Marketing rule #1: don’t fuck with the logo.

It’s the first thing they drill into you at Brand Club. Tyler Durden walks in, slaps you in the face and tells you the first rule of Brand Club is DO NOT FUCK WITH THE LOGO.

But in 2025, we are seeing big brands deliberately break that rule.

They’re taking their most sacred asset - the logo, the name, the thing that holds decades of equity - and chucking it in the bin for a laugh.

Today’s episode is about the logo hijack - when brands break the #1 rule and fuck with their logo to land their message in a different way. I’m calling it…

This edition of supergoods is brought to you by Mind Control

Does your packaging design truly reflect what’s inside?

You can have the best product in the world, but if your packaging design doesn’t communicate that in an instant, it doesn’t matter.

At Mind Control, we specialise in helping challenger brands evolve their packaging design to win more shoppers.

Great design is an unfair advantage. Leverage it today.

We can blame Coca Cola for this trend

Let’s go back to 2011.

The “Share a Coke” campaign did something kind of insane for the time - swapped the iconic Coca Cola logo for your name. Unless your name is Clive, there were no Clives there, sorry Clive.

This campaign initially sparked confusion. Cans and bottles started popping up that looked like Coke, but said something else.

But Coke proved an interesting point here: when your assets are strong enough, you can mess with them. And people will still instantly know it’s you.

The campaign was a success and it’s continued on years later in many different iterations.

But in 2025, is the novelty wearing thin?

It’s a fine line between disruption and desperation.

There’s an emerging trend of consumer-goods-brands jumping in on this game of the ol’ logo swap: a limited-run packaging stunt where brands deliberately mess with their own name.

Sometimes it’s weird, sometimes funny, but in the ultra-serious, risk-averse corporate landscape, it’s oddly refreshing.

Here’s what’s making the rounds lately:

1. Maxwell House “rebrands” to Maxwell Apartment

Coffee brand Maxwell House is 133 years old. In 2025, it decided to side with renters instead of homeowners. For National Coffee Day, the brand relaunched as Maxwell Apartment - full packaging run, Amazon listings, even a faux lease agreement slipped into boxes.

The Kraft Heinz brand is pulling out all stops in this - running the PR machine to drive click bait headlines like “Maxwell House changes its name after 133 years”.

Cue the Boomer outrage on TODAY.com from those who only read headlines.

There is some deeper BS story here about “supporting renters” who can’t afford a house and subsequently need to spend $40 on crap coffee for a year’s supply.

Even though it feels like a cringe attempt to relate to the “young folks”, it’s working. The brand is generating a shit ton of media and in the past 6 days, it’s now gone beyond marketing industry press and bled into mainstream outlets like USA Today and New York Post.

People will forget the silly story, but perhaps they’ll be reminded the brand exists and consider it the next time they’re at shelf. A win in our eyes.

2. Is this Lurpak or an Aldi knockoff?

In the UK, butter brand Lurpak has such strong distinctive assets - silver foil, deep blue script, and a history of being the “chef’s butter” - that it can afford to vanish its own name.

This little playful branding trick is designed to catch shoppers’ attention at shelf by literally putting the end-use front and centre. It can disrupt normal shopping patterns and trigger a moment of pause and joy - incredibly rare during the awful chore of grocery shopping.

I like this because it’s ultimately meaningless, causes a little confusion and fucks with people just enough to crack a smile without throwing away any equity.

Hello fellow kids, it’s me your cool Uncle

Colgate’s soap brand Irish Spring tried to boost its Gen Z appeal by riffing on the TikTok slang “rizz” (it means charisma for those of you playing at home).

I’m not sure what you think, but to me - this feels like a desperate attempt at relevance that’s going to land with the brand being laughed at, not with.

So why do this at all?

Because packaging is free media, and these hijacks turn a logo into a headline.

Attention is the prize.

Consumers are drowning in sameness. A prank rebrand punches through by creating surprise. Surprise drives word of mouth. Word of mouth drives earned media. The packaging becomes the ad.

Humour humanises.

Marketing has become painfully serious. The data says humour works: ads with humour score higher on recall and likability. A packaging gag can make a faceless multinational feel more like a mate cracking a joke.

It’s a flex of distinctiveness.

Only the strong can play this game. If your brand isn’t recognised without the logo, don’t even try. Coke can. Lurpak can. Snickers can. A challenger brand can’t. These stunts work because the other assets carry the weight - colours, shapes, slogans, product context.

But be wary, the risks are real.

Do it wrong and you confuse or irritate people. Volkswagen learnt this the hard way when the “rebranded” to “Voltswagen” in an April Fools stunt, claiming to go all electric. It backfired, investors believed it and regulators came sniffing.

In consumer goods, stakes are lower, but the lesson stands: keep the line between gag and reality obvious.

So should you?

Eh. It depends.

A fake rebrand works when it’s:

• Anchored in truth and positioning (Snickers + hunger).

• Backed by strong assets (Lurpak’s foil).

• Timed for cultural resonance (Maxwell Apartment + housing crisis, maybe??).

Do it too often and it stops being a surprise. Do it without equity and you just look lost.

Done right and it becomes a statement of confidence: our brand is so distinctive we can throw away the logo for a week and you’ll still know it’s us.

Strive to earn that right first.

If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing for more. And send it to a mate.