Rebranding, when executed thoughtfully, can signal innovation, capture new audiences, or mark a strategic pivot. Yet, for many global brands, attempts to reimagine their identity have met with swift public rejection, underlining the complexities involved in altering deeply familiar brand cues. Several high-profile failures reveal that customer loyalty often rests on emotional familiarity as much as product utility, and that tampering with legacy can be costly.
A Recipe for backlash: The New Coke experiment
In 1985, Coca-Cola reformulated its century-old flagship beverage in what remains one of the most talked-about marketing reversals in history. Dubbed “New Coke,” the sweeter version was introduced after internal taste tests suggested a preference over rival Pepsi. However, the change triggered consumer outrage. Just 79 days later, Coca-Cola reintroduced the original formula under the label “Coca-Cola Classic,” acknowledging the deep emotional connection customers had with the original product.
Design overhaul without consensus: Gap and Tropicana
Apparel retailer Gap faced similar resistance in 2010 after unveiling a new logo without prior notice. The Helvetica-based redesign was widely criticised for appearing generic and lacking brand character. Intense social media backlash led to a reversal within a week.
Tropicana, the juice brand owned by PepsiCo, encountered a commercial setback in 2009 when it replaced its iconic image of an orange with a straw with a minimalist glass of juice. The redesign made the product harder to identify on shelves, leading to a reported 20 per cent decline in sales over two months before the company reverted to its original packaging.
Shifting brand identity
In a bid to expand its audience beyond traditional genre enthusiasts, the Sci-Fi Channel rebranded as “Syfy” in 2009. While intended to modernise the channel’s image, the spelling change alienated a section of its core audience, who saw it as a departure from the brand’s roots in science fiction storytelling. Though the name remains, it did so at the expense of goodwill among long-time viewers.
Legacy undone: RadioShack and Tronc
Consumer electronics retailer RadioShack’s attempt to rebrand as “The Shack” in 2009 failed to resonate. Intended to sound more contemporary, the name confused consumers and failed to address the company’s broader structural challenges, including outdated inventory and digital competition.
In 2016, media conglomerate Tribune Company rebranded itself as “Tronc” (an acronym for “Tribune online content”), aiming to highlight a digital-first strategy. However, the new name, accompanied by a heavily criticised promotional video, became a symbol of corporate jargon disconnected from newsroom realities. The rebrand was phased out quietly two years later.
Heritage at risk: Royal Mail’s short-lived ‘Consignia’
One of the more notable institutional rebranding failures came from the UK’s Royal Mail. In 2001, the 350-year-old service rebranded its parent company as “Consignia,” hoping to signal a broader international logistics ambition. The name was widely criticised as vague and unnecessary, and was abandoned within 16 months following intense public and political opposition.
The common thread
Each of these examples shares a common misstep: underestimating how closely consumers identify with existing brand assets. Whether it was a change in name, logo, or packaging, the rebrands disrupted established perceptions without sufficiently preparing or convincing their audiences.