Look how wrong I can be. Richard Charkin posted an interesting piece on publishers brands the other day that I missed (no internet access) see it here
Feeling somewhat foolish
Eoin
Filed under: Books, Bookselling, Publishing Companies
August 2, 2006 • 10:45 pm
Don’t see why this really contraticts anything you’ve written Eoin. While the publisher themselves may not have a particularly well know brand name the same holds true for a lot of industries. Proctor and Gamble are relatively unknown as a brand in and of themselves, but that really doesn’t matter because as a company they are about marketing and promoting the different brands and products they own and control to different markets. Too much awareness of their own brand name would detract from what they are tryign to achieve with the actual product.
Similarly, who the heck are Interbrand? I know I’ve heard of them before in the same way that I’ve heard of any of a dozen PR and advertising concerns, but I forget about them five minutes later. Doesn’t mean my brain isn’t thoroughly colonised by the brands they “create”.
Publishers may simply become holding and brand management companies. Just because their own brand is largely irrelevant to the general public doesn’t mean branding isn’t where their value may lie in the future. It’s a specialised market, their expertise can remain relevant if they change to acknowledge the new technologies. How? That’s their problem.
Thanks for the support Colm!
It is not so much that i felt wrong (I suspect you know that happens only rarely) more that the report seemed a real finger in the eye of my ideas!
Eoin