Playboy (PLA) tends to be associated with the magazine and sex. Not the hardcore, nasty kind, of course -- Playboy has always been more than a tad distinguished, staying above board while the adult entertainment industry has chosen to compete in ways that my editor would delete if I even attempted.

With Iconix said to be interested in acquiring Playboy, it needs to think about where it can win with the ailing brand. The smart move may be to ditch the magazine and move away from sex -- it can't compete in either of these markets. Then, it needs to figure out how to make the brand relevant to everyone not in the Boomer generation ... or treat Playboy as an investment with a clock on it.

This post is part of AOL Money & Finance's Best & Worst in Money 2008 feature.

There have always been brand decisions that seem to come out of left field. Some make you wonder what they were thinking, while others make you wonder what took so long. The year 2008 was no exception.

It came as something of a surprise when in June Exxon Mobil Corp. (NYSE: XOM) announced that it would sell off many of its retail gasoline stations to local owners. While Exxon continued to post record quarterly earnings, and fuel prices spiked to all-time highs earlier this year, gasoline retailers in fact have faced razor-thin margins and fierce competition. It would take a significant boost in prices to make gas stations profitable, a notion that didn't seem to worthwhile back in June. Wonder what they think of that decision now that gasoline prices have fallen to a multiyear low?

I recall when Kinko's, the photocopying and faxing service provider with the catchy name, seemed to explode out of nowhere. And it seemed a little sad when FedEx Corp. (NYSE: FDX) gobbled up the successful upstart. But it was probably inevitable that the Kinko's name would be phazed out. It took quite a while, but FedEx finally announced eariler this year that it would just that. The newly christened FedEx Office (not so catchy, is it?) wants to shed itself of the image of a photocopying and faxing place to that of a back-office services provider for small to mid sized businesses. But will that turn out to be worth the $891 million they estimate the name change would cost? Time will tell.

This post is part of our Big Company, Small Town series, featuring large companies and the small towns in which they are headquartered.

Ever taken a road trip in an RV? If you have, there is a good chance that you were inside a Winnebago recreational vehicle. The name Winnebago has been synonymous with the large RV for as long as I can remember. With such a rich history, one would think Winnebago is located somewhere next a major interstate corridor or airport. Otherwise, how would it receive in its raw materials and ship out its finished product?

Winnebago Industries, Inc. (NYSE: WGO) is actually based in Forest City, Iowa, founded in 1958 in Winnebago County (that's where the company's name comes from). From its inception, the company has been involved with travel trailers. It used names from Native American tribes to name its different lines of trailers, and in the 1970s and early 1980s, made smaller trailers as gas prices spiked upward. In fact, come this summer, one of Winnebago's manufacturing plants in Charles City, Iowa, will be closed due to drastic changes in Winnebago's market due to higher gas prices and declining demand. The company has already laid off 200 employees from its headquarters in Forest City.

Unlike many American companies these days, Winnebago still makes the majority of its products in the United States, most of which are built on top of chassis units made by Ford or Chevy. The term Winnebago has made itself, after more then 40 years, into a brand name completely associated with RVs and trailers. Do you blow your nose with a Kleenex or tissue? Drink Coke or a soft drink? Go on vacation in a Winnebago or travel trailer? There's the brand power the company continues to have today, even with the hard times its experiencing.

Be sure to check out more Big Company, Small Town posts.

A few days ago, something -- I don't remember what -- reminded me of one of best parts of going back to school when I was a youngster in the early to mid-1990s: the Trapper Keeper.

I hadn't seen one in years, but a quick internet search revealed that while Mead discontinued the product, it reintroduced a new version of the Trapper Keeper in 2007. I might have to get one. So that got me thinking about old brands that I miss and I wondered: Companies spend millions to develop brands into household names only to discontinue them after a rough patch or merger. Might there be some value in the brands -- even years after they've been removed from shelves.

Turns out I'm not as creative as I thought. A cool company called River West Brands does nothing but acquire, incubate and launch long-dead brands. The current portfolio includes Coleco, Salon Selectives, and Brim coffee. The company also acquired -- and has since relaunched and sold -- other brands including Nuprin and Structure.

