?The Reserve Bank of India has asked banks not to treat Kingfisher Airlines? brand as collateral since it is intangible.?
In case you remember these lines from the last quarter of 2012, you will also remember the not-so-kind discussions around the loans going bad and the futility of trying to create a premium air travel brand in India. Well, the business model of Kingfisher Airlines was a failure. The ?tangible? books of accounts will bear testimony to that. But was the intangible part a failure too?
The Indian air traveller, grown up in the era of deep-rooted apathy of the national carrier, had developed a perennial sense of gratefulness. He was grateful for his safe landing, for the super dry sandwich in the cardboard box, for his luggage arriving with him on the same flight, for merely being able to reach point B from point A. The private airlines later on showed him better efficiency, sophisticated communication and professionalism. But it was Kingfisher Airlines that was willing to make up for all these years of deprivation.
The most visible symbol of this new air travel language was the red headphone. People would invariably steal it from the flight and then use it on-ground to listen to their personal device (another example of the lack of the airlines? business savvy). But the reason people were comfortable in displaying the stolen item was that it was almost seen as a badge that announced: ?Yes, I did enjoy my last flight.? Personal entertainment (even in the coach) was the symbol that announced capitalistic flamboyance in air travel especially as a stark contrast to the socialistic austerity doled out by Indian Airlines.
The memories of Kingfisher are invariably associated with a sense of freedom. Whether is the choice of food and beverage or the choice of entertainment, Kingfisher signified a huge relief. It was not what Kingfisher was offering, but it was more a reminder of what nobody else thought of offering. The affluent (and corporate) Indian traveller was used to five-star service in hotels, but he had to live with reasonably poor hospitality on air. Kingfisher was the first brand to challenge that and introduced the star classification for in-flight hospitality and comfort. That even forced other airlines to up their game.
They say the biggest attribute of a service brand is how it makes the customer feel. Kingfisher almost institutionalised the idea of making people feel special. When a flight attendant offered to clean your glasses, it not only transcended her to a true hostess but became the definitive symbol of on-air pampering. Most air travellers (especially in the upper class) never felt spoilt before and after Kingfisher. If there?s one thing that the brand owned effortlessly it was the idea of pampering. It stood out against the moderate to heavy dosage of high-handedness that was doled out by most other airlines.
The detractors always pointed out that this luxury was unnecessary. Nobody wanted to watch a Bollywood flick on a two-hour flight. The choice of beverage or the lavishness of the meal was a sheer waste. But they were missing the point?brand Kingfisher was not about pragmatism, it was about establishing the new-found meaning of value that the Indian air traveller discovered. Kingfisher was never about flying?it was about the enjoyment of flying. Two hours of indulgence that everyone looked forward to.
But if there was one place the brand got it wrong was trying to mix Vijay Mallya?s personal brand of flamboyance with the airlines. Everyone knew and acknowledged that the source code of brand Kingfisher was Vijay Mallya?but one didn?t need to make the overt connection. The famous in-flight video where he announced the desire to treat everyone like his personal houseguest or declared how he handpicked every single stewardess became the butt of many airline jokes. This also marked another significant event. When the airline started suffering from financial pressure, people were not lamenting the loss of a great service brand. Instead, they were criticising Mallya?s extreme exuberance and waxing eloquent about traditional values of caution and prudence. What could have become a source of brand folklore, turned into a severe criticism of an individual?s lifestyle. And Kingfisher has nobody but itself to blame for letting it happen.
Now, the big question: does brand Kingfisher has enough left in it to get resurrected? Entrepreneur John Cerasani wrote in an article for the San Francisco Chronicle, ?We have to remember that a brand that went away in the past went away for a reason. It may have been because it was a fad, or maybe it was just an unsustainable business model.? In the old brand world, we could have agreed with Cerasani and written the epitaph of brand Kingfisher being an example of unsustainable business model.
But the answer will change in today?s connected brand world. In a world where the consumers themselves can fuel a brand culture, the biggest assets that a brand can have are stories. If there?s one airline brand in India that can narrate a lot of stories, it will be Kingfisher. These stories can help the brand spring back into action. It may need a modified business model, it may need some serious structural re-engineering, but it will be stories that will make the consumers want the brand to be revived.
The King is dead. Long live the King. Time to look forward to part deux.
The author is managing partner, BBH India