Yes, as a matter of fact there is one.

It was written by Tom Fishburne and you can find it here.

Sadly the loop it suggests is less than comic for most people who undertake naming.  It's very much like the truth.

Here's the flow he outlines:

1. Brainstorm
2. Ideate
3. Sort
4. Lobby
5. Compromise
6. Check Trademark
7. Repeat

If this looks familiar to you then you need to consider another approach. 

How about:

1. Agree on name goals and importance of each
   
2. Agree on brand positioning
3. Confirm brand positioning against reality and tweak as necessary
   
4. Brainstorm
5. Expand concepts
6. Score concepts against goals and positioning (including trademark check)
7. Create mock-up identities for the top candidates
   
8. Select name that best meets the measurement criteria set at the start.

It's a rough approximation of what Stokefire uses in naming products... and in more than one hundred uses we've never had to repeat the process due to lobbying, compromise, or trademark issues. 

There is no lobbying because our system is analytically based.  The score is the ultimate tie-breaker.  Sure, some clients don't pick the best scoring name, but they do select ones that are near the top of the list. 

Naming ain't easy.  (Those who say it is likely aren't doing the type of research that enables companies and products to develop deep and powerful brands.) We are often perplexed by the many people (amateurs and pros alike) who seem to think that by encouraging a democratic process from start to finish the process will be made easier or the name stronger.  It doesn't work that way.

If you want mass participation then include that in the early stages of establishing brand positioning and the goals for the name - even brainstorming can benefit from extra input.  It ends there.  The actual selection should be as tight a group as possible.  If a democratic process - such as a vote - is required for a new name to be put in place then the preliminary selection should be made in advance, with the vote being one of two things - Either "YES" or "NO".

We advise that the materials be developed in support of the vote so that voters can understand the strengths of the name.  We also suggest that the full identity be developed so that the potential can be seen visually. 

That said - if you really want to come to a compromise you can go right ahead.  There's a reason why most names look an awful lot alike - and why company and product names follow trends.  Compromise encourages safety rather than risk, and safety means doing something that has been done before. 

Welcome to Dullsville, Population Infinity Plus You.

Yes, it's true - if you're going to rip someone off then the chances are excellent you'll do better if you give your rip-off a spiffy name.

Add Stokefire to the list of businesses that have been hit with this scheme - something that seems to be almost as pervasive as the Nigerian scams that come out every few months.  Here's how it works:

1. Receive a phone message from a Congressman's aide who says he wants to present you with the Congressional Order of Merit - and he leaves a toll-free number for you to call back.
2. When you return the call you are told that as part of the award you're also invited to serve on the Business Advisory Council and then you're instructed to listen to a taped message from congressman Tom Cole wherein he says the National Republican Congressional Committee needs your help to fight the liberal agenda.
3. You are asked for a donation of $495 after hearing Tom Cole's pitch and told that your name will be added to the list of NRCC supporters (in print) to be granted the title of "Honorary Chairman of the Business Advisory Council."  (This might seem strange, since this was supposed to be about getting the The Congressional Order of Merit, but you won't point this out to them.)
   
4. If you can't afford (or don't want to spend) that much they will offer you the same deal for the bargain price of $200.
5. If you have a fat wallet and really want that award they'll offer you a chance to have a seat at the President's Dinner for about $5,000.  It is not actually apparent whether or not the President will make an appearance here.  Karl Rove was known to show up at past events, however, so that's almost the same thing, right?

The only way you'll get your hands on the Congressional Order of Merit is if you pay for everything - which seems to have a price-tag of about $5200.

End result?  You get a couple pieces of paper, a nice night out, and your name on the NRCC donor's list.  All for doing nothing more than being on a calling list and having money.  Cool!

But think about this... would anyone ever spend money if this thing didn't have a nifty name? 

"Hi - we're with the NRCC and we'd like you give us money for our 'Feed the Rich' campaign.'  We'll even feed you lunch and dinner."

 See?  It doesn't work. 

Unfortunately the name has some serious flaws which become evident after you perform a Google search on it.  The very first hit is a story by Ira Flatow who very quickly exposes the whole thing as a charade.  You have to go through about three pages of links before you find the first mention that doesn't have the word "scam" in it.  One wonders how many Republican fund raisers now have Earl Stevenson on their quick-dial.

