It may just be a simple means of telling buyers/pa

Quote:

---

It may just be a simple means of telling buyers/partners that they’ll be acquiring a world-class platform drug without the Nader/Amarex baggage.

---

plenty of articles available with the google engine on rebranding reasons, do's-don'ts etc. This snippet from one article stood out:

Companies should rebrand to outgrow their poor reputation

We recently wrote about Uber’s successful rebranding efforts. Uber faced widespread backlash from their target audience about their toxic company culture and how they treated their drivers. It started conceding market share to Lyft, its main competitor.

Uber’s complete brand overhaul was necessary to break ties with its bad reputation, overcome an identity crisis, and visibly demonstrate a commitment to a new, improved culture. Uber’s new brand story focused on how its culture changed and its renewed focus on drivers and passengers.

If your business struggles to overcome a negative reputation, a rebrand can help consumers see you in a fresh new light and regrow brand loyalty. In this case, brand recognition might not be decreasing, but the rebrand would turn negative brand recognition into neutral or positive brand recognition.

But don’t assume that you can simply change your company name, and your brand strategy will be complete. Rebranding involves much more than just changing the name of a company. Rebranding requires you to take a fresh look at your overall business strategy.

ValuJet had to rebrand after flight 592's tragic demise in the Everglades. To do so they merged with smaller carrier Airtran but they were still a fleet of old DC-9's for the most part. Rebranding could come in many forms. Looking forward to a some insights from HQ soon.

Yeah, CA - if you're listening - soon would be good.