Although Product (RED) business model has thus far resulted in profits for partners and record private sector donations, the brand it is building is not sustainable without adjustments to the company’s marketing strategy. Symptoms of the increasing strain on the (RED) brand have manifested in the form of public misconceptions and protests around the business model, equivocal brand equity, and the growing gap between the revenue needed in the short term and the brand-building trajectory in the long term. To increase sustainability, the (RED) team should grow look for growth in its customer and partner base, as well as better retention mechanisms. (RED) can do this by updating its brand positioning to be less exclusive and more independent of its partners; communicating the end value of (RED) back to these customers in a more immediate way; and acquiring new partners that extend the current brand into adjacent sectors that underscore the repositioned brand. (RED)’s brand currently works as a “premium” value-add to the products that their partners make, based on association. In order to create the sense of selectivity, (RED) gathered together an ecosystem of brands – such as GAP, Starbucks, American Express – that together represented a distinct slice of consumer lifestyle. In so doing, (RED) received as much branding by association as it conferred, if not more. In turn, managing the (RED) brand has become as complex as having to monitor all the partner brands and their effect on one another. (RED) should reconsider costs/benefits of brand dilution vs broader less limiting associations that can open up more customer acquisition opportunities.

(RED) could also augment its appeal, which thus far has been based on the premise that success comes from customers acting in alignment with their own self-interests. While this principle is at the heart of what makes