So what's the flaw?  Well, let's look at the very first aspect of the FAINTS system: Fidelity.

Is "The Congressional Order of Merit" a name that rings true?  It seems to imply two things:  One, that the US Congress is providing the Order, and Two, that they're acknowledging something that is meritorious.  Are either in fact the case?  Seems like the answer is no - even if we're generous.  Sure, this thing is sponsored by a committee that is related to Congress, but it isn't congress.  To have fidelity this should be "The National Republican Congressional Committee Order of..." but they seem to have left out a few of the words.   As for merit-worthiness.  Donating to the NRCC is indeed worthy of note from the NRCC and they may even consider a donation as deserving Merit if it is big enough.  But Congress would never (or should never) provide a similar label for something as mundane as opening a wallet.

Once this falls down on the Fidelity measurement the rest doesn't matter.  As the Google search shows us - the entire campaign is torn apart on the Internet and the reason it draws this attack isn't that it is a fund-raiser... it is that this is a dishonest identity.  They're not selling (or giving away) what the name suggests.  A score of (-5) on the Fidelity scale effectively kills this very promising and powerful name.  You can't expect to label your wheelbarrow of mud as prime rib and expect that people will continue to enthusiastically buy your product.  People may buy the mud once, but they're going to spread the word that the steak your selling is just wet dirt.  And they'll be pissed.

Two quick notes before I finish.
1) If you run a search on "congressional order of merit" on the NRCC website you return a sum total of zero hits.
2) The "Business Advisory Council" that we are told is an honor to participate in is listed under the NRCC Donor Programs - Individual contribution opportunities.

So - they're offering you an award they don't officially acknowledge (which is odd for something they tell you is their "highest honor") and giving you a title synonymous with NRCC donor.  How much is that worth?

Lesson:  Be truthful about what you're offering with your name and brand.  Make sure you consider the impact of overstating your product's benefits - or your overall brand image may suffer the consequences.


Many thanks to Tom Cole (R-Oklahoma) for an entertaining morning of name and brand exploration.  (In case you were wondering what Congressman Cole does with his days - "Tom Cole spends most of his time listening to people."  That explains why he's still running this game... Google usually doesn't talk.)

A respectable cure for man-breasts?  One can only hope...

Sarah (the adoring adored wife of the Thingnamer) found a site that just begs to be ogled.  I felt an irresistible urge to check it out.  Why?  Well... What do you get when you combine a world leader with a couple extra pounds on his frame with a well tested underclothing support-system that keeps stuff from wiggling around?

The answer seemed obvious when we heard this website name.  Imagine a man-bra endorsed by someone in such a high office...  Finally men with prominent pectoral fatty deposits can feel confident again!  (If Putin can get behind this could Bush be far behind?)

We just bought a new car last week.  Paying sixty-five bucks to fill up the tank gets old fast.  So - out with the SUV and in with a nifty little dark grey Toyota Prius. 


I'd been trying to figure out exactly how you would refer to Prius in the plural and hadn't made much headway, so when my wife was out of the room I asked the salesperson.

Me: So... How do you refer to Prius plurally?

Him: Uhh... Priuses, I think.

Me: Oh.  That makes sense... I'd been thinking maybe Pria.  Well... How would you refer to a gathering of Priuses - like at a rally or something?

Him:  I have no idea.

Me:  I'd like to suggest "Priupism" 

Him:  ...

Me:  That's "Priupism" - with a "u."

Him:  Your car is over there.

Oddly he did not walk out to the car with me.  He waited for my wife.

Having made the water cooler chat much more interesting that day my job was complete.

This post examines another criterion (following yesterday's post on distinctiveness) commonly cited as a goal for organizational, product, or service naming: Simplicity. We're told that to be great a name must be simple... but we're rarely told why.  We'll take a quick look and see if its actually worthwhile.

You've probably heard or read it dozens of times... Perhaps even hundreds. 

Einstein said it best:

“It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience.”

Hmm... maybe Einstein didn't say it best.

An editor or copywriter of his seems to have improved upon it a bit:

"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler."

Still not quite right, though, is it?  Engineers working on the Apollo program said it even better:

"Keep It Simple, Stupid."

