UNSTUCK 028: How many categories should you stretch your brand to?

If you’re lucky enough to have a successful brand, the siren call of brand stretch, or the deliberate expansion of a brand beyond its original product category for growth, soon starts tempting the leadership team. The capitalist logic is clear: If it works here, why not there?

Done well, brand stretch can leverage existing brand equity to lower the cost of entry into new categories. Think Apple’s expansion from well-designed computers to well-designed watches, or Dyson’s leap from very expensive vacuum cleaners to very expensive hairdryers. In these cases, a coherent brand promise – design, innovation, performance – remains intact.

But stretch the brand too far beyond its source of authority and it can snap. Levi’s trying to enter the men’s suit market with its “Tailored Classics” range went against its rebellious DNA – can you imagine Steve McQueen in a tweed blazer instead of 501s? Or Cosmopolitan magazine, apparently inspired by the consumer insight that 65% of Britons use food during lovemaking, trying to launch its own range of yogurts linked to sex? No thanks. 

Know thyself and thy consumer

LVMH, the luxury brand powerhouse, is known for its range of perfumes and cosmetics among other things. The technology and production facilities they have to produce these can also make hand sanitiser, as we discovered during the COVID pandemic when they produced and distributed large quantities for French hospitals free of charge. But just because they can do it, doesn’t mean in a normal year a consumer wants to buy their hand sanitiser from the same brand they buy their luxury perfume from.

Just because you can produce something, doesn't mean you should either. Instead when faced with a decision to take your brand into a new category you should be brutally honest whether the opportunity is rooted in what you offer the consumer that they want to buy from you.

Business and brands should focus on building their equity and value within the category they occupy until they have established a meaningful presence.  Any expansion of product or ingredient lines should be within said category or one with a close adjacency. This is how successful brands build strong meaning and top-of-mind awareness with consumer. If you keep trying different things, the consumer or customer gets confused and is less likely to purchase.  

How far to stretch in sustainable food

In the nascent industry of sustainable foods, we already have examples of brands (B2C and B2B) trying to stretch. Growth is hard and something new often seems an easier way to get the next few million in than getting more from what you already have. However in doing so, the industry risks falling foul of thinking technology or ingredient potential first (what can we produce), rather than what the consumer values and will further establish the brand promise. 

Understanding the value of your core offer and where your consumer gives you permission to take it, is arguably at its most important in food where trust, taste and tradition run deep.

Oatly has built itself as a leader for the plant-based cause with the promise of creamy oat deliciousness with a rebellious edge. They’ve leveraged this to adjacent categories where consumers are already primed for a plant-based switch: yogurt, creamers, canned coffees. Even this disciplined approach didn’t come without drawbacks, as added operational complexity of different SKUs and supply chains resulted in patchy product availability around the world. However strong your brand, the balancing act of scaling your revenue and your operational abilities gets harder the wider your product offering.

Impossible’s move into ready-to-eat bowls also retains its core promise of a convincing meat alternative, potentially enhancing it because by having more control over the product experience rather than relying on the home cook. The combination of plant-based, global food and convenience hits macro trends that are easy for a younger or flexitarian consumer to understand. Whether the brand strength is sufficient to justify a premium in the crowded and cut-throat frozen food aisle remains to be seen.

However, Tindle’s acquisition and consolidation of plant-based ice cream brand Mwah! in 2023 and previously reported plans to expand from 'chicken made from plants' to oat milk is where you have to say - way too much, way too soon. Something they’ve seemingly realised for themselves as capital preservation has become all important, forcing the necessary focus on existing markets and categories. Here, Tindle has the opportunity to build its meaning beyond a generic chicken alternative, which it’s starting to do with plant-based meal experiences. Codifying that brand promise and staying true to it in everything they do will build strength and meaning that in time, could lead to successful brand stretch. We’re not betting on ice cream though. 

Time cures all ills

On the other hand, there is the case of Yeo Valley’s step beyond the dairy aisle into beef patties that we were asked about recently. Dairy and meat are two huge category opportunities – so can one brand do both? Yeo Valley has spent the last 30 years building its equity as an organic brand owned by a farming family. Initially launched with a yogurt (now the best-selling organic yogurt in the UK) they’ve expanded into other dairy categories while building a consistent message of delicious natural goodness through organic farming. In this context, assuming they have the resources to manage a new supply chain and retail buyers, the stretch into organic, regeneratively farmed meat builds on that core equity in a way that could build their business, their meaning with consumers and their mission.

But there’s a big gap between a 30-year-old brand and players in the sustainable food category that is itself at best 5 years old. If you're in charge of an emerging challenger brand the answer to the question of how many categories you should stretch it to, is probably zero.