year 2000, they opened a flagship store in Bond Street, London, which was intended to
draw attention to the brand status, therefore, it was strategically placed amongst other
luxury stores such as Alexander McQueen, Vivienne Westwood, Yohji Yamamoto and
Issey Miyake (Heller, 2000).
More significantly, in 1998, the company begun to use popular young models and
photographers to depict the extension in their target market which now included the
younger generation (The Economist, 2001) and it therefore showcased models such as Neil
Fenton and Stella Tennant, being photographed by Mario Testino (Burberry, 2015). Based
on the success of this strategy, the company improved on this by including popular British
model, Kate Moss in their Autumn/Winter 1999 campaign and went on to use other models
such as Lily Donaldson Max Irons, Isaac Ferry, James Jamieson, Tom Guinness, Fenton
Bailey and Gemma Ward in the years that followed, till the end of the era (Burberry,
2015).
In addition to this, the company started a bi-annual fashion show in Millan for its Prorsum
line which was intended to further communicate the product repositioning, therefore, these
fashion shows always had fashion leaders and also provided pictures and updates used in
the major fashion magazines which kept their customers informed and up to date with the
trends in the fashion world (Skyes, 2000).

38
4.2.3 The Results of the Rebranding Strategies
The results attained via the implementation of these repositioning strategies varied and can
be classified into two; the initial and the long-term results.
Taking into account the time spent in implementing these strategies (license agreement
amendment and retrieval, product design, and marketing), the financial gains did not come
until 3 years after Bravo was employed, but the results gotten were very impressive and
encouraging; in the year 2001, the company’s profit was £69.5m compared to £18.5m in
the year before, and by the next year, it further increased to £90.3m the year, and £116.7m
in 2003, thereby validating Singh et al. (2012) suggestion of increased profits being one of
the results of successful rebranding strategies.
Furthermore, as Bhushan (2013) suggested, the brand attained a total repositioned
perspective in the minds of its customers; the average age of their consumers fell to 30 in
2004 when Kate Moss was put in a Bikini (The Economist, 2004), it was also successful at
creating an image of a brand that was all about consumer creativity, individual identity and
creating a sense of belonging to society, an example of which was seen when they
identified and provided for the feminist group that emerged at the time (Tokatli, 2012), and
as a result of all these, it was tagged as having one of the most envied brand renovations
(Bothwell, 2005)
However, the positive effect of these strategies were not long-termed. As Lee et al. (2008)
posits, whenever brands decide to take on rebranding strategies, they risk deviating from
their success formulas. For Burberry, their success formula was targeting a niche market,
i.e. the luxury market, but while trying to provide something for everyone, they began to
lose their core consumers and even worse, they began to attract the wrong type of
consumers, the chavs.

39
According to (Ginsburgh, 2012, pp. 2) “Chavs traces the rise of an offensive caricature of
the working class: a racist hooligan, an alcoholic thug; women unable to control their
vaginas, men unable to control their fists; brainless, feckless scroungers-working class
people, as represented by the term chav, are nothing more than parasitic growths on
society”. This illustration reflects the very opposite of what the Burberry brand stood for,
but was the new image that the brand had gained (Mason & Wigley, 2013).
While examining the issues related to rebranding strategies, we consider Hatch & Schultz’s
(2008) Values, Culture and Image misalignment, which posits that in a bid to reposition
itself, the company might end up misaligning these three which is what can be seen in
Burberry’s case. In one of the printed flyers that endorsed by Burberry in 1934, they state
that it avoids any suggestion or extreme pattern or cut that would tend to dominate the
personality of the wearer (Burberrys, 1934), showing that one of the companies values was
ensuring that the company’s brand image did not domineer the customer’s image.
However, it had deviated from this and began to use its very noticeable plaid design on
almost all its products (i.e. a change in its culture), and it therefore attained a brand image
contrary to that which was intended, a brand for chavs. This unintended consequence of
their strategy to provide something for everyone can be traced to Holt’s (2004) work on
cultural rebranding which states that brands provide a means by which consumer’s express
themselves and their personalities, therefore, a brand that chooses to identify with everyone
risks being in the position that Burberry found itself.
Furthermore, the brand began to experience brand avoidance because people did not want
to be associated with what it stood for and even worse, because individuals wearing the
brand were refused entry into most public places (The Economist, 2011) and ultimately
reached a point of Ridicule when ex-soap opera Daniella Westbrook and her daughter were
spotted wearing the brand from head to toe (Rigby, 2011). The effect on the finance was

