The jury is out on Spicejet’s new owner Kalanithi Maran’s proposal to change the name of India’s second largest low-cost carrier at a later date. While some think the move doesn’t make sense, others like Ogilvy & Mather South Asia Chairman Piyush Pandey says it would not make much of a difference provided the process is handled well.
Anand Halve, brand consultant, chlorophyll, says changing the name of Spicejet is not a good idea. “The brand has just begun to establish itself. Renaming the airline would entail building awareness about the company from scratch which would be a painful as well as an expensive proposition,” he says.
Santosh Desai, CEO, Future Brands agrees. Desai says he sees no overpowering reason that requires changing the name of the brand. “For a company like Spicejet, it is not only infrastructure that you buy into, you also acquire equity related to the brand. The name is not tainted that you have to change it to cut losses. Changing the name of the brand would be a decision which should be taken after careful consideration,” he adds.
Some others, however, have a different take as the Indian aviation industry has seen such changes earlier as well. Examples: Kingfisher changed the name of Air Deccan to Kingfisher Red and Jet phased out the Sahara Airlines name in favour of JetLite.
O&M’s Pandey says name changes, if done properly, can be effective. For example, there have been four-five name changes for what is known as Vodafone today. From Essar to Orange to Hutch, the company is now called Vodafone. “Maran must be having a good reason if he is thinking of doing so. However, the name change has to be done in a systematic manner retaining the value associated with the brand people love,” Pandey adds.
Halve counters this by saying that Kingfisher is a strong brand in itself. When the airline acquired Deccan it brought the low-cost carrier into its fold because it does not make sense to maintain two brands in the same industry. But Sun Network, which Maran owns, is established in the media and entertainment segment, and aviation is a different ballgame altogether.
“With the acquisition, Maran has not bought for himself a fleet of aircraft, he has purchased a name which has some value attached with it. Instead of building a new brand, it would be wiser to invest time and energy in taking the existing brand forward,” Halve says. He has a point. The five-year old airline returned to profit in the last financial year. It is the second largest low-cost carrier after IndiGo with 13.2 per cent market share.
The Spicejet management has obviously done a lot on branding. For example, Spicejet executives say the challenge for airlines is to start differentiating on factors other than price and that’s where branding comes in. Some consumers may like the colour of a plane, others may have heard about the service of another airline, some may have heard of an airline reputed to be serving food while others may associate an airline with hassle-free flight. SpiceJet, they say, stands for a warm, friendly, approachable, and efficient airline.
To achieve this, SpiceJet sifted through the feedback it collects in every flight, and other consumer surveys. For instance, a feedback revealed that people preferred to have a hot beverage on board. SpiceJet built the equipment needed, and offered hot beverages.
It has also converted the feedback into many initiatives: for instance, unlike some airlines, it doesn’t charge extra to supervise unaccompanied minors; doesn’t charge for web check-in or preferred seats (next to emergency exits), doesn’t charge extra for sports kits, and offers less on return fares.
Experts are however unanimous on one aspect: the best thing about the change in ownership is the entry of a financially strong investor. “The very fact that the ownership of the brand is not fragmented at present would help the airline to expand aggressively in the coming years,” says Madison Communications CMD Sam Balsara.