by Zain Jaffer
Author’s note: I hold no financial interests in any of the companies mentioned here. In 2019, my previous mobile advertising tech company was acquired by a private equity firm.
****
Unless you were hiding under a rock in early December 2024, you had probably seen the Jaguar car ad or heard about the criticism surrounding it. If you scroll down the Youtube comments, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who said something good about it.
Let me start by saying that I have nothing against these types of ads. These have been effective for perfume, cosmetics, clothing, and other consumer items. Companies like Benetton have employed these types of ads to great success.
What I have an issue with is the fact that the ad was intentionally used to break the old loyal following, namely successful men who want to show that they drive Jaguars, and not Toyotas. There is nothing more disturbing at breakfast than to realize that your symbol of old world success and wealth has become something else entirely.
Understandably conservative publications and individuals are up in arms against the rebrand. Jaguar’s rationale appears to be a realization that their traditional client base of successful wealthy men, is not as big as they want. Understandably they want to swim in a larger pool, not a small one. Publications such as Autoweek have pointed this out.
It does not even matter at this point that the ad did not show the actual cars they intended to launch and was instead sort of like a mood board to describe the changes that management (and presumably the Board) want to steer the company to. Recently though Jaguar has shown their concept cars, and with the pink color motif, again obviously not intended to appeal to their traditional client base.
With a conservative backlash against liberal ideas sweeping many parts of the world in the ballot box, including the United States, companies like Volvo have taken a different drive. Their new ad, which has drawn raves from many sectors, is about how a young expectant mother is saved from death by Volvo’s ever reliable safety brakes. This is one example where the national mood reflects the ad.
Personally one can inject these social issues mildly in ads in an incremental manner. Sure I get the value that sometimes you need a revolution and not an evolution, but does that mean destroying your old loyal customer base who built your brand for decades?
Companies too excited to rebrand never seem to learn the lessons of Old Coke versus New Coke, or more recently how Bud Light destroyed and alienated its traditional male drinker base with their Dylan Mulvaney endorsement ad. Now they are trying to get back to their old Number One perch with male oriented ads, but it does not seem to work yet. At least not for a while, because memories can be short and people do forgive mistakes.
At the end of the day, company management and its Board will realize they have to appeal to new target groups, and they will use all types of marketing and advertising to do that. But are they really trying to sell a product or foment a social revolution? Those aims do not necessarily support each other.
The real question all companies and brands need to ask themselves is this. Is it really worth destroying decades of legacy and customer loyalty to appeal to other sectors, if one can simply set up a new brand to target that new audience? Are companies taking DEI too far and asking their traditional customers to accept that they are no longer wanted?
###