Brand confusion at Covent Garden !

In the past there were three main brands taking place here:

Fairly clear you might think. There was the “Royal Opera”. There was the “Royal Ballet”. And there was the venue itself – the “Royal Opera House”. In the unlikely event that you’re struggling to get it one is an Opera company, the next is a Ballet company and the third is where most of their productions take place. So why have they recently created this, a fourth brand, and what does it mean?

The answer, I fear, is that it means nothing. And a brand that means nothing, and that you can’t relate to is, frankly, a waste of time. Of course we know that there is some overlap between the Opera company and the Ballet company – they share an orchestra, for example and they perform in the same venue. But the Ballet offer and the Opera offer are entirely separate. We buy one, or the other, or both if there is a production or productions we want to see. But we don’t buy “Royal Ballet & Opera”.

The new brand is actually a corporate descriptor rather than a proposition for prospective customers to relate to. Yes there is a measure of integration – the ticket office sells both ballet and opera tickets for example. But that is just efficient admin. We go to the “Royal Opera House (brand!) to see the Royal Ballet (brand!) or the Royal Opera (brand!). We don’t go to see “Royal Ballet & Opera”. You can’t buy it actually.

The Royal Opera House has a distinctive brand offer as an extension of its identity as a performance venue. You can eat and drink and shop there without needing to attend a performance. That’s part of the Royal Opera House’s brand proposition.

The explanation given for the change you can read here . In my view as a Brand practitioner it makes little sense. As I say they have complicated unnecessarily the three strong brands that have served them well for decades. They should think again.