redroo wrote:Velocity7 wrote:Boof wrote:
The Virgin brand and license fees aren’t cheap either from memory but not sure if they still pay them and if they do how much VA currently pay Virgin group for this.
I've always been curious about the royalty costs on what to me is a name that doesn't resonate well with anyone born in the last 25 years. VA could rebrand and I don't think the "Virgin" name would be greatly missed. It's just not a brand that I am highly attached too. If anything it feels bit tawdry and past its use by date. Keen to hear what others think.
I will say it again, cause it’s worth bringing out of the cupboard - virgin (as a brand) is like your drunk auntie cracking onto your teenage mates at the family bbq. She has seen better days and all the red lipstick, flair, romance is a bit sad and cringe worthy.
If they rebranded tomorrow. It would not be missed. They had a strong brand 20 years ago but they don’t have one now. The brand hasn’t really changed.
I am a VAH shareholder. Virgin Australia has paid more money in royalty fees to Richard Branson than TOTAL profits since inception