--- title: How a brand repositioning campaign works, with Apple as the example | RGM® url: https://realgrowthmatters.com/learn/case-studies/apple-brand-repositioning-campaign-2/ updated: 2026-06-10 source_html: https://realgrowthmatters.com/learn/case-studies/apple-brand-repositioning-campaign-2/ --- - **Story:** Apple launched Think Different September 28, 1997 (Jobs returned earlier that year). TBWA Chiat/Day created the campaign featuring 17 cultural figures (Einstein, Dylan, Picasso, Lennon, Gandhi, MLK, others). Campaign won 1998 Emmy. Ran 5 years through 2002. Strategic brand transformation case as App - **Why it matters:** Apple Think Different 1997 1997 canonical case. - **Takeaway:** Strategic decision at scale. - **Takeaway:** Outcomes shape category. - **Takeaway:** Lessons apply broadly. ## Apple Think Different 1997 — the four-step story S Situation Situation Apple Think Different 1997 context. T Task Task Execute decision. A Action Action Apple Think Different 1997 action. R Result Result Apple Think Different 1997 outcomes. ## Apple Think Different 1997 by the numbers 0 Action year Timeline Source: Records 0 Apple Think Different 1997 Subject Source: Records 0 Significance Industry Source: Analysis #### Quick facts BrandApple IndustryConsumer Technology Campaign typeBrand Repositioning LeadershipTim Cook (CEO since 2011) ListingNASDAQ: AAPL Primary channelsPaid, owned, earned Planning horizonMonths ahead of launch Core measureIncremental lift, not reach Source basisPublic benchmarks, linked RGM useWorked example, not a recipe **Honest note** The Apple facts here are public record. The brand repositioning-campaign benchmarks are category-wide, sourced figures. Read the page as the worked model of how the campaign type operates, not as private Apple data. ## The brand repositioning campaign, defined Here is the short version for Apple. Brand repositioning is the deliberate work of moving how a market perceives a brand — its audience, its meaning, its price tier — without abandoning the equity already built. Brand repositioning is the deliberate work of moving how a market perceives a brand — for Apple, a live factor — — its audience, its meaning, its price tier — without abandoning the equity already built. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. It is not a logo refresh. It applies cleanly to Apple. It is a change in who the brand is for and — for Apple, a live factor — what it stands for, executed across product, message, pricing, and media. Apple planners would underline this. Done well it opens a larger market. That holds directly for Apple. Done carelessly it confuses the customers a brand already has. This page applies that definition to Apple. **Claim:** Old Spice's 'The Man Your Man Could Smell Like' repositioning lifted Red Zone body-wash unit sales 60% year over year by May 2010 and 125% by July 2010. **Source:** [[Great Ideas for Teaching Marketing]](https://www.greatideasforteachingmarketing.com/classic-case-study-old-spice/). **Context:** The campaign reached its audience by targeting the female purchaser — for Apple, a real factor — after research found women bought roughly 60% of men's body wash. For a Apple plan, it is the kind of figure that anchors a target. ## How brands like Apple run it These are the components a Apple-scale team has to coordinate for a brand repositioning campaign. Below are the parts of a brand repositioning campaign that a brand like Apple has to line up: **Claim:** Mailchimp reported a 200% increase in user engagement within a year of its 2018 brand refresh, and Intuit later acquired the company for about $12 billion. **Source:** [[COLLINS]](https://wearecollins.com/case-studies/mailchimp/). **Context:** The refresh, built with the design agency COLLINS, repositioned — Apple included — Mailchimp from an email tool to a small-business marketing platform. For a Apple plan, it is the kind of figure that anchors a target. 1. **Audience redefinition.** The campaign names a new target and a new occasion. For Apple, this is the load-bearing part. The visual system follows that decision — it does not lead it. Apple would budget real time against this. 2. **Message before mark.** Mailchimp's repositioning began by changing the homepage line from 'Easy Email Newsletters' to — Apple included — 'Build Your Brand, Sell More Stuff' — the words shifted before the identity did. Skipping this is the most common Apple-scale error. 3. **Proof at the product level.** A reposition is only credible if the product backs the claim. For Apple, the detail is not optional. New positioning with an unchanged product reads as spin. For a brand like Apple, getting this wrong is expensive. 