Information has appeared in various media outlets about the possible work of well-known Western brands in Russia under changed names. In this regard, a large number of journalists have contacted our company with a request to give some explanations from the point of view of the law and the real possibility of such work.

First of all, it should be clarified that the work of a large brand under a different name is a very dubious undertaking, unless the brand is so large that it can make a high–quality rebranding in Russia. For example, if, instead of advertising McDonald's, you pay for the same amount of advertising for another brand, which, in fact, McDonald's owns, of course, this will have a tangible impact and may force the consumer to make a choice in favor of the changed brand (by the way, different brands in different countries are not a new idea. There are a lot of examples: KFC in Canada is called PFK, Burger King decided to take the name Hungry Jack's in Australia, Unilever founded the Axe brand, but in some countries the name was already occupied by other brands. To distribute products in the UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and China, the company took the name Lynx, etc. many others). Therefore, qualitatively, with the previous service, brands may not suffer. However, the essence of the brand, just comes down to minimizing marketing costs. Brand advertising is an expensive pleasure, but it simultaneously promotes each individual unit of the brand. Therefore, creating a new brand (even within the framework of rebranding) is not a cheap pleasure. But not impossible. As for the legal basis of such a move, the law does not prohibit it (and how to prohibit it). To what extent franchisees will be interested in such a rebranding is also an important question: after all, their economic expectations were associated with just such a brand. But in the absence of an alternative, this may be the only way out. Then there is nothing much to discuss.

However, it should be understood that working under a different brand is a temporary solution. No large corporation can hide its affiliation to such a brand. And leaving the Russian market is not an important economic, but a political step. It is unlikely that such a rebranding can convince your audience (consumers) of your "correct" political views, because, in fact, this is a deception ... or even self-deception.

It was not for nothing that the news subsequently came out that some large companies decided to simply leave the market, and not do business in Russia under a different name. It's still more logical. But what should a business that has invested in capital infrastructure in Russia (real estate, factories, etc.) do? These are very complex economic issues. But if the decision to sell such assets is made, it is a very painful step for our economy, as well as a signal of its long-term viability.

The economic consequences, of course, will be catastrophic. There can be no two opinions. In the era of globalization of economic processes, there is not a single state existing in a closed economic space (even China). Although it is certainly possible to exist or survive. But it is impossible to develop in step with the whole world.

Of course, if the Russian economy does not finally close to foreign investment, Western "unfriendly" companies will quickly be replaced by Eastern "friendly" ones. However, there can be no question of an equivalent qualitative replacement.

Replacing Western brands with your product is a time–tested many times utopia. Many of our Western partners and clients have expressed a desire not to continue cooperation on investment programs in Russia. And it's sad…

17.05.2022