Editing Rebranding (section)

====Elimination of a negative image====
Organisations may rebrand intentionally to shed negative images of the past. Research suggests that "concern over external perceptions of the organisation and its activities" can function as a major driver in rebranding exercises.<ref>
{{cite book
| last1                 = Lomax
| first1                = Wendy
| last2                 = Mador
| first2                = Martha
| last3                 = Fitzhenry
| first3                = Angelo
| title                 = Corporate rebranding: learning from experience
| url                   = http://eprints.kingston.ac.uk/6396/
| series                = Kingston Business School Occasional Paper No. 48
| location              = Kingston upon Thames, U.K.
| publisher             = Kingston Business School, Kingston University
| date      = 2002
| page                  = 3
| isbn                  = 1872058280
| access-date            = 2017-01-05
| quote                 = Most companies had re-branded in response to external factors. Two over-arching drivers emerged: corporate structural change, and concern over external perceptions of the organisation and its activities.
}}
</ref>

In a corporate context, managers can utilize rebranding as an effective marketing strategy to hide malpractices and avoid or shed negative connotations and decreased profitability. Corporations such as [[Philip Morris USA]], [[Academi|Blackwater]] and [[AIG]] rebranded in order to shed negative images. Philip Morris USA rebranded its name and logo to [[Altria]] on January 27, 2003 due to the negative connotations associated with tobacco products that could have had potential to affect the profitability of other Philip Morris brands such as [[Kraft Foods]].<ref name="autogenerated1">{{cite web |last=Brennan |first=Tom |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2008/09/16/aig-too-big-to-fail.html |title=AIG: Too Big to Fail |work=Mad Money |publisher=CNBC |date=2008-09-16 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121012135739/https://www.cnbc.com/id/26740538/AIG_Too_Big_to_Fail |archive-date=2012-10-12}}</ref>

In 2008, AIG's image became damaged due to its need for a Federal bailout during the [[Financial crisis of 2007–2008|financial crisis]]. [[AIG]] was bailed out because the [[United States Treasury]] stated that AIG was [[too big to fail]] due to its size and complex relationships with financial counterparties.<ref name="autogenerated1"/> AIG itself is a huge international firm; however, the [[AIG Retirement]] and AIG Financial subsidiaries were left with negative connotations due to the bailout. As a result, AIG Financial Advisors and AIG Retirement respectively rebranded into Sagepoint Financial and [[VALIC]] (Variable Annuity Life Insurance Company) to shed the negative image associated with AIG.<ref>{{cite web |last=Gusman |first=Phil |url=http://www.property-casualty.com/News/2009/1/Pages/AIGFA-To-Rebrand-Itself-As-SagePoint-Financial.aspx |title=AIGFA To Rebrand Itself As SagePoint Financial |date=2009-01-12 |publisher=PropertyCasualty360.com |access-date=2010-12-03 |archive-date=2020-04-06 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200406100721/http://www.property-casualty.com/News/2009/1/Pages/AIGFA-To-Rebrand-Itself-As-SagePoint-Financial.aspx |url-status=dead }}</ref>