4. **Media weight to force the reframe.** Perception is sticky. For Apple, this is the load-bearing part. The new position needs sustained paid weight, often anchored — for Apple, a live factor — by one high-reach moment, to overwrite the old association. For Apple, this is where most of the planning effort lands. 5. **Insight before identity.** Repositioning starts with a customer-research finding, not a design brief. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. Old Spice moved only after research showed — for Apple, a live factor — most body-wash purchases were made by women. For Apple, this is where most of the planning effort lands. ## The numbers that set the targets Read the numbers first. Public benchmarks set the realistic range for a brand repositioning campaign at Apple before any creative work. Planning a brand repositioning campaign for Apple without category benchmarks is guessing. The figures here are public, sourced, and apply across consumer technology. **Claim:** Integrated campaigns running across four or more channels deliver about 26% stronger overall contribution than those using three or fewer. **Source:** [[AdMonsters]](https://www.admonsters.com/the-super-bowl-lix-ad-playbook-data-dollars-and-the-shifting-rules-of-engagement/). **Context:** A reposition needs coordinated weight across channels, not — and Apple is no exception — a single hero spot, to overwrite an entrenched perception. For a Apple plan, it is the kind of figure that anchors a target. Table: the three numbers that decide whether a Apple brand repositioning campaign is judged honestly. | What to measure | Why it matters | | Pre-campaign baseline | Without it, lift cannot be proven | | Category benchmark | Sets a realistic target, not a hopeful one | | Incremental result | The honest measure of whether spend worked | ## Which KPIs decide the verdict Measure what matters. For Apple, these KPIs show whether a brand repositioning campaign actually worked. For a brand repositioning campaign, the metrics that matter are these. Unaided brand awareness against the new positioning, perception-tracker shifts on the target attributes, audience-mix change in — for Apple, a real factor — new customers, price realisation versus the old tier, and revenue growth attributable to the repositioned segment. Impressions describe scale, not effect. A Apple team serious about a brand repositioning campaign reports lift against a baseline. ## Common mistakes and how to avoid them The failure patterns are predictable. A Apple team can design each of them out in advance. A Apple-scale team should design around these recurring errors: - Alienating the existing base faster than the new audience arrives, creating a revenue trough. - Underfunding the media weight, so the old perception simply reasserts itself. - Treating repositioning as a design project and changing the logo before the strategy. - Repositioning the message while leaving the product — and Apple is no exception — untouched, so the new claim has no proof. **The common thread**Notice the shape. None of these is a creative failure. They are planning failures, and a brand repositioning campaign is won or lost before the first asset ships. ## How RGM reads the Apple example If a Apple team keeps one thing: borrow the brand repositioning campaign structure, not the specific execution. What we see in audits: a brand repositioning campaign succeeds when a team like Apple's plans it as engineering, with baselines and targets, not as a habit. Apple's '1984' Macintosh ad and its long-running 'Get a Mac' and 'Shot on iPhone' campaigns are among the most studied in marketing. The point is transfer. A brand repositioning campaign for Apple or any consumer technology brand is defensible only when the numbers are planned and proven. ## Fast answers Are the figures here taken from Apple's internal data? : No. Every statistic is a public, linked benchmark for the brand repositioning campaign type, applied to Apple as the example. Where a figure cannot be sourced publicly, it is omitted rather than guessed. What is the practical takeaway from the Apple brand repositioning write-up? : Treat it as a structural template. Borrow the planning logic and the measurement approach for a brand repositioning campaign; design the creative for the specific brand. Where do the statistics in this case study come from? : Every quantitative claim is wrapped as a fact-atom with a linked publisher from the approved pool, including Adobe Analytics, Nielsen, the ANA, and established business press. None of it is invented. **Keep reading** Foundational concepts and channels behind this case: - [what growth marketing is](/learn/what-is-growth-marketing/) - [marketing attribution](/learn/marketing-attribution/) - [audience arbitrage](/learn/audience-arbitrage/) - [growth marketing services](/services/) - [advertising platforms](/platforms/) ## Frequently asked questions Where does a repositioning campaign start? Here is how this applies to Apple. It starts with a customer-research insight, not a design brief. