Such stuff as dreams are made on
Owning a brand that becomes a metaphor for the age is every marketer's ambition. In the 1990s Harvey Nichols achieved this distinction with a little help from Patsy and Edina of Absolutely Fabulous. Apple's iPod is on the way to achieving similar celebrity in the digital noughties. But how should a brand react when its image seems locked in the past?
When Jack Straw, the UK foreign secretary, last year described one of the government's so-called “dodgy dossiers” as “a complete Horlicks” by which he is supposed to have meant a right mess the incident surely counted as the lowest point in the 130-year history of GlaxoSmithKline's classic bedtime drink.
A year later, however, things have started to look up. In a feisty attempt to move with the times, the veteran brand has revamped its appearance. It has also engaged Mark Borkowski, a public relations consultant, to convince sleep-deprived party-goers and stressed-out working mothers that Horlicks is a product that speaks to their needs.
Horlicks' attempt to draw in a new generation of drinkers highlights a dilemma faced by many so-called heritage brands, which have seen the average age of their customers creep up year by year. The first option for brand owners is to proceed gradually, updating the look and feel of the brand through fine adjustments to its imagery and tone. Such an approach aims to attract younger people to the brand without alienating existing customers. The other option is to reinterpret the traditional values of the brand in contemporary idiom to reach younger consumers. Until recently Horlicks seemed wedded to the path of gradual change. In January, the company launched a new TV campaign featuring the tag-line: “Horlicks could help anyone get a restful night's sleep.” Though humorous enough, none of the commercials which feature mean-minded traffic wardens and bus drivers settling down with steaming mugs of the malt-based drink seem likely, nor are even intended, to dispel common perceptions of the brand as a cosy accompaniment to bed socks and lights out at nine.
Now, however, the brand may be changing tack. In July the product was given a creamier taste and repackaged in an eye-catching carton, with a moon-shaped “do-not-disturb sign” symbolising restful sleep. Hard on the heels of the new visual identity, the company's public relations agents recently announced that the beverage is back in fashion and being enjoyed as a relaxing after-dinner digestive in hip London venues such as the Groucho Club and the Zetter Hotel.
Horlicks is by no means the only heritage brand facing the dilemma of evolution versus revolution. Others include Kit-Kat, which has modified its iconic packaging and slogan; Ribena, the blackcurrant-flavoured drink; and Tetley Tea, which is running advertisements with chic celebrities, such as Sex and the City's Kim Cattrall. Yet according to Charles Trevail, director of London-based consultancy Promise, the number of brands that can be said to have genuinely reinvented themselves is surprisingly low. Among the exceptions that prove the rule are Guinness, Lucozade and, most recently, Hovis.
An aversion to taking risks with brands that consumers hold in affection even if they are no longer buying them so heavily may explain why companies often prefer to modernise gradually when sales start to slip.
The danger, however, is that in a crowded marketplace changes that are subtly communicated risk being drowned out by the surrounding media cacophony. And the risks of marking a break with the past may not be as great as brand owners think. Richard Murray, co-founder of Williams Murray Hamm, the London-based agency that redesigned Horlicks, argues that the number of brands that would be devalued by sudden change is fewer than one might suppose.
“A few brands, such as Oxo and Marmite, have an iconic identity. But there many others, such as Nescafé, laying claim to a unique equity, which consumers don't really distinguish between.” For household names in this situation, suggests Mr Williams, the challenge is to re-express what they stand for in a way that distinguishes them from their rivals.
No amount of clever marketing will restore the fortunes of a brand for which consumers no longer have a need, however. To avoid becoming irrelevant, says Jez Frampton, chief executive of Interbrand in the UK, companies must invest in their products as well as their image.
Babycham, the cider brand, showed the consequences of not responding to changes in taste when it embarked on a cosmetic relaunch in the mid-1990s. The image makeover, which involved dropping the brand's trademark deer and pear-green bottle, failed comprehensively and was subsequently reversed. “Babycham harked back to a time when consumers had unsophisticated palettes,” says Mr Frampton.
Whether Horlicks can connect with a younger market remains to be seen. In the brand's favour is the fact that its central idea offering people something that will help them to unwind at the end of a hectic day, and promote restful sleep seems more relevant today than at any time in the past. What is more, judging by the welter of publicity which the reported sightings of style-leaders sipping Horlicks in ultra-cool bars has generated, it appears that the relaunch has at least tickled the taste buds of the media. Mr Trevail, while applauding GSK's audacity, sounds a cautionary note. “Getting Horlicks into the Groucho Club makes a bold statement.” But, he adds: “It's all too easy to imagine some joker of a barman tossing powder into a mug and, with a well-aimed wisecrack, turning the whole thing into a bit of a . . . ” Horlicks?
