Inc. Magazine
Rebranding HBO Max as Max aimed to broaden its reach but caused confusion and weakened its premium image. Warner Bros. Discovery is now reversing course to regain trust and clarity. The move highlights how authentic strategy and customer connection often matter more than bold changes, especially when past branding missteps offer clear lessons.
Author: Nuala Walsh
Corporate rebrands are notoriously fraught. Few companies dare to reverse their public course, but Warner Bros. Discovery did exactly that. After consigning its streaming service HBO Max to the dustbin in favor of the shorter Max it will relaunch itself as HBO Max.
As a former investments CMO who has led many global rebrands, I understand brand legacy. I also know that such decisions aren’t made lightly—and they aren’t always made wisely either.
In 2023, Warner Bros. Discovery dropped HBO from the name to unite premium dramas and reality TV under a Max umbrella. The goal: to broaden appeal. The result: brand confusion, diluted prestige, and a 15-percent decline in share price this year.
Today’s goal is to distinguish HBO Max’s premium content from streaming rival Netflix. It’s also to undo what many call a huge error. But supercharging your brand Taylor Swift-style isn’t easy!
What led to the HBO Max rebrand?
The idea is that HBO Max will capitalize on HBO’s reputation for high-caliber programming. Warner Bros. Discovery referenced changing consumer needs, hoping this reversal would position them as responsive to feedback. CEO David Zaslav stated, “We should go back to including HBO in the brand, because nothing stands for distinction and quality more than HBO.”
If so, why strip HBO in the first place?
During M&A, brand decisions are rarely front-of-mind, unlike earnings. They’re made late or for political purposes. Having lived through several mergers, I can report they rarely work out. Think of the $36 billion Daimler-Chrysler “merger of equals” or the $165 billion AOL and Time Warner “deal of the century” that collapsed under cultural clashes and the dot-com bust.
As I argue in Tune In: How to Make Smarter Decisions in a Noisy World, multiple judgment traps contaminate high-stakes situations. In M&A, it’s a blend of vanity, panic, and desperation infused by groupthink, egotism, and probability neglect. Leaders translate blind spots and deaf spots into strategic miscalculations—and brands suffer.
Are brand reversals a good idea?
While packaging, imagery, and logos change, rebrand reversals are less common. Leading the rollback hall of fame is New Coke, which after just three months reverted to Coca-Cola Classic after violent consumer backlash in 1985. Sales immediately spiked 6 percent.
When my former investment house, Standard Life Aberdeen, rebranded to Abrdn (pronounced Aberdeen), mockers openly ridiculed its “disemvowellment.” A new CEO quickly reintroduced Aberdeen Investments.
This approach echoes WeightWatchers, which shrunk to WW before reverting to WeightWatchers.
Do rebrand rebrands rescue or risk reputation? Do consumers judge them as courage or flaw?
Of course, recognition is king. A familiar brand leverages established equity, trust, and positive associations. It taps into emotional resonance.
Typically, rivals exploit any misstep, elevating themselves as more stable or forward-thinking. Yet Netflix’s CEO thinks Warner Bros. Discovery’s move makes sense. Still, not all rate rebrand-rebrands positively.
Was the 2023 Max rebrand a mistake? Admissions of error are rare. Warner Bros. Discovery cited the momentum of 22 million new subscribers. Defensively, they self-promoted their “willingness to keep boldly iterating its strategy and approach.”
While some applaud the U-turn, others may question cost. Cynics point to backtracking as strategic confusion or lack of conviction. It may undermine investor confidence in long-term strategy. Cleverly, HBO Max launched memes on its own backpedaling.
4 lessons leaders can learn
A well-executed reversal can reignite trust if it’s rooted in authentic change with a compelling rationale. Too often, self-interest is disguised as customer-centricity.
Leaders must consider the following:
- Avoid spin. Explain why the first change seemed right, why it wasn’t, and how the rollback restores what customers value. As Saatchi and Saatchi’s chief strategy officer declares, “Good rebrands are a symbol of change, not a change of symbol.”
- Anchor to authenticity. A reversal must signal genuine recommitment to values. Token changes breed cynicism. RadioShack tried to modernize as “The Shack,” but low recognition and falling sales led to the name’s reversal. Today, British media slams luxury carmaker Jaguar for discarding its brand essence, while Modella Capital simply dropped the high street WH Smith name from 450 stores.
- Test and retest. Run small-scale pilots and trials. Otherwise, rebrands risk becoming expensive symbolic gestures rather than catalysts for growth. Remember when the U.K. postal service rebranded to Consignia? After widespread confusion and criticism, it reverted to Royal Mail within a year.
- Tune into doubt. HBO executives admitted their concern about the initial name change. “We’ve been iterating on this, both from a content and strategy standpoint, for the last two years, ever since we launched,” one said. Of course, it was HBO Go, and then HBO Now, before HBO Max. Don’t let office politics trump data. It’s a judgment killer that destroys brands.
Rebrands, un-rebrands, and re-rebrands are high-stakes gambles. True winners pair narrative shifts with strategic intent and customer focus. Only then does a rebrand become more than a mega-marketing spectacle—it becomes a blueprint for brand credibility that rescues rather than risks value.
Credits: TCA, LLC.