The Royal Mail, even for Margaret Thatcher, was a privatisation too far. The recently deceased prime minister claimed she would not be "prepared to have the Queen's head privatised".
But business minister Michael Fallon has declared the business should be sold off within the year via an IPO, potentially raising £3bn. What will it mean for you? %VIRTUAL-SkimlinksPromo%
It's unclear, because there is no clarity on who the Royal Mail would be sold to. Fallon's preference is for a public sale. However a trade sale to the likes of, for example, TNT, could also be on the table (though something of a public relations worry given the Royal Mail is a national postal service operator).
Equally, were Royal Mail to fall into the hands of private equity operators, that would also be a huge concern on the voter front. The aggressive private equity culture of stripping out value and looking for a quick buck would be a hard public sell (though some private equity companies are adept at creating genuine value and operational improvements).
"We recognise the attractions of an Initial Public Offering and we have received positive investor feedback to date," Fallon told the House of Commons recently. "However all options remain open. If an IPO is not possible, we will pursue the option of a private sale if this can be achieved on acceptable terms."
The Communication Workers Union claims staff numbers are likely to be hit, and services reduced, particularly in rural areas.
"Privatisation is an old fashioned idea and poll after poll has shown the UK public don't want their mail service sold off to become profit, rather than service, driven," says Billy Hayes, general secretary of the CWU union.
The CWU - which recently warned Labour it must renationalise the Royal Mail or lose millions in donations - says millions of small businesses would be hit by rising prices "and by the undoubted reduction to the one price goes anywhere, next day delivery, universal service."
A float, though, would be open to all and it's likely 10% of company shares would be retained by Royal Mail workers, though probably at a price. Additionally, it has also emerged that the Postcode Address File UK's national database of postcodes - typically used by marketing agencies - of everyone who lives in Britain is also to be privatised.
Although there are short-term cash advantages, there is the worry the Government could be forced to buy back information in future at inflated prices from private companies.
Biggest rebranding disasters
Fallon readies Royal Mail for sell-off
Tropicana manufacturer PepsiCo wanted to bring the popular orange juice into the 21st century with a new carton.
Unfortunately, when it rolled out its new, more functional cartons in January 2009, the consumer backlash was intense.
After a month, PepsiCo therefore announced that it would return to the old carton with immediate effect.
The linked rings of the Olympic logo are recognised around the world. But the organisers of the London 2012 Games wanted a more modern look.
Unluckily for them, the public did not agree. And when the "ugly" and "childish" logo was unveiled, 80% of respondents to a BBC poll gave it the lowest possible ranking.
Coca-Cola is one of the world's most famous brands. But even it makes mistakes from time to time.
Last year, for example, it decided to roll out Christmas-themed white Coke cans in the US. The bizarre choice of festive colour change - it was, after all Coca-Cola that created the red-coated Santa in 1931 - did not go down well, though.
Not only were Diet Coke fans confused by the similarity to the silver cans they regularly bought, drinkers of Coke were bemused by the lack of red cans on the shelves. The white cans were therefore ditched before Christmas had even arrived.
In a bid to appear more international, British Airways rebranded its fleet and got rid of the Union Jack on its tail-fins in 1996.
Unfortunately, however, Richard Branson's Virgin Atlantic was quick to take advantage of the change and slap Union Jacks on its own jumbo jets.
Everyone knows what the Post office does. But when the organisation changed its name to Consignia in 2001, consumers were left confused.
Unsurprisingly, the Consignia brand didn't last long as a result.
In 1993, Barbie and Ken doll manufacturers Mattel wanted to give Barbie's boyfriend Ken a more modern look.
However, "New Ken", with his earring, string t-shirt and purple leather soon became an embarrassment. Dubbed "Gay Ken", he was soon discontinued and recalled.
In 2010, Gap released a new logo designed by Laird and Partners that attempted to keep an element of the iconic logo that has defined the brand for 20 years.
The new look was short-lived, however, with the retailer reverting back to its old logo within a week after negative feedback from customers.
When Andersen Consulting cut ties with Arthur Andersen, it let a marketing consultant choose its new name.
The rebranding is reported to have cost the company $100 million (£63 million), but the name has not proved popular and is regarded as "one of the worst rebrandings in corporate history."
Electrical retailer Dixons was unhappy with its reputation for poor customer service. So it decided to change its name to Currys.digital.
Unfortunately, however, the name has not caught on, with many shoppers still referring to the stores as Dixons anyway.
Gerber is an American baby food manufacturer that, while not a rebranding as such, made the mother of all marketing blunders when it decided to launch a range in Africa decorated with images of happy babies.
The range failed to sell, which is not surprising when you consider that African consumers at the time - many of whom did nit speak English - expected to see pictures of the contents of the tins...