Reading Dorothy Mackenzie’s letter (MW June 17) regarding BA reversing its brand identity, I think she missed the point.
BA did not change its tail-fin identity because those who “dared to be innovative” were undermined. They decided to change it because their customers didn’t like it. I’m sure the design agency which sold BA the concept of ethnic tail-fins were full of the same flannel that Ms Mackenzie spouted – innovative image of Britain, global positioning, dynamic, outward looking, etc.
But at the end of the day, BA blew £60m, when £20,000 worth of research among its own customers would have told it “don’t fix what ain’t broke”.
Ms Mackenzie also suggested that there were plenty of other powerful symbols of Britishness other than the Union Jack – can she enlighten us to what they are, because I’m dying to know! A black cab? A London bus? A bulldog? Wouldn’t they all look great on the tail-fin of a 747.
By the way, I also noticed that on the day BA announced the U-turn, there was an ad in the Sunday Times for a senior marketing position within BA. Are these events somehow related?