F
R

9
-
2
0
0
1

AIRLINE BRANDING STRATEGIES

A shriek of outrage rippled through the ranks of the Lufthansa personnel. "The plane looks as if it had fallen into a pan of scrambled eggs," wrote furious crane operators in the readersí letter columns of their in-house magazine Lufthanseat Apparently some crews even refused to fly the unusual-locking aircraft. What had happened?

After 15 years of the tried and tested design of the German star typographer, Otl Aicher, who had also designed the pioneering pictograms for the Munich Olympic Games, Lufthansa decided in the mid-1980s to try something new. Instead of the harsh blue line above the windows and the delicate crane on the tail, the message was to be a little lighter.

For test purposes the Boeing 737-200 "Wolfsburg" was given a bright yellow underbelly and the empennage was likewise finished in yellow, with the crane symbol superimposed in thin blue lines. But the response within the airline was so negative that the "Wolfsburg" only stayed in the "wrong colourî for a short time. An Airbus A310 similarly repainted at Lufthansaís Hamburg base did not fly again.

"The crew who fly with these planes every day have to like a new design and influence their customers in a positive way," says Peter Knapp, a London-based airline brand designer, "so a new design must work both internally and externally.î But in this case so crushing was the criticism from the workforce that the in-house designers beat a hasty retreat. It was in 1989 that the somewhat bold design still in service today, with white fuselage, large lettering and slightly simplified crane icon, made its debut with the delivery of the first Boeing 747-400.

Lufthansa is in fact the first airline in the world to have developed a company logo using the crane: its predecessor, Deutsche Luft Reederei, adorned its aircraft with a flying crane in 1919, and this subsequently became a fixed element of the corporate identity after Lufthansa was founded in 1926.

In a consumer world that is ruled by brand names, it has never been more important for an airline to have the right public image. If the national flag and perhaps a catchy logo on planes, counters and ticket covers were sufficient in the olden days, today branding is a science of its own.

Half a dozen branding agencies, most of them based in London and the USA, are fighting not just on behalf of toothpaste or cars but, with dogged determination, in the aviation industry over budgets worth millions. "The airlines are much more conscious today that branding can be a question of survival," says David Davis of the FutureBrand agency. It is not just a matter of appearing attractive to oneís own staff and oneís customers. With all the consolidation going on in the world of aviation it is important in the industry as well to give off the right aura. This can determine whether an airline itself is viewed as a potential acquirer or merely as a target for take-over by a stronger brand.

"In an environment of market consolidation a powerful brand is particularly important for airlines," says James Gregory of Corporate Branding, an international firm of branding consultants. "The brand can determine whether a merger will be successful or fail, depending on how the brand is perceived and nurtured.î According to rankings maintained by Corporate Branding the strongest brands in aviation are currently Delta Air Lines, Southwest and British Airways, whereas US Airways, United and American occupy only positions seven to nine in the Top Ten.

A brand makeover, or rebranding as it is called, is not something to take on lightly. "Rebranding or even the introduction of a new logo should be a sign of change within the company," says Charles Wrench, head of the London office of Landor Associates, one of the biggest branding agencies. "If that is not the case, then it is dishonest, a promise that cannot be kept.î And it is expensive as well: bmi british midlandís total facelift presented in February of this year (FLUG REVUE 04/01) will cost some DM 60 million ($27 million) over the next two years, making it one of the most spectacular airline rebranding exercises of recent years. This includes the cost of repainting the aircraft and the necessary investment on the ground. "We only get a fraction of that," Peter Knapp, also of Landor, who managed the bmi redesign, is sad to say. Nonetheless, Michael Bishop, Chairman of bmi, does find the cost a little daunting. "Now that I have seen the bill, this will be the last campaign of this kind for some time.î

The first airline to have changed its image with a striking branding concept was the American airline, Braniff International of Dallas. Back in 1965 the designer Alexander Girard introduced what remains to this day a unique concept: he selected seven colours, including pink, green and orange, and had the entire fleet painted with them, each aircraft in one colour with a logo on the tail, which remained white. At the same time cabin seats were covered with specially designed materials, and these colours and shapes were also prominent at ticket counters and in lounges. In 1973 Girard commissioned the well-known artist Alexander Calder to paint first a DC-8 and later a Boeing 727 with abstract art all over. When Braniff flew to Europe for the first time in 1980, the Boeing 747SPís used were simply known as "Big Orangeî, having been painted all over from the landing gear well flaps through to the tip of the tail plane the colour of the sun. Sadly, Braniff went bankrupt in 1982.

