A FRIEND recently found himself in the company of some American tourists during a visit to a maritime museum in Scotland.

Such has been the extent of Scotland’s involvement in North Sea oil and gas exploration and production that a great many exhibits trace the development of these energy reserves in hostile conditions. The name “BP” featured with some prominence.

That was enough to irritate some of the North American tourists – and served as a reminder (were any needed) of the damage that BP’s reputation has suffered since the tragedy on board one of its sub-contracted platforms in US waters last April.

The comments made at the museum were none too kind towards BP.

My friend’s account of what was said came back to me when it was reported that pressure is now growing in the US for BP to change the trading name on its petrol station forecourts.

There’s a view being expressed over there that the brand must be banished if the business is to survive.

There’s been a lot said since the explosion on the platform claimed innocent lives and started pollution on a terrifyingly large scale.

It’s against the firestorm whipped up by some factions in the US that the suggestion to rebrand petrol stations is gathering pace.

What’s less clear is the logic behind the calls. It’s a complex issue of brand awareness and brand positioning.

BP is certainly not short of brand awareness in North America. The coverage they have received would tend to undermine the theory that there is no such thing as bad publicity. A degree of hostility towards a previously strong and credible brand established by one of the world’s leading companies has been aimed BP’s way. Whether much of it is fair or accurate, we may never know. Nor may we ever be clear on the extent to which senior BP representatives were prepared – or ill-prepared – to face the consequences of the explosion.

But will changing the signs and stickers at the pumps really make that much difference? Surely the extent of the coverage this story has been given will mean most consumers remain aware that it’s a BP product flowing through an Amoco pump?

Or are we going to witness America’s motorists being persuaded to overlook the nation’s biggest environmental disaster on the back of a ruse as simple as a name change?

MATT JOHNSON is chairman of Mando Group.