Dien,

Great post w/ insightful comments. But,... aren't most of the Virgin [insertbizhere] "brand" extensions, rather than line extensions? Or, maybe "business empire" extensions? In other words, they are new businesses, sometimes with a product/service similar or related to another (e.g., airline, trains, balloon flights) and sometimes totally different (e.g., cola, energy, money). On the other hand, a true line extension would be, say, starting with liquid soap and adding bar soap, then shampoo, then facial cream, etc. That is, extending the product line.

Or, am I being too narrow in my definition?

Just an observation from another thirtysomething, blessed with a full head of hair but a slight gut from too much pizza & Dr. Pepper (among other things),

Chris

> Hi Mike,

> Your post commented on the topic of line
> extensions....

> Clearly, some line extensions work, and some
> don't.

> Al Ries and Jack Trout rail against the
> evils of line extension in their classic
> marketing book "Positioning". They
> say it dilutes the position you hold in
> people's minds, and dilutes what your brand
> stands for.

> On the other hand, Richard Branson's Virgin
> "empire" is an incredible case of
> taking brand line extension to the maximum -
> and it looks like there's no stopping it!

> Check out some of these "Virgin"
> businesses....

> Virgin Atlantic
> Virgin Holidays
> Virgin Blue
> Virgin Trains
> Virgin Balloon Flights
> Virgin Cola
> Virgin Mobile
> Virgin Publishing
> Virgin Active
> Virgin Megastores
> Virgin Energy
> Virgin Bride
> Virgin Cars
> Virgin Wines
> Virgin Direct
> Virgin Cosmetics
> VirginMoney.com
> Virgin One
> ...and there are plenty more.
> So - why do you think Richard Branson
> succeeded (for the most part) with line
> extensions, where many fail?

> In my opinion, there's no point extending
> the brand when you're not making a profit in
> the first place!

> In the lotion company you mentioned, they
> were not making a profit (or making very
> little). To me, that's a sign they either
> need to do something drastically different
> within their business, or get out of the
> business and do something else altogether.
> Especially if it's taking up a lot of their
> time. If they're not making much profit, and
> if it's not growing, then they can't afford
> to hire others to do the work - which should
> be their aim (in my opinion). That would
> free up their time to focus on growing their
> business further, or focus on building more
> businesses.

> Richard Branson, in contrast - while he was
> always extending - was generally making a
> profit. His first venture,
> "Student" magazine, I think more
> or less broke even. But his next business,
> which was a mail order records business,
> made money. Profits are the bottom line.

> I think what Richard Branson does which is
> different is that the "Virgin"
> brand does stand for something - and I think
> all the Virgin businesses try to fulfil the
> image.... The "Virgin" businesses
> tend to be about

> fun
> reliability
> good value for money So, in this case, I
> think Richard Branson extends his brand in a
> "correct" way - in that all his
> businesses are built around the image that
> his Virgin brand continues to build. He
> won't slap the "Virgin" name on
> just anything.

> Jumping to another topic.... On the theme of
> "specialization" - I think what's
> more important is "specializing"
> your product in the mind of the consumer.
> That's what something such as the
> "glacial silt soap" does.... It's
> a "specialist" product. There's a
> difference between being a
> "specialist" yourself, and having
> a product with a "specialist"
> image in the mind of the consumer.

> In contrast - as far as I can tell - nothing
> in their marketing distinguishes the natural
> lotions of the company you mentioned from
> the thousands of other natural lotions which
> are out there in the market place....

> When you ARE your product (such as in
> service businesses - being a lawyer, an
> accountant, a copywriter, etc.) - then
> "specializing" the product is
> often the same as also being a
> "specialist" yourself. However,
> when you are not the product, then you don't
> need to be a specialist yourself to have a
> specialist product.... "Glacial silt
> soap" will be a "specialist"
> product in the mind of the consumer, no
> matter who owns or runs the business. The
> specialization is within the product and
> marketing.

> Just a few ramblings from a fat balding man
> in his 30s.... :)

> - Dien