Bold Move or Costly Mistake?

Welcome to Creator Columns, where we bring expert HubSpot Creator voices to the Blogs that inspire and help you grow better.

Jaguar’s recent rebrand has people talking, but not in the way most marketers hope for.

Gone are the classic cues of British elegance. In their place is minimalism and “modernist exuberance.” Their rebrand campaigns involve cryptic videos, high-fashion models, and a new mantra: “Copy nothing. Delete ordinary.”

Reactions have been mixed. Marketing legend Mark Ritson called it “f—ing lunacy,” while Rory Sutherland is reserving judgment, saying, “It’s too early to call.”

So, what’s Jaguar playing at?

What has Jaguar done?

The historic British car manufacturer has gone for a new look. The leaping cat has been removed from the logo. In its place is a minimalist wordmark that now reads “JaGUar.” Yes… with that random capitalization.

Jaguar launched this rebrand by wiping their social media profiles clean and replacing their branding with car-free visuals. This prompted Elon Musk to ask, “Do you sell cars?”.

But the change is part of a broader strategy. Jaguar’s sales have been falling, and there’s a real fear that the brand can’t rely on its existing customer base.

To cope, Jaguar is repositioning as a £100k+ luxury EV brand to rival Porsche and Bentley. Rather than targeting an older generation who adore its British roots, Jaguar plans to target “cash-rich, time-poor” millennials and Gen Z.

But will it work?

The Tropicana Effect

Most marketers can recount a long list of failed rebrands. Usually, the top of that list is Tropicana in 2009. They ditched their iconic orange-with-a-straw logo for a sleek redesign.

The result was abysmal. Sales dropped 20% in two months. The company lost £30 million before scrambling back to the original design.

Jaguar’s gamble feels eerily similar: ditching the familiar in favor of “modern.” But here’s the thing: cars aren’t juice.

Buying Tropicana is a quick, emotional, and intuitive decision (what Daniel Kahneman would call “system 1”). Car buying is deliberate, logical, and tied to identity (“system 2”).

So, you could argue that severing Jaguar from its roots is unproblematic. After all, buyers will rationally assess Jaguar’s car based on its quality, not its historical marketing.

But we’re missing an important part of the puzzle: mental availability.

Jaguar’s Mental Availability Problem

Byron Sharp, author of How Brands Grow, highlights the power of memory structures. Jaguar’s heritage—Le Mans wins, the E-Type, and the “Jaaaag” factor—are its mental assets.

Sharp argues that one of the sole aims of advertising is to refresh mental availability. Doing so keeps the awareness high and boosts purchases.

Huge brands like McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Apple, and Audi incorporate distinctive brand elements into every one of their ads. This repeat exposure builds mental availability in the customer’s mind.

In his book, Sharp notes how ads that successfully link to existing brand assets are 60% more effective at driving sales than generic ads with weak brand associations.

In other words, Coca-Cola sells more by creating familiar, albeit perhaps dull, ads of young friends drinking Coke on a hot day than they would by creating an ad that’s distinctive yet unfamiliar.

Jaguar ditching all their recognized assets for abstract visuals risks losing everything that makes the brand memorable.

Lessons from Australian Wine

Bryon Sharp shares an example of Queen Adelaide, a well-known wine brand in Australia that had lost market relevance and shelf space.

Seppelt, the company behind Queen Adelaide, saw an opportunity to relaunch the brand rather than create a new one. Unlike Jaguar, Queen Adelaide focused on maintaining familiarity. They retained the recognizable name and design elements to trigger existing memory structures in consumers’ minds.

Within a short period, Queen Adelaide became the largest-selling chardonnay in Australia. Sales surged due to the brand’s ability to reconnect with its established mental availability.

The example underscores that doubling down on mental availability can drive sales for a struggling brand.

The Sensible Option for Jaguar

The safe and sensible option for the iconic brand would have been to marry the old and the new.

Take the assets that Jaguar fans are familiar with and build on them to highlight their new electronic era.

They could have reinvented the logo but kept clearer nods to Jaguar’s heritage. Mental availability thrives on familiarity, and Jaguar’s rebrand leaves them as weak as a new brand entering an extremely competitive market.

By adding to the strong brand, Jaguar could have retained the strong associations millions around the world had with the brand rather than severing them.

But that’s the safe option. While it’s undoubtedly less risky and far less likely to lead to a catastrophic drop in sales, it also has less potential for upside.

The Big Question

Is Jaguar’s rebrand a clever move to secure its place in the EV market, or will it end up as another Tropicana-like disaster?

Mark Ritson argues they should’ve modernized with their heritage, not erased it. Rory Sutherland? He’s keeping an open mind.

What’s certain is this: Jaguar has risked billions in mental availability. If they can’t build new associations fast enough, this bold bet might cost more than they can afford.

This blog is part of Phill Agnew’s Marketing Cheat Sheet series where he reveals the scientifically proven tips to help you improve your marketing. To learn more, listen to his podcast Nudge, a proud member of the Hubspot Podcast Network.