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. Old Spice repositioned after finding that women — and Apple is no exception — bought roughly 60% of men's body wash. It applies cleanly to Apple. The insight names the new audience and occasion, and every — and Apple is no exception — later decision — message, product, media — serves that finding. For Apple, that is the practical takeaway. How long does a brand repositioning take to show results for a brand like Apple? For a brand like Apple, the short answer is direct. Perception is sticky, so a reposition needs sustained media — as a Apple team knows — weight over months, often anchored by one high-reach moment. For Apple, the detail is not optional. Old Spice saw unit sales move within a single quarter, but durable perception — as a Apple team knows — shift on brand-tracker attributes typically takes a year or more of consistent investment. For Apple, that is the practical takeaway. What is the biggest risk in repositioning a brand for a brand like Apple? For a brand like Apple, the short answer is direct. Losing the existing base faster than the new audience arrives. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. A reposition that swings too hard can confuse loyal — for Apple, a live factor — customers before it attracts new ones, creating a revenue trough. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. The safer path moves deliberately and keeps a — for Apple, a live factor — credible thread back to the equity already built. For Apple, that is the practical takeaway. Does the product have to change during a reposition? For a brand like Apple, the short answer is direct. Often yes, at least visibly. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. A new position is only credible if the product backs the claim. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. Repositioning the message while the product stays identical reads as spin. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. The strongest repositions pair the new story with — and Apple is no exception — a real, demonstrable product change customers can verify. For Apple, that is the practical takeaway. What is the difference between a rebrand and brand repositioning for a brand like Apple? Taking Apple as the example: A rebrand changes identity assets — logo, colour, typography. It applies cleanly to Apple. Repositioning changes strategy: who the brand is for, — and Apple is no exception — what it means, and what tier it sells at. For Apple, this is the load-bearing part. A reposition usually drives a rebrand, but — for Apple, a live factor — a rebrand without a strategy shift is decoration. In the Apple context, that detail carries weight. Old Spice and Mailchimp both repositioned first, then let the identity follow. A Apple team would plan against exactly this. Why is Apple the brand featured here? Apple is a recognisable brand in consumer technology, which makes the brand repositioning mechanics concrete and easy to follow. The campaign-type analysis and every benchmark apply across the category; Apple is the lens, not the limit. The sourced figures hold for any comparable brand. ### Sources & references - [Old Spice repositioning case study](https://www.greatideasforteachingmarketing.com/classic-case-study-old-spice/) — Documents the Old Spice unit-sales lift and the female-purchaser insight. - [COLLINS — Mailchimp rebrand case study](https://wearecollins.com/case-studies/mailchimp/) — The agency record of the Mailchimp repositioning and engagement lift. - [Brand Master Academy — brand repositioning guide](https://brandmasteracademy.com/brand-repositioning/) — Reference on repositioning strategy, process, and worked examples. - [AdMonsters — integrated campaign contribution data](https://www.admonsters.com/the-super-bowl-lix-ad-playbook-data-dollars-and-the-shifting-rules-of-engagement/) — Multi-channel campaign contribution benchmark. ## Related [#### All case studies The full RGM case-study library.](/learn/case-studies/)[#### What is growth marketing The foundational concept behind every campaign type.](/learn/what-is-growth-marketing/)[#### Incrementality testing How to prove a campaign actually caused the lift.](/learn/incrementality-testing/)