More from these Authors

• Case | HBS Case Collection | April 2019

  Kraft Heinz: The $8 Billion Brand Write-Down

  Jill Avery

  On Friday, February 22, 2019, following an unexpected and disappointing earnings report, The Kraft Heinz Company’s stock price fell 27%, wiping out $16 billion in market value. CEO Bernardo Hees had announced that the company had taken a $15.4 billion asset write-down, that the company would be cutting its annual dividend from $2.50 to $1.60 and that it was under SEC investigation for accounting irregularities related to its procurement process. $8.3 billion of the asset write-down was related to a loss in value of the firm’s intangible assets, specifically its Kraft and Oscar Mayer brands. As Kraft Heinz looked ahead to the future, it was time to recalibrate its brand management strategies. With $50 billion in brand assets remaining on its balance sheet, effectively managing its brands going forward was critical to avoiding another brand asset write-down and to regaining the $8 billion brand value the company had just lost. Was Kraft Heinz's brand asset write-down the beginning of the end of the market dominance of "Big Food" brands across the board or was it idiosyncratic and a result of the firm's brand management resources, capabilities, and strategies?

  Keywords: marketing; marketing strategy; brands and branding; brand management; private equity; Brand Value; Brand equity; Marketing communications; advertising; marketing ROI; brand storytelling; Consumer Products Industry; consumer behavior; Food and Beverage Industry; Intangible assets; Marketing; Marketing Strategy; Brands and Branding; Consumer Behavior; Food; Marketing Communications; Private Equity; Consumer Products Industry; Food and Beverage Industry; United States; North America;

  Citation:

  Avery, Jill. "Kraft Heinz: The $8 Billion Brand Write-Down." Harvard Business School Case 519-076, April 2019.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducators

  Related

• Article | Journal of the Association for Consumer Research | April 2019

  Rituals and Nuptials: The Emotional and Relational Consequences of Relationship Rituals

  Ximena Garcia-Rada, Ovul Sezer and Michael I. Norton

  Four studies reveal the benefits of relationship rituals: couples with relationship rituals report more positive emotions and greater relationship satisfaction and commitment than those without them. We show that rituals are crucial for understanding consumption practices in romantic relationships. Using a sample of romantic dyads, we identify a novel moderating role of mutual agreement, such that both members of a couple must agree that they have a ritual: different couples can see the same consumption behavior (e.g., paying for a weekly date night) as either a ritual or a routine, and the benefits accrue only to those couples who jointly view it as a symbolically meaningful ritual. We contribute to the literature on rituals by empirically documenting the relationships between rituals, specific emotions, and relationship satisfaction, and by demonstrating that the same sequence of actions can have different psychological effects due to the role of mutual agreement. Finally, we contribute to research on consumers’ shared experiences by suggesting a novel mechanism for committing to such experiences: relationship rituals.

  Keywords: rituals; Relationship Satisfaction; Relationships; Satisfaction; Spending; Behavior; Perception; Emotions;

  Citation:

  Garcia-Rada, Ximena, Ovul Sezer, and Michael I. Norton. "Rituals and Nuptials: The Emotional and Relational Consequences of Relationship Rituals." Journal of the Association for Consumer Research 4, no. 2 (April 2019): 185–197.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsFind at Harvard Read Now

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | December 2018 (Revised March 2019)

  Branding and Politics: Nike and Colin Kaepernick

  Jill Avery and Koen Pauwels

  Nike's selection of politically polarizing Colin Kaepernick as the spokesperson for the thirtieth anniversary of its iconic "Just Do It" campaign catapulted the brand into the media spotlight and made it a political flashpoint for consumers across America. Would the choice of Kaepernick positively or negatively affect Nike's business results or just generate a lot of social media chatter? As Nike's management team watched some people burn their sneakers in protest on YouTube and others applaud the company's behavior on Facebook, they wondered whether inserting Nike into the middle of a heated political debate was the right thing to do or the most reckless action Nike's brand stewards had ever taken, putting Nike's $30 billion brand asset at risk? After all, on social media, it was easy to say that one would boycott or buycott a brand due to one's political beliefs, but in the marketplace, other purchase criteria often reigned supreme.

  Keywords: social media; digital marketing; entertainment; politics; activism; Brand equity; Marketing; Marketing Strategy; Brands and Branding; Marketing Communications; Sports; Advertising; Apparel and Accessories Industry; Sports Industry; Consumer Products Industry; United States; North America;

  Citation:

  Avery, Jill, and Koen Pauwels. "Branding and Politics: Nike and Colin Kaepernick." Harvard Business School Case 519-046, December 2018. (Revised March 2019.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducators

  Related