Edmundo — thanks for the props and the thoughts. Agree with all of it. Definitions get challenging because they overlap. As you said, “Image” and “Offer” often are considered marketing functions (though you could make the argument that all of the branding capabilities should be marketing function.) “Offer” and “Experience” get fuzzy cuz sometimes the experience IS the offer, or a big part of the offer. Sometimes (in service brands) the “employee” is the “experience” is the “offer” — so the categories are ME/CE. But it was an attempt to try to delineate the components in a relatively simple way. Also agree that “branding” as I’m talking about it is as much a description of the reason for a company to exist as it is a activity within a company. In that way, it might be an overreach. But organizations need to start to understand that “brand” doesn’t sit over in the marketing group or just on the packaging label… for many/most companies its the central function of the organization: to convert customer needs and desires into revenue by solving problems for customers and delighting them through experiences. That might be considered an overreach today, but I think for some brand-led companies, it is how they view the corporate function. But in no way is every organization there yet. That’s the challenge. Thanks for taking the time to engage.