ImplementingaRe-BrandingDecision-浙江大学方建勇.pdfVIP

Implementing a Re-Branding Decision: The Federated Department Stores Case - Part B “The big idea was the marketing of the Macy’s name nationally, so that we could do a much better job of driving sales and getting a much clearer message to the customer.” —Susan Kronick, Federated vice chair On September 13, 2004, CEO Terry Lundgren announced Federated Department Stores’ decision to re-brand all of its co-branded stores to the Macy’s nameplate on March 6, 2005: The evolution of the Macy’s brand is a significant development for our company and its competitive positioning in the retail sector. By focusing all of our efforts on Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s, two of the world’s best known and most formidable retail nameplates, we will be able to maximize the incredible potential inherent in both of these brands through distinctive, consistent and far-reaching marketing initiatives.1 THE DECISION Terry Lundgren said that the decision to convert Federated’s regional co-branded stores to Macy’s stores was driven by the success of the company’s recent co-branding initiative: “It was Rich’s- Macy’s for several months before we had the courage to go all the way, but the test was effective and our business improved gradually in most of the markets. So, that’s what gave us the courage” to pursue the re-branding. Perhaps the biggest consideration was the belief that the Macy’s brand had nationwide expansion possibilities that the regional brands didn’t. “Rich’s in Atlanta is one of the best regional brands there is, . . . but you can’t take that to New York or . . . to San Francisco,” Terry Lundgren explained. Expanded gift options were one advantage of re-branding for customers. National gift giving, gift exchange, and gift returns would now be possible,