[Sigia-l] Google, the brand [was: Google IM...]

[Manu Sharma]

Dave:
"For me the biggest question regarding Google is if they can manage the
power of their brand. This is something that Netscape blew big time and
that AOL is trying to recapture, but also looks like it is going to
blow it too."

Stew Dean:
"It's also a huge risk. The process of effective user experience design
and large companies often just doesnt get along. You're right AOL have
blown it - it's taking a so so idea and trying to get a brand to work
with it."

Well said. A mediocre product will never make a great brand. One of the
many many geniuses of Google is that it demonstrates that if you create
a product that is remarkable by the order and magnitude of Google [1],
you don't need to spend millions on branding.

Google is perhaps the only company in the history of big brands that
never spent *anything* to market its search engine [2] believing
"they'd rather spend their money on developing the best product." [3]

Not so long ago graphic designers made fun of its logo [4]. I don't
think anyone would do that now. As Google redefines the corporate logo.

Manu.

[1] Related: 'Google and the Great Mousetrap Fallacy'
http://tinyurl.com/3zz8f [self link]

[2] One may have seen promotions of Google advertising solutions but
Google has never promoted the search engine. Though some may disagree
http://www.realseo.com/archives/000707.html


[3] "[Cindy] McCaffrey shaped Google's low-key marketing approach,
rejecting a high-profile campaign in the company's early years in favor
of word-of-mouth marketing, colleague Matt Marshall says. "Remember,
(then interim marketing V.P.) Scott Epstein brought in some
high-powered advertising experts and proposed a massive advertising
campaign in late 1999. McCaffrey, siding with Larry Page and Sergey
Brin, rejected that approach, saying they'd rather spend their money on
developing the best product, which would be the best way of generating
publicity. That was a significant step for two reasons. First, because
everyone else around them at the time was spending millions on ads.
Second, because other search engines (think Excite, et al) had
successfully pursued such ad strategies to get a leap ahead of the
competition."

The rest, as they say, is history."

<url:
http://www.siliconbeat.com/entries/2004/12/19/mccaffrey_leaving_google.html>

[4] 'Skimpy', 'amateurish-looking,' 'kitschy,' 'almost vernacular,'
'the-founder-did-it look,' was how the writer described the logo.
However, conceding the immense success of Google, he went on to add a
fair note of warning to fellow graphic designers:

"...on the brink of an IPO, Google presents a nightmare for brand
consultancies worldwide: If a company has a great product, backed by an
honest mission, millions of dollars spent on branding is – gasp – not
necessary."

Google, Googled, Googling, Googleth…
<url:
http://www.underconsideration.com/speakup/archives/001880.html#001880>