40
immediate; in 2004, their profits had dropped to £70.7m i.e. a 40% fall in profit (Burberry,
2004/05).
4.3 The Ahrendts Era; 2006-2014
4.3.1 The Need to Rebrand
The minute a luxury brand makes itself available to the mass public, it becomes devalued,
because price paid, is tied to the luxury and not easily accessible status of the products
offered, which is why the Burberry brand became synonymous to the Chav culture and
ultimately, devalued (Marketing Week, 2007), thereby becoming a victim of its own
success (Bothwell, 2005). The brand inevitably became the classic example of a pole drift
i.e. when a product becomes associated with a class or sub-culture and eventually, it
became an object of satirical jokes (Habashy & LaCalle, 2011), made worse by its viral
appearance on the TV show, South Park (Duff, 2004).
Due to the sharp decline of sales figure recorded in the UK, expressed via the 40% drop in
profits, which was majorly due to the new brand image and the company’s 2% growth rate
compared to the industry’s average 13% growth rate, it was apparent that the company was
in dire need of another product rebrand, because as Liu & Tang (2009) posit, having a
brand image that consumers can and want to be identified with increases brand-equity and
strengthens brand loyalty. Although the rebranding activities started in 2004, i.e. during
Bravo’s tenure, the results most significant results attained were achieved from the year
2006.
On their journey towards regaining their prestigious status, Burberry had to first eliminate
the existing negative brand image it had gained and get on a somewhat neutral ground,
therefore, Bravo stopped the production of the baseball caps which was one of the most
famous items worn by the chavs and improving on this, Angela Ahrendts, who was

41
appointed as the new CEO in 2006 subsequently went on to reduce the amount of their
products which had the tartan by about 90% (Forbes, 2012) and gained back all of the
company’s licences (Amed, 2013).
Keller (2000) suggests that rebranding can occur on three levels; product level, business
unit level, and the corporate level, with each level incorporating the one before it and this
can be seen in Burberry. Ahrendts believed that the best way to ensure that this rebranding
was optimally successful and centralized across its global locations and products offered,
was to bring it from the internal environment and have it transcend externally i.e. corporate
rebranding that resulted in product rebranding (Ahrendts, 2013). In an interview, with
Capgemini Consulting, Ahrendts, talks about the journey from bust to boom and how it
was centred on refocussing on their original vision and how they could reposition
themselves without deviating from this vision (Ahrendts, 2012).
Promoting her ‘yang’, Christopher Bailey to Chief Creative Director, they began to
transform their corporate rebranding into product rebranding (Gilchrist, 2012). They
therefore decided to focus on their core-advantage, core-competence and suitable niche
markets that other well established companies had missed; having a British origin, making
coats and millennial consumers in their 20’s respectively (Ahrendts, 2012), while creating
and keeping a ‘connected culture and image that consumers could always identify’
(Gilchrist, 2012).
In line with having a connected culture, their three objectives were also connected; for
instance, rather than trying to reposition themselves as a young brand to attract the
millennials, they decided to become a young old brand; a heritage brand that evolves based
on the needs of its young consumers, which was drawn from the fact that the founder of
Burberry, Thomas Burberry, who had paved the way for the success of the company, was
21 at the time he started the business, therefore, 70% of the company’s employees were 30