If Einstein himself couldn't get simplicity right then how can any of us mortals be expected to do it?  And when Einstein got it wrong it's not like people ignored him, is it?  They just kept working with it until it worked out...

Of course, none of these statements actually say anything about why stupid people (or anyone for that matter) should keep things simple.  So - I aim to fill in that gap - at least as it pertains to naming.

Why does simple work for naming?  Two reasons:

1. People have a limited amount of attentional capacity.  Simple stuff requires less attention to notice than does complex stuff.  Things that are overly complex or involved just get ignored by our minds to preserve our sanity.  Consider this: You may notice the beautiful color of the buds on a blossoming dogwood tree (simple) but you would never stand there to count them all up and see if the number of blossoms had something to do with how beautiful it was (complex.)  Sure, someone might do this - but not your average consumer or viewer of dogwood trees.  If something is too complex it will be screened out - basically unseen and unprocessed by our minds.  If your name gets screened out for being too complex (like your typical five word non-profit association name) it's as good as not being seen at all.
2. People remember simple things easier than they remember the hard stuff.  Remembering the lines of a musical staff is hard (EGDBF).  Remembering "Every good boy does fine" is easy.  Simplicity is a significant key to being remembered once a name is noticed.  Simple means easy to understand and process.  This can be via mnemonics, rhyming or other tools that assist us in the processing and storing of this information.  I've never bought a "Pooper Scooper" for my dog, but after having seen it once I'm unable to forget the name.  If I had to send someone out to buy one I'd reference it by name and if they were on the aisle it'd be the one purchased.
   

As with distinction, simplicity is not a goal in itself - but a way to get other desirable goals.

Simplicity gets you noticed, getting noticed is a requirement to making the sale.  (You can't buy a product you don't see.)

Simplicity gets you remembered, getting remembered builds familiarity, familiarity reduces the barriers to making the sale.  (You can't ask for a product when you don't remember its name.) 

Last example - When I give speeches and talks I often ask what the best car in the world is.  People list about a dozen models from Ferrari to Honda.  When I ask who makes the safest car?  Almost unanimous - Volvo.  They stick with a simple message and become inseparable from the word.  That's powerful - I can think of no other brand that would bring the same word to mind for 95% of the populace. 

The power of simplicity is the power to break through barriers and screens.  Simplicity gets you further into mental processing than any other criterion.

In this Thingnamer's view simplicity is indeed a desirable measurement criterion.   In fact, I can't think of a single complex name that I like.  Though it's only a sample of one, I'd wager a lot of us only have place in our minds for the simply expressed names and brands.

How about you?

Okay, we don't know it for a fact, but we're pretty sure he's a fan.

Why?

Because just eight months after we helped Columbia Sussex launch the Blush Ultralounge - an ultramodern night club - Wynn grabbed the exact same name and used it to replace and rebrand Lure - his struggling night club that previously occupied prime real estate in his casino. 

We're flattered that he noticed our work and saw the potential.  Both Blush Ultralounges are doing great business - and while operations and execution play a major role in that, so too does the depth and quality of the brand name.  Given that Wynn had less than spectacular success with his original name (Lure) it stands to reason that the new one enabled an approach and experience that Lure couldn't offer. 

Incidentally, Lure was one of the names our team discussed with the team at Blush - and we ruled it out because we found it less brandable than the winning name.  Seems like Steve and the new owner learned the same lesson. 

So - Bravo to Wynn and Columbia Sussex for their successes!

Here's to hoping that Steve will give us a call and get him a name of his own next time.  (And if someone paid for the name... well... hats off to the team that got the money.  We don't have the Moxie to copy anyone's work quite this closely...  Not that there's anything wrong with that.)

Anyone think that a company that invests in branding and research two years ahead of a hotel opening would fail to notice a nightclub owned by one of the biggest gaming and hospitality companies in the country?  We don't.

So... truly, Steve - we like the name and are happy you've selected it.  Given your budget and ability to execute, however, we think you could've selected some even more promising brand concepts that a less populous environment (like one in a tertiary market, perhaps) couldn't support effectively.  Opening another club?  Call us - we'd be happy to talk.  Really.

While doing a search for potential trademark conflicts for one of our repeat clients we came across a trademark filing that we just had to post. 

...In a world where porn was nowhere to be found on the Internet...  And where domain squatters didn't hoard all the good real-estate...

