Most rebrands don’t start with a clear strategy and this is why rebrands fail.

They start with a feeling founders don’t want to sit with…

A founder wakes up one day and something feels off. Engagement is down. Sales feel heavier. The brand that once felt exciting now feels… stale. And instead of slowing down to figure out why, the instinct is to change what’s visible. New logo. New colors. New fonts. A new “era.”

That’s why rebrands fail.

Because when a rebrand is used to avoid deeper strategic work, it doesn’t solve the problem, it just hides it for a while. And eventually, the same issues resurface, usually louder than before.

What Identity Drift Actually Is

Identity drift happens when a brand’s behavior no longer matches what it claims to stand for.  Every failed rebrand I’ve ever audited had the same pattern: the visuals changed, but the decisions underneath stayed exactly the same.

It’s not a design issue. It shows up in how a business sells, how it prices, how it communicates, and how consistently it shows up. Over time, decisions get reactive. Positioning gets fuzzy. Leadership hesitates. And the brand starts sending mixed signals; internally and externally.

When that happens, founders often mistake the symptom for the cause. They assume the brand looks outdated, when in reality the strategy underneath hasn’t evolved or been clarified.

A logo can’t fix that.

Why Visual Refreshes Feel Like Progress (But Aren’t)

A visual refresh feels safer than making strategic decisions because it doesn’t require saying no, changing offers, or stepping fully into authority.

Visual changes feel productive because they’re tangible. You can point to them. Announce them. Post about them. They create the illusion of movement.  

But movement isn’t the same as progress.

Without clear positioning, defined offers, and aligned leadership, a visual refresh becomes false momentum. The brand looks different, but nothing operates differently. Same confusion. Same hesitation. Same lack of clarity wrapped in new packaging.

That’s when audiences start disengaging. Not because they’re angry, but because they’re confused.

When Rebrands Fail: Real Examples

When you look closely at these examples, a clear pattern emerges; why rebrands fail has far less to do with design taste and far more to do with identity clarity.

Cracker Barrel

Cracker Barrel attempted to modernize its brand by removing long-standing visual elements tied to nostalgia. The backlash wasn’t about design taste; it was about identity. Customers felt the brand was abandoning what made it recognizable in the first place. The problem wasn’t modernization. It was abandoning earned trust in exchange for relevance they didn’t need.

HBO Max

After a merger, HBO Max rebranded as “Max” to broaden its appeal. In doing so, it stripped away the very name people trusted. HBO was the reason people subscribed. Removing it didn’t broaden appeal. It erased the very reason people were paying attention. It diluted the brand’s authority and created confusion, so much so that the name was eventually reinstated. 

Gap

In 2010, Gap replaced one of the most recognizable retail logos with a generic redesign. The issue wasn’t that the logo was “ugly.” It was that the brand failed to respect the familiarity and trust already built with its audience. The reversal came quickly and expensively.

Petco

Petco repositioned itself as a health and wellness company, removing beloved mascots and shifting messaging. Customers didn’t suddenly see Petco as premium or wellness-focused; they just felt unsure about what the brand actually was anymore.

Tropicana

Tropicana replaced its iconic packaging with a minimalist redesign that ignored decades of emotional familiarity. Sales dropped sharply. The product didn’t change, but recognition did. And that cost them.

When Rebrands Actually Work

Rebrands work when they reflect reality, not aspiration. When strategy changes first, and visuals follow.

Dunkin’ dropping “Donuts” from its name wasn’t a cosmetic gamble. The business had already shifted toward beverages. The rebrand simply named what was already true.

That’s the difference. Successful rebrands describe a change that has already happened. Failed ones try to manufacture credibility before it’s earned.

The Real Cost of Brand Confusion

Recognition is a shortcut. Audiences don’t memorize brands; they file them away.

When a brand changes too much, too fast, without a clear reason, it forces people to reassess something they thought they already understood. Most won’t. They’ll just move on.

Confusion doesn’t usually trigger backlash. It triggers indifference, and indifference is far more expensive. Fewer clicks. Fewer referrals. Less trust. And once that familiarity is broken, rebuilding it is far harder than preserving it in the first place.

Questions Founders Should Ask Before Rebranding

Before you touch your logo, ask yourself the questions most founders avoid because the answers require change:

• What has actually changed in the business?
  
• Who are we truly serving now?
  
• What behavior hasn’t caught up yet?
  
• What discomfort am I trying to avoid?
  
• Am I solving a strategic problem or postponing it?
  

If the answers aren’t clear, a rebrand won’t make them clearer.

Most brands don’t need reinvention. They need honesty.

Clarity has to come before aesthetics, every time. The brands that last aren’t constantly relaunching. They’re consistent. They know who they are, who they serve, and why they exist, and they’re willing to stand by that long enough for it to compound.

A rebrand won’t save a brand that hasn’t decided who it is.

But clarity, once earned, compounds faster than any new aesthetic ever could.

Listen to the full case
If this breakdown felt uncomfortably familiar, the full episode goes deeper into why rebrands fail, how identity drift actually shows up, and what most founders avoid confronting before they change their visuals.