42
years or younger and a strategic innovation council, made up of these young employees,
for the purpose of brewing ideas that would be popular amongst their target market was
created.
Furthermore, with the company meetings being digitised in a bid to further foster the
connected culture, the company saw the potential of digital marketing as a way to attract
these young consumers and began to explore this strategy (The Korn/Ferry Institute, 2011)
as selling the heritage of the brand to the young target market was not an easy task
(Ahrendts, 2013). This strategy began in-store with all of their sales representatives having
iPads that they them access to the company’s global products, even if they were not
available in store, and the customers could order it, furthermore, the customers were able
to watch the company’s renowned fashion shows in-store and order items immediately
after the show was over. The company also went on to create accounts on all the social
media major social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Tumblr,
Pinterest, Google+ and even Weibo for its Asian Market (Burberry, 2009).
The second objective was to focus on their core-competence, the production of trench
coats. As at 2006, the sale of outwear products accounted for only 20% of total sales in
apparel (King, 2014), even though this was the root of the company’s success and as
Ahrendts noted in an interview, they must have been doing something wrong because even
their own executives who enjoyed massive discounts were not purchasing these trench
coats (Ahrendts, 2013). Therefore in line with the overall connected culture vision, the
company also, merged the objective of reaching out to the millennials via digital marketing
(such as the use of social media) with that of reviving the trench coat and they created the
‘art of the trench’ which shows everyday people wearing the different styles of the trench
coats, in different colours, different places and under different weather conditions as well
as the history of the trench coats (Bunz, 2009). By showing well known people in relaxed
pictures, millennials are encouraged to purchase the coats because they get to associate

43
themselves with such people, and furthermore, with the option of uploading personal
pictures onto the website, they are further encouraged by the possibility of being featured
on the site (Grieve, et al., 2013).
The third objective, which was somewhat the hardest for the company was carried out in
the same way i.e. in conjunction with their other objectives. The company sought to exploit
its British History as most of the other luxury brands were Italian or French, therefore,
following Elberse and Verleun’s (2012) work on the economic value of celebrity
endorsements, the company decided to make use of young Brits for their marketing
strategies (Ahrendts, 2012) and used models such as, Rosie Huntington-Whitely, Charlie
France, Tom Guinness, Nick Wilson, Lily Donaldson, they also used Romeo Beckham in
the Spring/Summer 2013 collection which went viral, as well as popular British Actress
Emma Watson, British actor, Sam Riley, and went on to promote and sign undiscovered
British artists such as George Craig, Sam Beeton and also retained Photographer Mario
Testino, thereby attracting international millennials who are drawn by the music as well as
the British culture (Burberry, 2015).
Also, knowing the significance of the customer’s perspective in the success of any
rebranding strategy, the company began an initiative which is intended to monitor the
behaviour of their customers in relation to the brand across all of their platforms.
Furthermore, the connected culture initiative was applied to their product pyramid. The
Pyramid which was initially divided based on the level of accessibility and price was
transformed in 2009 and was now classified based on the occasion for which the lines were
designed; The Prorsum remains the inspiration for the other lines, being centred around
runway, the Burberry London is however now made up of formal wears i.e. ‘what the
Burberry customer should wear on weekdays’ and finally, the Burberry Brit is ‘what a
Burberry customer wears during the weekend’ (Burberry, 2009/10).

44
4.3.3 The Results Attained
At first glance, the company seems to have carried out just corporate level rebranding, but
looking closely, we see that the corporate rebrand which was the connected culture was
transformed into a product rebrand. For example, the connected element of the brand is
manifested in the product because it means that the Burberry brand is the same all over the
world, in terms of the product and services rendered which is further expressed in the
transformation of their product pyramid into a unified one (Burberry, 2013/2014)
Furthermore, their three objectives were used to influence consumer’s perspectives and the
effect is evident. First, as can be seen below, the company’s profits have been on a
continuous increase since the implementation of these strategies, apart from the year 2008
due to the great depression, and in 2015 due to the exchange rates (Burberry, 2009/10;
Burberry, 2014/15), as well as with a 300% increase in stock levels (Kowitt, 2012).
Table 2: Burberry’s Financial Position from 2005-Date
Source: (Burberry, 2009/10; Burberry, 2014/15)

