Is Innocent about to loose its way?

There are a couple of early warning sighs on the Innocent brand that make me worry they are about to loose their way. I posted a couple of weeks ago on the problem of brands being "hot, then not". I do hope this is not the case with Innocent, as its one of my favourite brands, and I truly admire what they have built.

Warning sign number 1: the re-launch of their Innocent Juicy Water range as "This Water".
According to Marketing magazine, this is Innocent's attempt to enter "the functional soft-drinks market with a series of water products containing added vitamins and minerals". Mmmm. Innocent's success has been about selling "tasty little drinks" that were packed with natural goodies and, as the name suggests, nothing added. The tag-line is "Nothing but nothing but fruit". Doesn't a fortified range of drinks sounds un-innocent? And sort of scientific.

Also, This Water is a new brand, with weak Innocent endorsement ("From the people at Innocent"). It seem that this is because the brand owners feel the product doesn't fit Innocent's fruit-based equity, and so they want to distance it from the core. But then, why do it!? And while we're on the issue of naming/branding, isn't "This Water" a bit of crap name?

The only thing Innocent Juicy Water had going for it was the link to the Innocent brand...now this has been taken away, and they have to launch a whole new brand into the highly competitive water market. And now they have a brand portfolio to manage, and what relationship the This Water brand has with the core mother brand blah blah blah... I can just see the Powerpoint charts now. This is unwanted distraction from growing the core business.

Warning sign number 2: sales over £100 million.
The Innocent brand is now seriously big, with 2006 sales of £96million, up 140%. The chances are that Richard Reed and the other founding directors of the brand have got their hands more than full with managing this growth. We need a bigger office. We need a new IT system. We need to hire a team to do the German launch. And on the list of management tasks goes. The result is that they have to hire a new team of people to do the most important stuff: brand development and innovation.

Brand leaders stepping back is one thing. But the real risk for the brand is of course the sell-out. And with sales heading North of $200 million, you have to wonder if the sell-out of Innocent is months rather than years away. Pepsi has bought PJ Smoothies in the UK, and Coke snapped up the US version of Innocent, Odwalla a few years ago. Indeed, my money goes on Coke to be the one who swallows Innocent. If this does happen, then there is a real risk that a brand that was hot, will suddenly be not.

I do genuinely hope I'm wrong, as I love the Innocent brand both as a consumer and a branding bloke. What do you think?

Comments

[Chris]

I think you mean "lose"

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/loose

[Cotters Karoo]

I agree entirely - the brand is so strongly anchored to the "nothing taken out, nothing put in" ethos that it seems an odd strategy to literally dilute the brand by watering it down to extend ('scuse the pun) into other market segments,

[Rebecca]

Hi, another genuine innocent fan here too... but I had similar thoughts when I saw 'This Water' I dont understand why they have done this - shaking off their strong brand and moving away from their strong brand values?? Watering themselves down I wonder?

[David Taylor (brandgym)]

Dan, What an honour to have the creative genius behind the absolutely, totally brilliant innocent brand on the little old sausage blog. You and the rest of the team indeed have every reason to be chuffed to bits with what you have achieved.

My concerns were those of a genuine innocent fan...and yes, I'd love a chat over a cuppa to get your views, and then I'll write em up.

David

[dan at innocent]

Hello. My name is Dan. I write stuff at innocent. I don't think we're losing our way, and I'm really proud of the way that we've grown over the years. If you ever want to pop in for a cup of tea and fancy seeing for yourself how we're doing, I'd be more than happy to put the kettle on.

[David Taylor (brandgym)]

Couldn't have put it better myself sir.

"Stop relying so heavily on a brand voice which speaks to a small group of consumers" eh? Last time I looked, Innocent was a £100 million brand, helped in no small measure by that distinctive brand voice.

More Wolf Ollins-ese to add to the pink swastika debacle of London 2012...

[Fergus]

...and warning sign number 3, their tie up with McDonalds which seems like a very long way removed from their brand values. I read this from a Wolff Olins brand expert who clearly doesn't hold the same view...

"The McDonald's deal is a fantastic opportunity for a drinks company in the big league, but to make the most of it commercially, Innocent has to grow up.This should be a rite of passage for them but they must stop relying so heavily on a brand voice which speaks to a small group of consumers"

What utter bollocks!