It happens to almost every popular brand whose leadership lacks a basic understanding of product and brand management. Through a company’s failure to establish and adhere to a strategic brand vision, the brand can wander and grow on its own without thinking about how it could ultimately lead to its demise or at least its transformation into something unplanned. .

The cycle of how to lose your way usually goes something like this. A brand begins with a featured product that often becomes one in itself. Then develops a small but loyal following, gains momentum through the world of word of mouth and marketing, becomes more popular, grows in status, appears in specialty outlets, becomes even more popular, becomes even more mainstream, loses part of your cache now that everyone has it, it shows up at Wal-Mart, it becomes a commodity and now you’re just another shelf item for the consumer. And, your original customers have now probably left you.

Now this is great if your goal is to be on the shelves at Wal-Mart or Target (fantastic goals). But it’s not that great, for example, if you originally wanted to be considered the highest quality provider of widgets that can only be found at stores like Neiman’s or Sak’s. But somewhere along the way, the lure of big money associated with massive exposure is often too much to resist and companies abandon whatever strategy they have and end up being just another item on the wall.

It turns out to be the best of us. Remember when Columbia Sportswear was considered to be some sort of status brand? When was Eddie Bauer considered high-end? When an Ironman meant 140.6 miles? There is no right or wrong here, just a choice. Do you want to be Calvin Klein selling their wares at TJMaxx or do you want to be carried only at the high-end stores?

Sounds like a silly conversation? It is not. It pays to have a status position in the minds of consumers. Which would you prefer? A Chevy or a BMW? Baume & Mercier or Seiko? I would probably choose the BMW and the Baume & Mercier. But why? In truth, there’s arguably little difference in what you’re buying. They both tell you what time it is and can take you where you need to go. In fact, Chevy and Seiko are likely to give you a much better ownership experience from a reliability and cost perspective. But we still love our brands.

Don’t underestimate what’s in a name. From a marketing point of view, a name speeds up the process of communicating what you have to offer to the consumer. An established brand or brand allows a business to communicate tons of information with a simple name or logo. In economic terms, this efficiency reduces the transaction cost. In marketing terms, it cuts down on noise and allows for clarity of message.

A good example of this is to look at Apple. At a glance, your logo can communicate everything you’ve worked to establish your brand for. Look at the Apple logo and you’ll think of quality, iPad, uniqueness, cutting-edge design, trendy, reliable, expensive, Steve Jobs, iPhone, market leadership, etc. No magazine advertising needed; there is a lot of important data in that little fruit.

So, with that little marketing overhaul behind us, I turn to the World Triathlon Corporation (WTC). Most people have never heard of this organization, but I bet most people have at least heard of its most popular brand; Iron Man. Ironman meets all the criteria of what qualifies as a popular story. As described in How This Ironman Thing Started, this small, local event held in Hawaii in the late ’70s has grown into a mega-marketing machine bearing its brand name on everything from watches to running shoes. However, as the name has grown, it seems to have lost its way. Is the Ironman name a brand, a product, or just an event, or all three? The fact that it is in discussion should tell you that there is a problem.

From the beginning, the WTC has used Ironman as a brand and product. This is perfectly acceptable as many companies start out this way and are forever associated with their first product. Your favorite soda company is a good example of this. When they developed other products like Fanta and Sprite in the 1940s and 1950s, they created new brands. They were not sold as Coca-Cola Fanta or Coca-Cola Sprite. Can you imagine the confusion of standing in the grocery store looking at a wall of products called Coca-Cola something? The message would be all encrypted. No doubt; there is certainly a lot in a name.

So where did the problem start? The WTC did a very smart thing when it took the traditional 140.6-mile Ironman and created a shorter distance race of 70.3 miles. Much like the half marathon craze, this has opened up a whole new audience to ultra-distance triathlons and introduced many athletes to the Ironman brand. And in another positive move for the growth of the sport, the WTC has drawn up a plan to create a series of Olympic distance races.