45
In addition to this, the brand also gained significant leadership in social media presence;
with 12.8 million fans on Facebook and 985, 000 Twitter followers, 4.5m Instagram
Followers and 9m views on the ‘from London with love’ YouTube Video that featured
Romeo Beckham (Burberry, 2013/2014), it became a digital leader in its industry and this
resulted in the company being the recipient of several awards such as the fourth fastest
growing brand globally, and the fastest growing in the luxury fashion industry (Ahrendts,
2013), the 3rd
most liked global fashion brand (Kowitt, 2012), as well as being copied by
luxury retailers such as Harrods (King, 2014).
Also, via ‘the art of the trench’ strategy and the improvement of their core-product, the
trench, Sales increased to 50% of outwear compared to 20% at the beginning of the era.
4.4 Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to focus on a single company; finding out the various
circumstances that led managers to carry out rebranding strategies, the type of rebranding
strategies they carried out at the various times and the reason for the differences and finally
the role of consumer’s perspective in determining whether or not these strategies fail. The
study chose to look at a particular company, rather than taking a cross-section account
within an industry or across industries, in a bid to see if and how a company adjusts its
strategies based on the changes in the environment and customer tastes, and also how their
past success or failures shape their future strategies. To achieve this, the study chose
Burberry as a case study because it is a heritage brand famous for its strategies that have
resulted in ‘bust and boom’ periods for the company and it therefore sought to connect the
evidence and suggestions in literature to the activities and results attained in the company.
The Burberry case study was a very interesting one, as it had embedded in it all the
research questions. It showed how the founder, Thomas Burberry started the company and
produced the gabardine, to attend to a need in the market, how he went on to market it by

46
providing the outwear clothing used by famous successful explorers such as Major F.G
Jackson and throughout the case study, we see the need for the three major rebranding
strategies; to increase the target market, to revive a dying brand and to revive a damaged
brand image, reasons suggested in literature by Singh et al. (2012), Goi & Goi (2011) and
Lee et al. (2008) respectively. The case study went on to show the types of Rebranding
Strategies, showing how the company carried out various evolutionary rebranding
strategies within eras, but evolutionary rebranding strategies across the eras. It also showed
an example of how Keller’s (2000) suggestion of rebranding across the hierarchical levels
in a company can be carried out effectively. Furthermore, via the review of literature, the
study highlighted factors and issues that were to be considered before engaging in
rebranding strategies and the case study showed how the consideration (or lack of it) of
these affected the success of the strategies.
It also showed the need for a balance; between heritage or tradition, and the changing
environment, as well as balance between any strategy to be implemented and the company
culture (which forms the consumer’s perception).
These strategies are summarised in the figure below

47
Figure 3: Summary of Burberry’s Strategies
Eras
Thomas
Bravo
Ahrendts
Reasons
For
Rebrand
Market
Penetration
Dying Brand
Negative
Brand Image
Theme
Core-
competence
Meeting the
Needs of the
Changing
environment
Balance
Between
Heritage and
Changing
Needs of
Consumers
Strategies
Product
Ambassadors/
Endorsements
Licensing,
'something for
everyone';
increased
product line
Leveraging on
their core-
advantage,
core-
competence
and the
suitable niche
markets
Consumer
Perception
Positive in the
short run,
negative in the
long-run
Positive in the
short run,
grossly
negative in the
long-run
Positive in the
short and long
run

48
5. Discussion
5.1 Summary of Findings / Implication for Businesses
In addition to gaining an in-depth knowledge on the subject of rebranding and observing
how theory comes to life, via looking at Burberry from 1856-2014, the study was able to
answer the three research questions:
The study sought to find out the effect that rebranding strategies have on company’s
performance and discovered that while the authors in the literatures reviewed earlier
suggest several advantages and disadvantages derived from rebranding strategies, (which
Burberry witnessed), none of them however talk about the difference between the short-run
and long-run effects of strategies carried out. The Burberry case study summary (Figure 3)
shows how in the first two eras, the brand experienced positive short-run effects on
company performance but detrimental effects in the long-run. This therefore shows that
managers should not only be concerned about achieving positive results, but also about
maintaining the positive result attained and knowing when to improve on these strategies
or change them.
Furthermore, Goi and Goi (2011) suggested that often times, companies run into trouble by
trying to fix what is not broken and taking on rebranding strategies at the first sign of a
drop in sales or profits. Building on this, via the case study, the study found that
sometimes, companies also run into trouble by not taking on rebranding strategies; either in
a bid to keep their tradition, company culture or fear of the unknown. As can be seen in
1997, the long-run detrimental effect suffered by Burberry was because it had become a
tired, old brand basking on its old glory (the short-run positive results attained) and the
company profits were fast falling (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004), and this was because rather
than evolving with the needs of its target market, it wanted to keep its ‘heritage brand’