Nope.  It isn't fiction.

Tech Freaks posted a list of the first one hundred domain names to be registered - beginning way back in the dark ages of 1985.  You can click the link above for the full list, or view the top ten below:

1. 15-Mar-1985 SYMBOLICS.COM
2. 24-Apr-1985 BBN.COM
3. 24-May-1985 THINK.COM
4. 11-Jul-1985 MCC.COM
5. 30-Sep-1985 DEC.COM
6. 07-Nov-1985 NORTHROP.COM
7. 09-Jan-1986 XEROX.COM
8. 17-Jan-1986 SRI.COM
9. 03-Mar-1986 HP.COM
10. 05-Mar-1986 BELLCORE.COM

Anything having to do with sex, porn, fetishes, auctions, SEO, VOIP, and Paris Hilton was notably absent.  In fact, the list seems dominated by government contractors and large-scale manufacturers.  It seems quite a few of the first hundred are no longer serving the purpose they were registered for.  Sure, the long list of computer manufacturers (DEC, HP, IBM, SUN, INTEL, TI) is mostly intact, but Toad, Octopus, and others seem to be vastly different than they started out...  Unless an online travel agency was really that forward thinking...

In fact - the company with very first name registered - SYMBOLICS - is no longer operating. Long Live Symbolics!

And to all you Domain Squatters out there - just remember this... Even though you're likely camping out on about seven dozen domains that my clients want - you could've had 'em ALL if you'd just had your act together by 1987.  YOU COULD'VE RULED THE WORLD!!! 

(Don't feel quite so big and powerful anymore, do you?)

So, you really only need help choosing between a couple names?  Well... this post is for you!

One of the things that people come to Stokefire for is help in deciding between the top naming candidates already identified by a client.  (As a quick aside - though this is often what we're told our clients almost always have ended up using a name that comes out of our creative process rather than one they've developed independently.)

But... if you're looking for a name and really think you just need help deciding which is right I've found a tool for you.

Check out the Decisionizer!

Here's how it works...

1. You ask the website a question - like "Which name should I choose"
2. You enter each candidate under consideration
3. You list out the criteria for measurement (FAINTS - or one of the other items listed in that post - would work in a pinch)
4. You score each candidate
5. You get your answer.

Quick and easy!

Okay, maybe not entirely easy... or quick... there's still the issue of subjective measurements, lack of professional guidance, no help with internal politics, and the like. 

But if you really only need to make a choice this well certainly enable you to do so. 

Good luck.  (And if you actually do this, remember we're here for disaster recovery when you need us.)

This is a great video of Seth Godin speaking to an audience at Google.  Anyone who thinks that technology sells itself - and that marketing (or branding) is just a bonus -  needs to listen and watch. 

Even namers can learn a thing or two.  People don't buy products and technologies... they buy stories.  (Why else would anyone spend $25K per gallon for perfume?)

Yeah, it is 48 minutes long... but it is an excellent 48 minutes.

...except for the many spelling mistakes in the transcript.

Is there a connection between your favorite pair of jeans and the new name your company is considering?  Would I be asking this question if there wasn't?  Welcome to a blog post about... jeans and names.  (But not names of jeans.)

Quick thought before we depart for the holidays...

How many of you out there have a pair of jeans that you've owned for years, have worn through good and bad times, and only just now realized that there are more holes and raggedy bits than there is whole cloth?  Putting on your favorite jeans makes you comfortable, maybe brings back memories, or just allows you to stop sucking in your stomach the way you might have to when you're dressed for business... 

I've witnessed countless people - including myself - agonize over what to do when it becomes apparent the comfortable jeans with knee-holes that go clear around to the back of the leg are no longer suitable for wearing in public. 

Invariably we all try to find the same store that sold us the jeans in the first place and get the same cut as we had the last time. 

We want familiar.  We want comfortable.  We want our same damn jeans back. 

(The only time we don't is when we've had a major change - lost weight, put some on, or suddenly gotten -or lost- confidence in ourselves.)

Predictably I'm going to tie this to naming. 

We see exactly the same thing when we perform rebranding for our clients.  The first round of names we deliver almost never connects with the client.  They look for names that say the same thing that their old name did - but do it better.  Rather like looking for the same jeans they were wearing - but without the holes. 

