Guessing the victor is not a hard task at all.
It is an obvious issue of trademark violation. The intruder has to come up with a non-violating name and withdraw from the scene.
Away from resolving the issue, what could be the reason for United Airways to use a detonatable name like that?
Is United Airways aware of branding issues and their importance in today's marketplace?
Did they think of the cost of repainting their fleet?
I would say that they thought that the name would give the airline the initial momentum needed to help it during the early stage of operation. So the question is - did they manage to use the name of the humongous rival to their advantage? Did they achieve enough profit to pay for the repainting job and the possible monetary compensation payable to United Airlines?
Date: 05 July 2011 commenting on http://www.airlinereporter.com/
It is an obvious issue of trademark violation. The intruder has to come up with a non-violating name and withdraw from the scene.
Away from resolving the issue, what could be the reason for United Airways to use a detonatable name like that?
Is United Airways aware of branding issues and their importance in today's marketplace?
Did they think of the cost of repainting their fleet?
I would say that they thought that the name would give the airline the initial momentum needed to help it during the early stage of operation. So the question is - did they manage to use the name of the humongous rival to their advantage? Did they achieve enough profit to pay for the repainting job and the possible monetary compensation payable to United Airlines?
Date: 05 July 2011 commenting on http://www.airlinereporter.com/
1 comment:
David Parker Brown's reply on 05 July 2011:
Who knows what United Airways was thinking. I tried to talk to them, but never heard back. They could have thought their airline would remain so small it wouldn’t matter, but now they have grown.
Post a Comment