Talk:Rebranding/Archives/2012
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
POV
I've removed this paragraph which seems to me to promote a non-neutral point of view:
- Rebranding has proven to be a boon for small media consultancy businesses who find that the heads of major corporations are more likely to part with a huge amount of money in return for a contrived word, than admit they can't manage their business competently.
This is certainly an opinion that some people hold of rebranding, but we shouldn't state it as fact. A reference to an article critical of rebranding would be better. -- Andy Smith (talk) 23:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
What is the best kind of training to be given to team members in case of rebranding in hospitality industry, that is ti help them coping up with changes and accept the new standards smoothly? Kh. Hamdy (EGYPT) 04-04-07 11:30
seems instructional, not encyclopedic
Phrases like "it is critical" raise the red flag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.183.211 (talk) 01:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Spam?
It looks like "New Generation Research - Experts in Bankruptcy Research" was haplessly tacked into this article, which is a link to their website.
Seems like a complete non sequitur to me but thought it might be leftover from an earlier edit or the like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.196.159.82 (talk) 00:19, 21 March 2012 (UTC)