You Can't Rebrand Your Way Out of Irrelevance

Jaguar's recent rebrand and the backlash it received is a classic case of confused performative "wokeness". The uproar over the minimalist logo, the abstract 'Copy Nothing' campaign, the absence of actual cars in the ads – that's the backlash, yes. But it's not the rebrand that was the problem, not fundamentally. The problem was that Jaguar was already irrelevant.

You can't rebrand your way out of irrelevance. You can't just slap a new coat of paint on a house whose foundation is crumbling and expect people to move in. Jaguar had been on a "steady road to nowhere" for a while. Their challenge wasn't just to go electric; it was to re-establish what Jaguar means in 2025 and beyond. This should have been the brief!

When I see them rolling out 'androgynous models' and 'abstract visuals' with slogans like 'Live Vivid' and 'Delete Ordinary' and tossing aside the iconic leaping cat and any image of their actual vehicles, it screams, thirsty, a brand that's shedding its very identity and all its hard-won historical equity. It's precisely what I've been talking about when I say "you can't outprice your identity." They seemingly tried to shed their heritage in a desperate attempt to be "modern" or "in culture" – as some critics put it – for an audience they clearly didn't understand.

The feedback revealed a deep disconnect. It tells you they alienated their existing, albeit dwindling, loyal customer base without truly connecting with a new one. Why? Because the core brand identity – what makes a Jaguar a Jaguar beyond just being a car – wasn't redefined.

This isn't a failure of design in isolation; it's a failure of cultural intelligence, knowing their audience, what makes them their audience and why you want to be in a Jaguar. Tap into that! Who was the rebrand for? Was it developed by teams that genuinely reflect the diverse, aspirational New Majority they claim to target? Or was it an internal committee, that does not look like today’s consumer, trying to guess what "modern" is, leading to a generic aesthetic that ironically made them less distinct in a crowded EV market?

A rebrand should be an evolution, a strategic articulation of a renewed purpose, rooted in deep understanding and heritage. Jaguar's move felt like a "complete reinvention" that destroyed more equity than it built because they fundamentally missed the mark on relevance. They didn't understand what their brand's "soul" needed to be for today's consumer, and no amount of abstract art or new typography can fix that. It's a stark reminder that true relevance is earned through authentic connection, not through a superficial makeover when the core identity is already fading.