49
image and the company believed this was to be achieved by remaining the same, sticking
to what they know how to do.
The Study also sought to find out how the successes or failures of prior rebranding
strategies shape future rebranding strategies and if these past experiences help the company
to make better rebranding decisions that produce positive long term results. The case study
shows how every rebranding strategy incorporates lessons learned from the success or
failure of the previous strategy; the strategy to diversify from gabardines to trench coats
was due to the success of the former and the decision to include more product lines was
due to the failure of the strategy of sticking solely to its historical roots. Furthermore, the
study shows this learning process and reveals the role of balance in the success of
rebranding strategies, irrespective of how good the idea behind it might be. In each of the
‘bust’ periods of the firm, the case study showed that Burberry had leaned too much
towards one strategy or view point. For example, as at 1996, the company was leaning too
strongly towards its historical background and lost sight of the opportunities to grow in the
emerging market. Next, in 2006, the case study shows how the company had focussed so
much on trying to meet the needs of the emerging markets, by seeking to fill every possible
niche market and as a result, it not only lost its customer base, but also gained the wrong
type. However, in the final era, the study shows how they had learnt from their past
mistakes and therefore implemented a strategy which was founded on their historical
background, but amended to suit their evolved target market. The company learning from
its past successes and failures learnt that the optimum position for the firm was the middle
ground between heritage and changing environment. However, literature on this is divided;
Panda (2006) suggests the opposite, stating that sticking to the heritage qualities of a
product is a more successful strategy, while Wiedmann, Hennings & Schmidt (2011),
believe that although these qualities are very important and shape consumer’s decision,
there is still a need to go further by paying attention to the change in environment.

50
Finally, the study aimed to find out the role that consumer perception plays in ensuring the
success or failure of a rebranding strategy. Evident from the works of Newman (2015) and
Voyer & Kastanakis (2014), it is important to note that there are no one size fits all
strategies to be used by all companies; the fact that this strategy proves effective for
Burberry does not guarantee that it would yield the same result if used by another firm,
even if it is another heritage brand in the fashion industry. Rather, the study found that the
key to maintaining success is a continuous evaluation of consumer perception of strategies
before execution. From the study, a proper examination of Burberry’s short-run successes
in the first two eras can be linked to the company paying attention to customer perception;
in the Thomas Burberry Era, by paying attention to the needs of their customers, they
emerged from producing the Gabardine, to producing the trench coats and this brought
about a positive outcome. Similarly, at the beginning of the Bravo Era, they expanded their
product line because their customers wanted this and again, this proved successful for the
brand. However, in both instances, when their focus shifted from the consumers to
profitability, the company began to experience periods of bust.
In addition to answering these research questions, the study found out that in carrying out
rebranding strategies, companies need to focus on sustainability rather than profitability. In
the Thomas Burberry era, we see how the company targets its rebranding strategies
towards the needs of the Asian Market, rather than its British market, because at the point,
the Asian market had been turning in more profit for the company, compared to the
European market. A survey carried out by Mckinsey (2012) found that even though
presently most firms focus on present profits rather than sustainability, focussing on the
latter actually ensures the former in the long-run. Similarly, this created a back-lash for the
company in two different ways; the Economy in the Japan failed and this accounted for a
57% drop in profits for the firm (Moore & Birtwistle, 2004), and even worse, since the