Rob Walker's feature story for The New York Times Magazine takes a look at River West, and it's one of the best business stories I've read this year. It's a fascinating look at reviving brands, marketing, and the tricks our minds play on us that make us remember products we've never seen before fondly.

Age-old telecom company and brand AT&T, Inc. (NYSE: T) is launching a new advertising campaign to convince younger customers that the company is hip. Naturally, the new ads will be edgier and flashier, which apparently everyone in the 18-34 age bracket responds to according to most marketing mavens. But can a company just put some pizazz in their marketing and instantly gain younger customers, or are those customers smarter than these companies realize? Maybe a little of both, right?

Truth is that marketing is what makes most economies go 'round, and AT&T glitzing it up in this department is a testament to that claim. AT&T's purchase of the Cingular brand (and company, heh) earlier in 2007 meant that the company sees the future coming from wireless services and other areas instead of landline telephones and older technology that 10 years from now younger customers won't even know existed.

In a move back to the power of the Cingular brand (which AT&T dumped unceremoniously), the color orange will also be used as the company's primary corporate color instead of blue. The blue AT&T 'world swirl' logo has been around for decades in one form or another, and in addition to changing the color, will AT&T change the corporate logo as well? Maybe it is time to make this move, since many youngsters connect the current AT&T logo with the Death Star from Star Wars. That's not a good thing to have in mind when you're buying a phone.

The conventional wisdom used to be that shoppers went looking for their favorite brands and that consistency of product packaging assured customer loyalty. Apparently marketers now have decided that good old reliable product packaging is making those products invisible to consumers. According to the New York Times, Pepsico (NYSE: PEP), known for its resistance to label design changes throughout its long history, is now changing some label designs every few weeks.

The problem is that, with the internet and hundreds of television channels, it's becoming increasingly harder for marketers to get their messages out to customers. Product packaging now has to do more than simply identify the goods within, but actually reach out and grab your attention. Hence, Mountain Dew bottles that appear to have been tagged by graffitti artists, or Unilever's (NYSE: UN) shampoo bottles shaped like video game joysticks. Target Corp. (NYSE: TGT) has been in the forefront of bringing eye-catching advertising to its themed store aisles.

There are other motives for this experimentation with product packaging as well. Some companies are searching for ways to reduce container sizes and to have less environmental impact. Some household product manufacturers are looking to make their once utlitarian packaging so pleasing that people may be willing to display it in their homes.

And it looks like things are only going to get weirder. Pepsi has a plan in the works for cans that spray a pleasing scent when opened. And you know that product packaging that talks to you can't be that far down the road. If you thought pop-up ads and TV commercials were annoying, just wait for the day you go into the shop and all the products are screaming for your attention.

Branding experts and marketing professionals like to believe that the brands they represent are what the consumer is looking for. Hmm, not quite. Is Dell Inc. (NASDAQ: DELL) in the midst of being turned around because it is a brand in trouble? To this writer's point, I have to agree somewhat that Dell represents a category in trouble. It sells more desktop computers than anything else, and that is a dying category (and has been). Does Dell need to supercharge its laptop computer category during the final half of 2007 and really attack the retail presence outside of selling "dying" desktop PCs at Wal-Mart? If you're a Dell shareholder, you should be asking this question as Dell sits precariously during the latter half of 2007.

Liz Claiborne (NYSE: LIZ) will sell 16 of its 36 brands in a move that will cut [subscription required] about $800 million of the company's $5 billion revenue.

The move is very risky. The company believes that by moving out of brands that have modest profits it can focus more on its core brands. A difficult environment in department-store sales is behind the company's thinking for focusing on a fewer number of product lines.

To get around problems with slow department-store sales, the company will also open 300 of its own outlets by 2010.

The Wall Street Journal, however, points out that the brands Liz will cut are not necessarily the slowest growing brands. The company has not said whether they are less profitable than the ones to be retained or not.

That is why the strategy may make little sense. Having a larger number of brands would appear to give the company more leverage at the retail level.

Well, perhaps the management knows something Wall Street does not know. Earnings over the next couple of quarters will bear watching.

Douglas A. McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

In a long overdue move, JetBlue Airways Corp. (NASDAQ: JDBLU) replaced founder David Neeleman as chief executive officer. Shares of the discount airline soared 6 percent.

