Talk:The Co-operative brand/Archives/2013

Membership

Is this the appropriate place for outlining the common membership brand too? It is still controversial as to whether other societies want to have shared Co-op Group membership branding, but Midcounties, Lothian, Borders & Angus and Chelmsford Star have now taken it on as well. As well as the branding, it also means that members gain benefit if they shop at the store of any other participating society.Martín (saying/doing) 10:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Its a common branding shared by a variety of different co-ops so it's exactly what this article is about: go for it. JonStrines (talk) 10:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The Co-operative Group

Is this a common brand? the logo displayed is widely marketed as The Co-operative Group's corporate logo, and other societies continue to use the cloverleaf brand for their stores (e.g. Heart of England, Midlands) or different branding, the logo also appears on many products in different co-op societies as The Co-operative Group own the (or is the) co-op wholesale society, from looking at various sites for other co-op societies, they seem to continue to use their own brands rather than that of the co-operative group, some incorporating the cloverleaf
James50567 (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a common branding for the shops managed by the Co-operative Group, as was the old cloverleaf logo that many still use. The different co-operative societies mostly have their own corporate logos that they use on their websites and publications. The article isn't yet finished, so it hasn't got the section showing the actual use of the brand (the "co-operative membership", "co-operative food", "co-operative funeral care" logos etc. The logo at the top of the article is the Group's corporate logo, but is also the basis of the common co-operative branding that is in the process of being rolled out across the consumer co-operative movement, and that's why its here.

It is a most confusing situation, to be honest, brought about partly by the consumer society's desire to be both independent from each other but have the avantages of positive identification from pretending that the co-op shop in Leicester run by Midcounties is the same as the one in Manchester run by the Group. This article is an attempt to clarify the murky situation. JonStrines (talk) 09:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Would it be appropriate for this article to contain a list of Co-operative societies for clarity that there are seperate societies, rather than the list only being in the article British co-operative movement?
James50567 (talk) 15:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I think what's needed is a list of the societies that use the common branding. But I can't find one! JonStrines (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Jebus

A new user has come in and danced this article all around Wikipedia before deleting it and redirecting to the Co-op Group's page. I've reinstated the article and will try and repair all the other damage tomorrow. JonStrines (talk) 21:11, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

All the history disappeared somewhere during this move. Unfortunately I think there was important content that is only in this history, as well as the GFDL attribution history. Could an admin find it and restore it please? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:40, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Info Box

The Group's info box has been put on this article and I'm undecided whether this is useful or not: it gives the impression that this brand is a Group only thing. Equally, though, the Brand is effectively owned and controlled by the Group so it does make a certain degree of sense. Should we keep it, or maybe create a new kind of info box?

JonStrines (talk) 08:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Yesterday, I used {{Infobox brand}} to put a new infobox at the top of the article, to represent "The Co-operative" brand programme introduced in 2007. I am sorry that it appears to represent the Group: that was not my intention: the programme is led by Group but was piloted by 4 Co-ops, and has since been adopted by others. The new infobox links to the Group's branding programme page, purely because that is an online description of the national system.

By all means tweak or drastically change the infobox to improve its educational value.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:45, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

No, actually looking at it some more I think you're probably right: it was the image that made me think it was overly Group-y, but on reflection what could be better than a picture of a shop using the brand? JonStrines (talk) 08:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Dubious

I once took at face value the Salisbury Journal's claim that the Fordingbridge store was the first refit with "The Co-operative" branding, in April 2007. However, the Catherine Charnock slide deck (pages 27 forward) indicates that up to 42 stores were refitted with the new brand in 2005 and 2006.

Have I misunderstood one of the sources, or is one of them just plain wrong?

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:03, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the Salisbury Journal is talking about the shop being the first in a programme of refurbishments, not the first to get the branding: the logo's certainly been around longer than that, and Catherine Charnock's presentation would seem to be the more reliable source. JonStrines (talk) 08:15, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Which societies?

This article seems to be completely wrong. Not only have Scotmid not adopted the brand, but they have recently started refitting all of their stores in a brand that is even more unlike the universal co-op branding than before. Meanwhile, the Heart of England society have adopted the brand universally for all of their food outlets and are refitting at quite a pace. Should we perhaps make an effort to reference some of the claims on here? Twrist (talk) 15:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

According to the Catherine Charnock slide deck [1] (page 27, 33) Scotmid's Laurencekirk branch adopted the brand in September 2005. (see also http://www.scotmid.co.uk/news.php?articleID=70 - presumably the store opened in October 2005) This article was written back in 2008, so by all means update the article with more recent sources, including photos: it would certainly be encyclopedic to explain if Scotmid rejected the common brand.

Yes of course add text or photos of the newer recruits like Heart of England and Southern (without sources it you must)

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)