51
company had been focussing on the present profitability, the brand image had been
affected, as it was now viewed as more of an Asian Brand than a British brand.
Finally, from the study carried out, it is safe to say that Burberry is on a path towards
sustainable growth; company’s finance has been on a continuous increase for the past nine
years (excluding 2008, due to the economic meltdown), its rebranding strategy serves has a
benchmark for other companies in its industry, it has been a recipient of several awards and
most importantly, as explained in the case study, the company has learnt to focus on its
core-competencies, leverage on it core-advantage and how to discover suitable niche
markets.
5.2 Recommendation for Further Research
One of the limitations of the study was lack of sufficient academic journals in the industry,
therefore, the study relied on online sources and although these provided objective
information, they lacked critical analysis of information. Hence, a further study into the
subject matter, looking at another industry which has sufficient academic literature would
be beneficial as they would show whether or not the findings from this study are accurate.
Furthermore, the research was carried out looking at a single company, in a single industry
and although it served the purpose of the study by providing answers to the research
questions, it would be expedient to carry it out across companies and industries to
investigate if the practices or results attained differ.

52
Bibliography
1. Abell, D., 1980. Defining the Business: The Starting Point of Strategic Planning.
Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.
2. Acquino, J., 2011. Business Insider. [Online]
Available at: http://www.businessinsider.com/10-most-successful-rebranding-
campaigns-2011-2?op=1&IR=T
[Accessed 29 June 2015].
3. Ahrendts, A., 2012. Digital Leadership; An Interview with Angela Ahrendts, CEO
of Burberry [Interview] (16 August 2012).
4. Ahrendts, A., 2013. Burberry's CEO on Turning an AgingBritish Icon into a Global
Luxury Brand. Harvard Business Review, January.
5. Amed, I., 2013. CEO Talk; Angela Ahrendts on Burberry's Connected Culture.
Business of Fashion, 3 September.
6. Applin, B., 2013. Basingstoke before redevelopment. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.victoriacountyhistory.ac.uk/explore/sites/explore/files/explore_assets/2
013/07/13/basingstoke_before_redevelopment_bob_applin.pdf
[Accessed 09 August 2015].
7. Babu, V., 2006. Expectad. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.expectad.com/white_paper/Brand_Rejuvenation_Expect_Advertising_I
nc.pdf
[Accessed 08 July 2015].
8. Bhushan, D. L., 2013. The rising sun rises- Case study of the bank of Baroda.
International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 3(11), pp. 1-8.
9. Bothwell, C., 2005. Burberry versus The Chavs. [Online]
Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4381140.stm
10. Bravo, R. M., 2000. Bravo for Burberry [Interview] (9 July 2000).
11. Bunz, M., 2009. Burberry checks out crowdsourcing with The Art of the Trench.
[Online]
Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/media/pda/2009/nov/09/burberry-art-of-
the-trench
12. Burberry, 2002/03. Burberry Group plc Annual Report and Accounts, London:
Burberry.
13. Burberry (2003) Harvard Business School.

