????BP may be in for serious changes.The brand could even be thrown out the window once all is said and done, especially if the over one-hundred-year-old company ceases to exist in its current form. But the company's actual work -- and the profits its projects generate -- aren't going anywhere. One of the built-in benefits of being in the oil industry is that you have an indispensible product. It's why Exxon can be responsible for the Valdez spill, continue to cast a fairly old-school oil company image, and still be enormously profitable.

3. Have a backup plan: Exxon can become Mobil overnight, but where's Amoco?

????Exxon also has the safety net of keeping the Mobil brand attached to it. Depending on the market, they can leverage one brand over the other, says Takeuchi. BP doesn't have that luxury. It bought Amoco in 1998 but cut the name out of the brand in 2000. That was the same year they went "beyond petroleum" and spent millions of dollars plastering green helios icons on gas stations everywhere.

????BP won't know the next step in their branding strategy until they can control the damage from the Gulf spill, says Grabowski. "The first thing they have to do is cap that well." Second, they're going to have to eat some crow.

????This gets more complicated now that people are calling for government involvement and a criminal investigation has been opened into the spill. Smith says that while people believe that BP should have had better plans, they also believe that "the government should have required them to have better plans." It will be even more embarrassing if the government has to take over to clean up BP's mess.

????People are beginning to think, "With all the great technology they have and all their confidence in their abilities, they can't cap a well?" says Grabowski.

????They'd better. At least, their brand depends on it.