Poll: New Brand Creation
Posted: Thu Jun 20, 2019 9:29 pm
I have been having issues where I attempt to buy a large conglomerate and then break it down into more manageable pieces. Usually I will have a ParentCo that is the holding company for all of my operating subsidiaries. The ParentCo will have some operating businesses of its own. Then I will have specialized subsidiary companies focused on say automotive, apparel and leather goods, or food, beverage, and snacks.
When I complete an acquisition of say, Big Conglomerate Corp, I can transfer some of its firms and technologies to my more focused subsidiaries. The problem is the brands stay with the Parent Company even if the old company was using a range brand strategy. That means I basically have to start from scratch with building their market share back up in those businesses. I think brands need to be reworked such that a brand is more like something you own. I would get rid of the corporate, ranged and unique brand options. Instead, brands could cover anywhere from zero to all products depending on which you choose to incorporate into the brand.
Basically, each company would have a brand portfolio. It can only have one brand per city covering a given product. It can remove a product from a brand, but that will remove the brand rating from the product. A product can be added to a brand and inherit a portion of its brand rating depending on how similar it is to the other products in the brand and its quality. Brand rating would still be determined in broadly the same way and change according to product quality, advertising, product compatibility etc. Companies could buy brand portfolios from each other similar to how technologies are traded. The price of doing so should be quite high; I think the price of technologies should be increased as well.
Buying another company you could choose which of its brands to keep upon acquisition and (remove products from existing brands when their are conflicts).
Separately, brands could have an intercity element. In real life, there are certain global brands like Coca Cola and Starbucks that enjoy amplified effect due to their global presence. I will think more about how an element of customer captivity could be modeled in. If you look at writings and speeches by legendary investor Tom Russo, you will see that customer captivity for consumer brands is one of the couple most potent competitive advantages companies can possess. I think that can be incorporated more deeply in the game in a way that creates fun challenges and does not harm balance or create excessive micromanagement.
When I complete an acquisition of say, Big Conglomerate Corp, I can transfer some of its firms and technologies to my more focused subsidiaries. The problem is the brands stay with the Parent Company even if the old company was using a range brand strategy. That means I basically have to start from scratch with building their market share back up in those businesses. I think brands need to be reworked such that a brand is more like something you own. I would get rid of the corporate, ranged and unique brand options. Instead, brands could cover anywhere from zero to all products depending on which you choose to incorporate into the brand.
Basically, each company would have a brand portfolio. It can only have one brand per city covering a given product. It can remove a product from a brand, but that will remove the brand rating from the product. A product can be added to a brand and inherit a portion of its brand rating depending on how similar it is to the other products in the brand and its quality. Brand rating would still be determined in broadly the same way and change according to product quality, advertising, product compatibility etc. Companies could buy brand portfolios from each other similar to how technologies are traded. The price of doing so should be quite high; I think the price of technologies should be increased as well.
Buying another company you could choose which of its brands to keep upon acquisition and (remove products from existing brands when their are conflicts).
Separately, brands could have an intercity element. In real life, there are certain global brands like Coca Cola and Starbucks that enjoy amplified effect due to their global presence. I will think more about how an element of customer captivity could be modeled in. If you look at writings and speeches by legendary investor Tom Russo, you will see that customer captivity for consumer brands is one of the couple most potent competitive advantages companies can possess. I think that can be incorporated more deeply in the game in a way that creates fun challenges and does not harm balance or create excessive micromanagement.