53
14. Burberry, 2004/05. Burberry Annual Report, London: Burberry.
15. Burberry, 2009/10. Burberry Annual Report, London: Burberry LTD.
16. Burberry, 2009. The Art of The Trend. [Online]
Available at: http://artofthetrench.burberry.com/gallery/d/fuschia-kate-sumner-
photographed-in-trench-coat-by-andrew-leung-in-4e19183a-5f74-11e4-ae60-
8badd8cf3cbd
17. Burberry, 2013/2014. Annual Review, London: Burberry.
18. Burberry, 2014/15. Burberry Annual Report, London: Burberry.
19. Burberry, 2015. Our History; Burberry. [Online]
Available at: http://uk.burberry.com/our-history/#/heritage/heritage-1800-1
20. Burberrys, 1934. Style Never Means Conspicuousness, London: Burberrys LTD.
21. Celebre, A. & Denton, A. W., 2014. The Inquisitive Mind. [Online]
Available at: http://www.in-mind.org/article/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-the-
dove-campaign-for-real-beauty
22. Chernatony, d. & Riley, D., 1998. Defining a “brand”: beyond the literature with
experts' interpretations. Journal of Marketing Management, Volume 14, pp. 417-
443.
23. Cooper, R., 1979. The Dimensions of Industrial New Product Success and Failure.
Journal of Marketing, 43(3), pp. 93-103.
24. Cox, W., 1967. Product Life Cycles as Marketing Models. The Journal of Business,
40(4), pp. 375-384.
25. D’Amico, S., Giustiniano, L., Nenni, M. E. & Pirolo, L., 2013. Product Lifecycle
Management as a Tool to Create Value in the Fashion System. International
Journal of Engineering Business Management, 5(33), pp. 22-28.
26. Daly, A. & Moloney, D., 2004. Managing corporate rebranding. Irish Marketing
Review, 17(1/2), pp. 30-36.
27. Day, G., 1981. Product Life Cycle: Analysis and Applications Issues. Journal of
Marketing, 45(4), pp. 60-67.
28. Dibbie, V. M., 2013. Marketing Strategies: Rebranding as a Means of Redeeming
Corporate Image of Products and Organizations. Journal of Business and
Organizational Development, 5(1), pp. 2026-2034.
29. Druce, L., 2010. Branding Disasters: The rebranding of British Airways. Business
Zone, 1 January.

54
30. Duff, O., 2004. Marketing: It's time to tap the chav pound, innit. [Online]
Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/marketing-its-time-to-tap-
the-chav-pound-innit-20365.html
31. Elberse, A. & Verleun, J., 2012. The Economic Value of Celebrity Endorsements.
The Journal of Advertising Research, 52(2), pp. 149-165.
32. Forbes, M., 2012. Burberry CEO Proves Tradition Doesn't Prevent Innovation.
[Online]
Available at: Marketing: It's time to tap the chav pound, innitMarketing: It's time to
tap the chav pound, innit
33. Fournier, S. & Yao, J., 1997. Reviving brand lyalty: A reconceptualization within
the framework of consumer-brand relationships. International Journal of Research
in Marketing, 14(1997), pp. 451-472.
34. Gilchrist, S., 2012. The Democratic Republic of Burberry. Brunswick Group,
Summer, pp. 60-68.
35. Ginsburgh, N., 2012. "Chavs”, class and representation. International Socialism
Journal, 2012(136), pp. 2-12.
36. Goi, C.-L. & Goi, M.-T., 2011. Review on Models and Reasons of Rebranding.
International Conference on Social Science and Humanity, 5(2), pp. 445-449.
37. Goldsmith, B., 1994. Burberry Goes Casual. [Online]
Available at: http://wwd.com/fashion-news/fashion-features/the-prodigal-label-
thomas-burberry-line-relaunches-in-the-u-k-731787/
38. Grant, T., 2001. International Directory of Company Histories. Volume 41 ed.
Michigan: St. James Press.
39. Grieve, j., Idiculla, A. & Tobias, K., 2013. Entrenched in the Digital World.
[Online]
Available at: http://www.businesstoday.in/magazine/lbs-case-study/burberry-
social-media-initiative/story/191422.html
40. Habashy, H. e. & LaCalle, C., 2011. The Burberry Revolution. [Online]
Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heba-el-habashy-and-charles-
lacalle/the-burberry-revolution_b_833618.html
41. Hatch, M. J. & Schultz, M., 2008. Taking Brand Initiative; How Companies Can
Align Strategy, Culture, and Identity Through Corporate Branding. 1st ed. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