老品牌的进化与革命
拥有一个成为时代象征的品牌，是每个营销人的抱负。在上世纪90年代，略微借助电视剧《绝对精彩》（Absolutely Fabulous）里的Patsy和Edina，夏菲尼高（Harvey Nichols）赢得了这种声望。到了当今数码时代，苹果电脑（Apple）的iPod即将获得类似的名声。但如果一个品牌的形象与过去难舍难分，它又该怎么办？
去年英国外交大臣杰克?斯特劳（Jack Straw）将政府内部涉及伊拉克武器情报丑闻的一份“问题档案”描述成“十足好立克（Horlicks）”，他是想说那件事情简直一塌糊涂，就如同葛兰素史克（GlaxoSmithKline）制药公司的经典睡前饮品130年历史中最糟糕的时刻。
可是一年以后，情况开始好转。经过积极与时俱进，这个老品牌已经改头换面。它还聘请了公关顾问马克?博考思基（Mark Borkowski），力求让睡眠不足的派对活跃分子和压力沉重的职业母亲相信，好立克是切合他们需要的产品。
好立克试图吸引新一代饮用者，这突出表明了许多所谓传承品牌所面临的两难境地，这些品牌眼看他们顾客的平均年龄逐年增长。品牌所有者的第一个选择是采用渐进方式，通过对品牌形象和风格的细微调整，来更新品牌的外表和感觉。这类举措的目的是在不疏远现有顾客的同时，把更年轻的人吸引过来。另一个选择是用当代流行的词语来重新诠释这个品牌的传统价值，使年轻消费者更容易接受。直到最近，好立克似乎还是恪守渐进路线。今年1月，公司发起一场新的电视广告活动，并特别点明：“好立克能帮助您整晚安睡。”在广告中，为人刻薄的交通辅警和公共汽车司机手里各捧一杯热气腾腾的好立克麦芽饮料后，已经和睦相处了。虽然这些广告十分幽默，但看上去却不太可能（甚至根本没有打算）消除大众对这个品牌固有的感觉。在人们看来，这是一种晚上9点钟陪着你穿上睡袜、关灯睡觉的好伴侣。
但现在，这个品牌可能正在转换策略。7月份，该产品加入了更浓重的奶油味，并用一种引人注目的纸盒重新包装，上面是个象征安睡的月亮状“请勿打扰标记”。公司的公关代理商紧跟这一视觉新形象，于近期宣布，这种饮料已再度风靡，在Groucho俱乐部和Zetter酒店等伦敦的时尚热点去处，人们正把它作为一种有助放松的餐后助消化饮料来享用。
好立克绝非面对“进化还是革命”两难困境的唯一传承品牌。其它这类品牌包括奇巧（Kit-Kat）、黑醋栗风味饮料利宾纳（Ribena）以及泰特莱茶（Tetley Tea）。奇巧已更改了它的标志性包装和标语，泰特莱茶则在放送由《欲望城市》（Sex and the City）中金?卡特洛尔（Kim Cattrall）等时尚名人出演的广告。但据伦敦咨询公司Promise的主管查尔斯?特瑞威尔（Charles Trevail）介绍，称得上真正改头换面的品牌却少得惊人，其中的例外是：Guinness、Lucozade和最新改变形象的Hovis。
对于一些消费者即使不再大量购买但仍有感情的品牌，厂商不愿贸然做出改动，这点或许可以解释为什么在销售开始下滑时，企业为何往往选择渐进式的改变。
但这样做的危险是，在一个拥挤的市场中，如果这种改变以不太显著的方式传播，就可能会被周围的媒体喧嚣所淹没。若完全超越过去，其风险也许没有品牌拥有者想象的那么大。为好立克重新打造形象的伦敦公关公司Williams Murray Hamm联合创始人理查德?默里（Richard Murray）认为，因突然改变而贬值的品牌比人们以为的要少。
“Oxo、Marmite等一些品牌受到了偶像般的追捧。但还有很多其它品牌，比如雀巢咖啡（Nescafé），则自称独一无二，但消费者却并不能真正加以区分。”威廉斯先生提出，在这种情况下，家喻户晓的品牌所面对的挑战，就是以区别于竞争对手的方式，去重新显示它们所代表的东西。
不过，对于消费者不再需要的品牌来说，任何聪明的营销手法都不能恢复其命运。英国Interbrand公司首席执行官杰兹?弗兰普顿（Jez Frampton）说，要避免落伍，企业除了在形象方面，还必须在产品上投资。
苹果酒品牌Babycham在上世纪90年代中期进行了一次表面化的重新亮相，显示出不针对公众口味变化做出反应的后果。那次形象上的改头换面丢弃了原来“鹿”的商标和梨绿色的包装瓶，但还是彻底失败，以至于最终又恢复了原来的面目。“Babycham的做法是将消费者带回到只知道简单色彩的时代，”弗兰普顿先生说。
至于好立克能否与更年轻的市场接轨还有待观察。但该品牌已占了一个有利条件，这就是它的中心构想：为人们提供一种有助于让他们在忙碌的一天结束时放松下来的东西，并促进他们安稳入睡。这似乎比以往任何时候都更适应时代的需要。此外，据称有人看到一些时尚明人在超“酷”的酒吧里啜好立克，而引起了大量宣传，根据这一点来看，似乎此次形象重塑至少已引起了媒体的兴趣。特瑞威尔先生称赞葛兰素史克的大胆，但同时也以谨慎的口吻提醒道：“让好立克进入Groucho俱乐部是个大胆的宣言。”他补充说：“但这太容易让人想到这样的笑话：酒保把一些粉末投进一只杯子，说上一句恰倒好处的俏皮话，然后把杯子里的东西变成……”好立克？