After that it was not until 1997 that the world of design got another opportunity to leave its mark on an airline, when British Airways dropped the grey-blue business look created by Landor in 1984 and overnight assumed the role of global airline with its unusual ethnic design. 15 international artists whose origins ranged from the Ndebele tribe of South Africa through to Canadian Indian and Russian had designed motifs which from this time forth were to adorn the empennages of the 308 jets in BAís fleet. Bob Ayling, Chief Executive of BA at the time and the driving force behind this campaign, explained, "British Airway is proud of its British origins, but we have to throw overboard the old-fashioned part of our British identity and instead take on the modern characteristics of our country."

Unfortunately the bold and visually extremely inspired new look did not appeal at all to the typical, middle-aged male British business traveller who is British Airwaysí most prized customer. Finally in the spring of 2000 Bob Ayling was himself thrown overboard along with his ethnic concept after only half the fleet had been transformed. The new Chief Executive, Rod Eddington, is now having all the aircraft one by one repainted with the stylised national flag fluttering in the wind, as the tail assembly art gallery sadly bites the dust. Designer Piers Schmidt, who was involved in the project, explains, "It didnít work because the culture and product development within BA had not gone far enough to fulfil the expectations aroused along with the design. They changed the packaging but not the underlying concept."

On the other hand sometimes a new corporate image has produced quite tangible benefits for an airline. When Landor introduced the new white fuselage at Federal Express to replace the former mauve-coloured paintwork, the corporationís fuel costs fell significantly because the on-board air conditioning did not need to be used so much on the ground. Southwest Airlines introduced new leather seats across its fleet along with its new colours. These not only look better but the cleaning bill has shot down as a result.

Three questions for Peter Knapp

FLUG REVUE: Does it makes sense for an airline to rebrand after sustaining a spectacular accident, like ValuJet, China Airlines or Korean Air?

Knapp: There must really be compelling reasons for a change of colours. If customersí response following an accident is very negative and the airline is held responsible, then that could be a convincing reason. But if the airline continues to be popular and respected despite a crash because the accident was outside the airlineís control, then one should hold on to what one has. This was the case at British Midland in 1989 after a Boeing 737-400 had crashed. But in-depth market research is needed for this. There is no formula which says you have to rebrand after an accident. A brand makeover purely for the sake of it is pointless, it just costs money.

FLUG REVUE: What role does branding play in low-cost carriers? Couldnít Ryanair for instance be more colourful?

Knapp: Ryanairís success could well be because its somewhat conservative image differentiates it from the more energetic impressions conveyed by the competition. Ryanair comes over almost as a representative of the traditional, institutional airlines, so the customer is paying low prices to be part of the establishment. It is almost like flying BA or bmi but much more cheaply. It is very clever tactics to come over as a reliable, professional company with authenticity and yet offer low prices. Go has also positioned itself very cleverly as a kind of lifestyle brand, making it unique in the industry. There are not many brands as fashionable as Go which can use this as a differentiator. Quite different from the loud and vociferous approach of EasyJet.

FLUG REVUE: Letís talk about alliances now. Will there come a day when instead of individual airlines all we have is alliance umbrella brands?

Knapp: To believe that Oneworld or Star Airlines will exist in the future is a purely intellectual matter, not an emotional one. That is why the national characters of airlines are so important. People like to place their trust in their home carrier, they value the experience of being taken home by their fellow countrymen. If they have to fly for twelve hours then they want to do that in the company of people who understand them and their culture. People arenít interested in a universal global brand but in a company which seeks them out because they trust the country from which the airline comes. This is borne out by the BA experience: there is a natural affinity in gathering around oneís own flag, thatís human nature. If need be, NASA could become a global brand for travellers to space.

From FLUG REVUE 09/2001, page 20