Of course, this is not done out of the goodness of their hearts. The WTC is making millions from racing licenses, merchandise, race entry fees and television deals with NBC/Universal Sports. I am all for making money and kudos to WTC for making the most of their opportunity. However, a funny thing happened on the way to the bank. The brand has lost its way.

Perhaps through simple lack of foresight or perhaps an attempt to capitalize on the brand’s popularity, the WTC named its 70.3-mile series “Ironman 70.3.” So now it is common to hear things like: What is an Ironman? How far is an Ironman event? Why are all the events called Ironman? “Oh you did Ironman Florida, didn’t Ethel in finance do one in Orlando last weekend?” The Ironman name has been watered down and now communicates such inaccurate information that even triathletes have to pause a conversation and clarify what distances are being discussed. Everything is an Ironman. It’s like the example of standing in the grocery store with every drink labeled Coca-Cola. He has lost his punch.

So does anyone really care? If you buy a brand; do you mind. For the same reason you wouldn’t trade your BMW emblem for a Yugo decal, you care. And if you manage a brand, you should care. The kind of indifferent attention that the WTC has given the Ironman brand will cause it to deteriorate and that is dangerous territory for an organization that relies heavily on overpriced entry fees and merchandise sold entirely around lofty standing and brand strength.

This disconnect was recently exacerbated by two WTC marketing blunders. First, they tried to sell special access to services through a program that had little real value, and then priced it at $1,000 per year (this program was removed within days after a flurry of complaints). Second, his lack of brand control was on display when the 2010 Miami Ironman 70.3 ran out of water early in the race, changed the race route just before the start, and drifted riders through the congested highways of Miami with little supervision. The WTC response was that it was not their fault. They had sold the name to a local race director who did a poor job planning the race. The WTC offered free entry to the 2011 IM 70.3 races, but I doubt that will help many people who traveled there and trained for much of the year around this event.

The brand is losing its cache position in the triathlon community. I have already witnessed it. From hardcore athletes to weekend warriors, I hear rumors indicating a growing disenchantment with the brand as it drifts into mass marketing, mass marketing, and a lack of focus on its core product and customer; true Ironman distance athletes. These athletes (Ironman’s primary customer) are starting to look to non-Ironman events. In essence, they are looking for the old Ironman experience.

Some of the damage has already been done, but there is a path to redemption. The first thing you need to do is create separate marks for the different distances (product lines) and treat them accordingly. Customers who buy Lexus expect a different experience than those who buy Toyotas. Applying the basic behavioral understanding of how we like to interact with brands, the WTC must recognize that each group of athletes wants to be associated with their specific event. When you use the Ironman brand for all races, you deny everyone that enjoyment. Full Ironman distance athletes are disenchanted that the brand has been undermined by shorter distance races. Also, the 70.3 distance runners have to constantly explain that they didn’t actually do an “Ironman”, they did half an Ironman and so on…it’s really irritating.

Perhaps the solution is in process. I’ve only seen one version of the name and logo for the new Olympic distance races and they don’t call it Ironman (thank goodness). They have named the course the “5150 Triathlon Series” cleverly using the “I” in Ironman instead of the number one on the 5150. Hopefully they will avoid using the M-Dot and save it for their main event, 140.6. Ironman distance mile.

The next step for redemption would be to rename the 70.3-mile races. I have no bone to choose from with these breeds. I actually love this distance and make them myself. But a 70.3 is not an Ironman. I’m not in the business of naming events, but I’d recommend using the same logic implemented for the 5150 series. Call it something totally different and bind the master flag in some passive way. Either way, and I’ll say it again, find a new naming convention because 70.3 miles just isn’t an Ironman.

The Ironman brand has grown and lives far from its Hawaiian roots. It is true that there is a fine line between using the brand to promote the sport and damaging it through missteps and overexposure. Hopefully the 5150 series is the start of a proper way to manage such a coveted name.