Neeleman, who will remain as chairman, was replaced by chief operating officer Dave Barger, who will remain president. Barger certainly has his work cut for him.

As I've argued before, JetBlue's brand has been damaged by service snafus that left thousands of passengers stranded on airport runways for hours on planes that didn't take off.

In response to the negative press, Neeleman established the "Customer Bill of Rights" which promises vouchers for future flights for passengers that find themselves in the same situation. I'm not sure if people that have experienced poor service on an airline would want to fly that same airline again even with a discount.

When it comes to customer service, talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words. If Barger can convince the flying public that the "Bill of Rights" really means something, then JetBlue will be able to expand into other markets and be a serious competitor to Southwest Airlines Co. (NYSE: LUV).

But that's a big if.

I was happy to see that today's Wall Street Journal was taking a closer look at what I considered the most interesting part of the pet food recall: 101 Brand Names, 1 Manufacturer. It turns out that Menu Foods was the manufacturer for everything from discount private label brands to some of the most expensive premium brands: Everything from Wal-Mart's Ol' Roy to the Science Diet stuff that I buy at the vet for my elderly lab with digestive problems.

And apparently it's the same in lots of other industries: Kellwoods sews clothes for Calvin Klein and Sag Harbor, a much cheaper label. Of course, the industry spokespeople say that they are all made from different recipes and whatnot and that the products vary in quality. But what else are they going to say?

I'm still suspicious about this: I always buy store brands if they're cheaper and I don't notice the difference. But hey, maybe I'm just not sophisticated.

The online magazine, brandchannel.com, has released its 2006 survey on top brands. It should be no surprise that Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) got the top spot – even beating out Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL), which was #2.

Then again, it helped that Google bought the super-hot brand, YouTube. Actually, this was ranked #3 on the list.

As for #4, it's another upstart: Wikipedia.

No doubt, the internet world is getting lots of mindshare. And, these top brands are fairly new companies. What's more, for companies like Wikipedia and YouTube, there was minimal advertising dollars.

In other words, it was really the loyal users that helped to build the brand. It's also notable that Wikipedia and YouTube rely on user-generated content.

You can read more about the brandchannel.com survey at Reuters.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and the EDGAR-Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements.

According to Ford, the company started an aggressive campaign worldwide to attack the problem with agents raiding and seizing fake parts, especially in China and India, but also in the U.S.

General Motors Corp. (NYSE:GM) also said it is combating the problem around the world, but hasn't released a figure of estimated losses due to phony parts.

Counterfeit goods can also harm consumers. Fake auto parts may have low durability that can cause serious car failure and safety concerns. Consumers don't always know repair shops use these parts to save cost. In other cases there could health and other ramifications if sub-standard cosmetic products, medical goods, clothing and electrical items are bought. While the FBI is also trying to stop the phenomenon, with legal action outside the U.S. often fruitless, the effort mostly seems like treading water.

One of my favorites, Limited Brands Inc. (NYSE: LTD,) has announced a direct stock purchase plan to provide an affordable means for investors to purchase their common stock. Its plan called BuyDIRECT is being facilitated by The Bank of New York and is available to anyone. An initial minimum investment of just $200 is required but after that, purchases as small as $50 may be transacted. A one time enrollment fee of $10 is applicable at time of first purchase.

The plan offers enough flexibility to be both interesting and useful. Shares may be held in book entry form or you may have stock certificates issued directly to you. Be advised that having hard copy stock certificates issued generally involves extra cost so you'll need to weigh that into your decision when choosing what to do. Additionally, Limited Brands offers you the option of reinvesting all or some of your dividends earned, which can have significant tax advantages. Alternatively, you may have your dividends paid directly to you. Holders of shares already in certificate are allowed to have any portion of those shares transferred to their plan account and are welcome to withdraw or transfer at any time.

Limited brands has a plan brochure available and it invites you to have a look. The plan will be available 24 / 7 through Bank of New York. This plan looks like an excellent way for a newbie investor like me to grab a chunk of some exciting stock. I see limited Brands as a good, solid company group and I think I'll start my portfolio with it. When that happens I'll be sure to let you know!

You may get current information on Limited Brand's stock performance here.

You may read my other articles here .