Talk:Brand

Archives (Index)

2012 2013 2014 2016 2017 2018 2020 2021

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2022 and 2 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Marielygerman, Tbarboza23, Candrews1 (article contribs).

Principles of marketing

Tamil 157.51.81.255 (talk) 05:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Origin

Might there a possibility that branding started with inanimate objects? I mean, marking or branding objects is a lot easier than do the same to animals. And objects, specially valuable ones, might have been stolen, too, in ancient times. George Rodney Maruri Game (talk) 19:42, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Xxxx

Xxxx 2401:4900:6190:CEE:0:0:C3A:BA35 (talk) 15:54, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Digital Communication

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 17 March 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): GarrisonCalmerDighton (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Sanders.b.d, Kmack1075, DemonsandLions.

— Assignment last updated by Jamie.green-2 (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Discuss enumerat the function of ITP

Discuss enumerat the function of ITP 222.127.252.25 (talk) 12:13, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Lead images

@Belbury:, I don't see how selectively exhibiting Ferrari and Coke helps understand the article, but the broader problem is potential covert product placement without offering much encyclopedic value. Why Ferrari and Coke among all else? Why not Apple? Google? GE? There's a better way to present without giving highlight to specific companies. Graywalls (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

A small number of WP:EXAMPLES can help the reader's understanding. Some people will get the idea much quicker if we say that we are talking about things like Coke and Ferrari.

A MOS:LEADIMAGE can "give readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page". A reader who has searched for "brand" and was expecting to read about livestock branding will have to skim the text (and not be distracted by the second paragraph which talks about livestock branding) to realise that they're on the wrong page. An image helps.

What better manner of presentation would you suggest here? Belbury (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Preferably, something that doesn't favor any specific company. Graywalls (talk) 21:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

How might we do that? Belbury (talk) 08:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Until we develop some idea of how we might provide the reader with a useful visual shorthand example of a brand without favouring any specific companies in the process, if such a thing is possible, I'll restore the images. Belbury (talk) 11:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Brand Guidelines page.

I think it'd be very important to collect sources and setup a Brand Guidelines page. I commonly get led to this page when trying to refresh my knowledge on how Brand Guidelines work. MarkBelain (talk) 19:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Labels used in business have which brand names? 2601:587:4202:2D60:C53B:EFAD:F31D:CAC5 (talk) 17:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Brand as a core element of business model is missing

I do not want to interfere with the meticulously developed definition of branding, yet I have to point out that this definition is strongly biased. It is in fact a definition of trade mark and not a brand. It was a trade mark that was branded on the cow! Branding is a process while a trade mark is a frozen result. Brands are living entities in contrast to trade marks. What this definition hughlights only is how marketing uses brand in promotional and other activities but not branding itself.

Let me point to Leslie de Chernatony's work and especially From Brand Vision to Brand Evaluation ( https://www.amazon.com/Brand-Vision-Evaluation-ebook/dp/B0B5FMXM6R/ref=sr_1_1?dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.EqTv_QCSGPdY6ipNL8DOK4y2GemnfolhR3g_VvYiSrAzB8z0EjsaThjfkM6pHkTufMDTDj3ZQb1c5j9r_QE_E-8IsHFeyBX0ZXHjA1U9eZDEaU666dycxXX70Z_gBbp4Ymbw-z_qnBvf6oV11hv7sCl3Kw2UekpLbfm4jSdAsColMVy4d3eC07Od8IaLeNVZWi7worc6rTYBeNFhFghJb7WaG292jcZLlMOIDDI_4eU.aMoQnzPHjMOoCdDefttyBNX2fPvypEfj7L66l9uFN5A&dib_tag=se&qid=1734609729&refinements=p_27%3ALeslie+de+Chernatony&s=books&sr=1-1s

Lesle is not referred to, for he creates a branding narrative that in many points directs to a different identity of brands that presented here.

To recapitulate: Brands are citral point of the business model (of a company, NGO, State, individual...). When we talk about the governance, it is a governance of a business model, of an identity, which is extremely complex, fluid and changing in time. Trade marks are frozen, while brands adapt to the environment like do all living creatures. Brands are thus part of human nature, a nature that evolves. They are part of evolutionary biology if you understand S.J. Gould concept NOMA (Non Overlapping MAgisteria). Brands are focal issue at the managerial boards and not of marketing departments. And so on and so on.

I have devoted a book Brandlife on that subject and am practicing that kind of branding philosophy from the year 2000. Yet, I'm no authority in comparison to the one of Leslie, whom I have upgraded into the direction of the evolutionary biology and memetics. I would be more than eager to add a section , yet I have a huge respect to Wikipedia editors and would check this option beforehand.

Andrej Drapal Drapi (talk) 12:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)