What about David Jones and Myer? Their images and branding are almost identical. Coles and Woolies don't differentiate much either.

Executive managements outrageous salaries and bonuses don't differentiate much either. And let's face it, isn't that what really counts ??

One word, FAMILIARITY. Familiarity is comforting, there are many customers who will purchase a particular product from a particular company simply because it is familiar to them; Because they know what to expect, even if they don't like the company. If you can supply a product that is similar to your competition then you effectively piggy back off their branding. Then the small differences become the main selling point. Straight away you have the attention of the budget concious and accounting departments, as well as anyone who is unhappy with your rival. If you can claim to be a better corporate citizen than an Australian icon, then you've sealed the deal. Either that or the icon buys you out.

It's the same in the corporate advertising nature of politics. In 2007 Labor won an election by being very much like the Government on virtually every policy, but with one simple difference, no work choices.

When McDonalds spent a zillion advertising the new 'Mighty Angus' burgers, sales went through the roof and Hungry Jack's were suffering. So what did they come up with? The 'Angry Angus' :rolleyes:.

Switch on your TV in the morning and channel 7's 'Sunrise' program follows the exact same format as Channel 9's morning program.

As someone with significant real world (not armchair) experience in marketing and branding, psycho joe is correct for the most part. Brand development and management is all about initial display of similarities in comparison with successful opponents, with one or two adjustments to create points of differentiation (unique selling points). If a rebrand takes place that's too different from what's existing in the market, the result will be loss of market share as consumers feel less assured and confident about the product quality that they're to receive. The points of differentiation are what is pushed through marketing communications, but it's the similarities that make up the vast basis of a brand in order to display solidarity, reliability and familiarity.

What Virgin Australia will have on its side is that it's a brand extension, not an entirely new brand, and so the level of brand awareness and recall in the audience is already in existence, which in theory should allow for greater differentiation from the competition. However, the fact remains that given the current monopoly on full service airlines domestically by QF, the only way to successfully compete will be to subtly but widely push similarities while driving home the USPs as focal points within communications.

FINALLY! We see something...:D


http://tapa.tk/mu/3ce221bb-323b-71b4.jpg

http://tapa.tk/mu/3ce221bb-3250-50d0.jpg

http://tapa.tk/mu/3ce221bb-3261-1c3b.jpg

And how did we get these photos??...dodgy! Looks good tho.

This aircraft is actually already flying revenue services, was thinking they would mabye keep this under wraps. Found this on airliners.net

http://yssyforum.net/board/attachmen...6&d=1302949065

Fair enough.

Are you sure you found them on airliners.net?

I' didn't think they accepted dodgy mobile phone photos :rolleyes:

Good god! They've managed to put a 737 overhead panel in an A330 cockpit...YOU BAAASTARDS!!!

They are from airliners.net, but not the photo section. They are in the forum section.

FlightGlobal found this image to be trademarked (black and white as that is all that is shown on the trademarks page):


http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/wi...181-123467.jpg

Photo: Virgin Australia logo revealed - Wings Down Under

The question is - is it the real one, or a decoy? JB is not an unintelligent man...

VH-YFC an 800 is at CHC about to be painted in the new colour scheme :cool:

Think you will find it is the virgin part which forms that trademark and the Australia part is tagged on as a development to the trademark I.e still to be developed!!

Trade mark site shows the trade mark is for the Virgin tailplane image and the word "Australia".

Looks completely original, except for this:
http://www.spafax.com/images/case-st...in-america.jpg

Hope they didn't pay anyone for the logo design....

Looks like a pre-schooler could have done it...

Keep it in black and white I say. Looks good!

Winglets

exactly what I was saying - only the word and not a final image or colour scheme to match just yet... Jb needs something to unveil afterall can't give it all away.

Tail has been trade marked with the word.

IP Australia only makes black and white copies of logos available.