55
42. Heller, R., 2000. Can This Woman Do a Gucci on Burberry. [Online]
Available at: http://www.forbes.com/global/2000/0124/0302050a.html
43. Holt, D., 2004. How Brands Become Icons; The Principles of Cultural Branding.
5th ed. Massachusetts: Harvard Business School.
44. Ing, P., 2012. Rebranding and the related constructs. International Journal of
Commerce, Business and Management, 1(3), pp. 76-85.
45. ISPO, 2015. 90 Percent Of All Purchasing Decisions Are Made Subconsciously.
ISPO News, January, pp. 5-15.
46. Jobber, 2003. Mcgraw Hill Education. [Online]
Available at:
highered.mheducation.com/sites/dl/free/007710708x/110215/sample_ch_Chapter_0
8.pdf
47. Juntunen, M., Saraniemi, S. & Jussila, R., 2009. Corporate re-branding as a
process. Athens, Thought Leaders International Conference on Brand Management.
48. Kapferer, J.-N., 2012. The new strategic brand management: Advanced insights
and strategic thinking. 5th ed. London: Kogan Page Publishers.
49. Keller, K. L., 1999. Managing brands for the long run: brand reinforcement and
revitalization strategies. California Management Review, Spring, pp. 102-124.
50. Keller, K. L., 2000. In The Expressive Organisation: Linking Identity, Reputation
and the Corporate Brand. In: Building and Managing Corporate Brand Equity.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 115-137.
51. King, L., 2014. Forbes; Burberry Struts Ahead With Tech Transformation Begun
By Apple's Angela Ahrendts. [Online]
Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/leoking/2014/05/21/burberry-struts-
ahead-with-tech-transformation-begun-by-apples-angela-ahrendts/
52. Kowitt, B., 2012. Burberry's Angela Ahrendts: High tech's fashion model. [Online]
Available at: http://fortune.com/2012/06/05/burberrys-angela-ahrendts-high-techs-
fashion-model/
53. Lee, M., Motion, J. & Conroy, D., 2008. Anti-consumption and brand avoidance.
Journal of Business Research, 62(2), pp. 169-180.
54. Liu, S. & Tang, D. E., 2009. Factors Influencing Effective Rebranding Strategy.
Melbourne, ANZMAC.

56
55. Makasi, A., Govender, K. & Madzorera, N., 2014. Re-Branding and Its Effects on
Consumer Perceptions: A case study of a Zimbabwean Bank. Mediterranean
Journal of Social Sciences, 5(20), pp. 2582-2588.
56. Male, B., 2010. Business Insider. [Online]
Available at: http://www.businessinsider.com/rebranding-failures-2010-
3?op=1&IR=T
57. Marketing Week, 2007. Chequered times for Burberry. [Online]
Available at: https://www.marketingweek.com/2007/01/11/chequered-times-for-
burberry/
58. Mason, R. B. & Wigley, G., 2013. The ‘Chav’ Subculture: Branded Clothing as an
Extension of the Self. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 5(3), pp. 173-
184.
59. Matić, D. A., 2014. My Burberry; A short story about the brand, famous trench
coat and the My Burberry perfume. [Online]
Available at: http://www.webbdowse.com/files/Dragana-28102014.pdf
60. Matlach, M., 2011. The Commercial Overprint Society of Great Britain (COSGB).
[Online]
Available at: http://cosgb.blogspot.co.uk/2011_02_01_archive.html
61. McRobbie, L. R., 2015. World War 1 100 years later; The Classy Rise of The
Trench Coat. [Online]
Available at: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/trench-coat-made-its-mark-
world-war-i-180955397/?no-ist
62. Mills, L., 2001. Bravor for Burberry. [Online]
Available at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/comment/4457553/Bravo-for-
Burberry.html
63. Moisescu, O. I., 2009. The importance of brand awareness in consumer's buying
decision and perceived risk assessment, Cluj-Napoca: Babes-Bolyai University.
64. Moore, C. & Birtwistle, G., 2004. The Burberry business model; creating an
international luxury fashion brand. International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, 32(8), pp. 412-422.

A Comprehensive Analysis Of Burberry S Rebranding Strategies 1854-2014

A Comprehensive Analysis Of Burberry S Rebranding Strategies 1854-2014

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A Comprehensive Analysis Of Burberry S Rebranding Strategies 1854-2014

Similar to A Comprehensive Analysis Of Burberry S Rebranding Strategies 1854-2014 (20)

More from Lori Moore

More from Lori Moore (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A Comprehensive Analysis Of Burberry S Rebranding Strategies 1854-2014