DIA From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3273 posts, RR: 24 Posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 8665 times:
TAAG introduced the 777 to their fleet with a new c/s...but decidedly axed it, and went back to the old c/s before the a/c flew revenue service. Why? I actually liked the newer c/s...and thought that it brought the TAAG livery up-to-date. More importantly, why did TAAG nix the new c/s?
I think Air India went through the same story as TAAG...although I think their new livery only showed up on a 747 and an A310...if I recall. And now, they have a new-new one that has been accepted.
I can understand when some new liveries are just wrong (Braniff's "Reebok-shoe" c/s) and are quickly done-away-with. Yet, sometimes odd liveries (like DL's new re-widgeted-tail c/s) make it through to the entire fleet.
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6282 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 8517 times:
Well, TAAG went thru some management changes, and the new guys felt that the old guys were losign focus. The new livery isn't going to solve the problems at TAAG, and so mgmt did away with it to work on other things.
Do a forum search for more details there, what I've written is a fuzzy version of what I remember from reading the thread.
Delta.... well, don't even get me started. Four corporate images in ten years must just be okay with them.
Eric From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7708 times:
I think mainly it comes down to two aspects.
Change in management and financial cost.
If, say, a new management decides that the cost of introduction exceeds the predicted benefits from the new livery, such as cost of rebranding/introduction to make it known to the public, then the financial decision will ulitmately win. If there is no perceived benefit; why go through with it?
Cornish From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 8187 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 7585 times:
another notable one was the Aeroflot scheme used in the mid 90s on a couple of A310s. It got abandoned and aircraft stayed in the traditional scheme until another scheme arrived later with more blue used. That also didn't last before the latest silver and blue now used arrived.
SpenceSaab From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 59 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 7143 times:
LOL! I guess sometime airlines can be misled, what about when Royal mail became "Consignia"?! What a flop. I saw recently on the news in a bit about the (quite frankly pathectic and way too expensive) London 2012 logo, they mentioned other marketing flops. In there was the British Airways "World Tails" designs. I thought that they were (relatively) sucessful. Am I wrong in this?
Also, does anybody have a picture of the Braniff Reebok livery? I'd never even heard of it before.
Speaking of airline liveries, Binter Canarias have painted there leased 737 in a fantastic paint scheme. At first I heard it was only a temporary thing to promote the awards that they had won in recent years. I hope it stays though. Does anybody know if it will be a permanant livery?
Silence is Golden when you don't know a good answer
LH526 From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 2434 posts, RR: 13
Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 6652 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Nowadays, the oh-so-magic word branding barely emerges the basic level of the average CEO.
It's a quick stroll through Marketing, followed by a "let's be cool and get a new livery, ensuring for more customers". However this is NOT the way things work and it all is a big misinterpretation and underjudegement of the usual human mind. Branding goes EXTREMELY deep with Design making a merely 70% of the whole image, IF and only IF the design goes from top to bottom: Livery and logo is only a very small part, barely seen by the passenger. Way more important is interior cabin design, office architecture and the overall image / media picture. Passengers judge by what surrounds them inflight and on ground
The minute-split glimps they get on the fuselage upon boarding won't help much if seats are your 1990s worn out average and FAs appear in badly tailored suits.
It all has to be consistent .. look at Swiss for example ... EXCELLENT overall performance .... Suits, office, livery, logo, seats, even the inflight entertainment screen interface matches..... perfect!
Good other ones are Lufthansa, Swiss, Etihad, Emirates, ....
Bad fellas are Avianca or Aeroflot
Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...
NWADC9 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 4904 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6089 times:
Quoting Floridaflyboy (Reply 14): What about that one NW DC-9 that was painted in the gray colours years ago, but was never applied to any other aircraft in the fleet. I remember seeing it on here a few times.
That was just an experimental paint scheme.
Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that? -Capt. Picard