In a recent project we asked the client to select the top three candidates from a list of twenty-five we submitted.  The names they selected were:

1. The name they use today
2. A variant of the name they use today, but with one word changed.
3. The working name of the rebranded organization.

In each case the reasons given were that they "felt right" or "familiar" or that they "just connected." 

Organizations typically rebrand only when there is a reason to do so.  Something changes internally or externally and the old identity no longer works.  It's like the major weight loss issue.  You can't wear the same jeans anymore even if they were comfortable.  Sure - you can still fit in them, but why not buy some that look good on the new you and accentuate your adjusted figure? 

Me and my Lucky Brand Jeans have been together for about five years (with occasional flings involving Indigo Palms - note... that is NOT as nasty as it sounds.)  I know it is difficult.  Especially when you don't feel that you've changed substantially.

Is there a lesson here?  Yeah, I think there is.  When considering names, if you sense you're being pulled towards the ones that are a lot like the one you've already got - take a step back.  Consider whether or not you (or your product or organization) has changed enough to merit a new look.  If you have then just remove the names that connect to the old you from the list. 

If you're the same and just want a new look you might want to consider keeping your name the same (or not changing your jeans) and instead focus on ensuring that you work on the way you present yourself.  (There's a reason why models always seem to present themselves to the camera in 3/4 view.  I'm not sure what the reason is, but there IS a reason.)  Marketing really can help - and marketing is much different and less invasive and costly than rebranding.

So - do you just need to control the camera angles or is it really time to get a new you?

Have a great holiday everyone.  I'm off to finish off a rebranding project - followed promptly by forcing myself to buy some unfamiliar jeans.  (Sorry, I'm not going to invest in anything low-rise.)

Want to have an impact on the environment and help whales, too?  This post is probably not going to be of interest to you.

This blog used to be filled with a common type of post - mostly containing diatribes written by me that railed on naming contests as ineffective, divisive, and generally rife with suckitude. 

Well, a new dawn in naming contests has arrived.

Whale naming competition

More than 11,000 possible whale names were submitted but we are now down to the last 30 possible whale names...which ones will be given to the wonderful humpback whales currently travelling on the Great Whale Trail?

Choose your favourite name from among the 30 below and hit the submit button at the bottom of the page. You can only vote once but you can ask as many friends to vote as you like.

Due to popular demand, the voting has been extended until the 7th of December 2007 at 17:00 Amsterdam time. So vote now and get all your friends to vote too.

Here's the list of names we're given to choose from:

Any of those stand out to you?

What do YOU think the results were?

Amazingly, I'm not against this sort of contest.  What's the harm in giving a whale with a stupid name?  Not much - it'll get press in the short term and people will remember the event for a while.  It keeps the contest sponsor in the news for a bit.  It's a lot like naming a baby panda - it gives a normally quiet entity like a zoo the ability to create interest with almost no investment in marketing. 

It's short term, it's low risk... it's bubblegum marketing.  You chew it for a minute or two and spit it out after its done its job.  

(I'm actually surprised that we don't see "Stephen Colbert" or perhaps "Bababooey" in the list...)

Now... imagine if this had been your company you were naming.  How'd you like to be the Mister Splashy Pants bar and grill?  (Okay... that might actually be fun...)  The Mister Spashy Pants Mortuary, maybe?  Imagine trying to find the CEO to run that company...

Hat tip to Jeffry Pilcher for reeling this in.

...for naming and branding...

...or for anything at all, really.

Marketers (at least the good ones) are big advocates for measuring the results - or the potential - of marketing and branding efforts.  Most of us in the industry have some system whereby we take an aspect of a campaign and measure it on a 1-to-10 scale - or perhaps a 1-to-5 or 1-to-3 system.

We tend to agree that evaluation is good.  Not only should use use systems that evaluate qualities before you release a brand - you should continue to measure after launch.  But generally speaking, it is the way we evaluate that seems to be tripping us up.

Consider the infamous 1-to-10 scale.  Harmless, right?  Everyone knows it, understands it, and can live with it.

But we've gotta ask if all of that really offsets the negatives we've encountered ourselves.  Does familiarity trump false optimism, inaccuracy, and inconsistency?  If it doesn't then folks need to find a better way...

Here's what we know to be true about positive evaluation scales:

• Using only positive numbers leads to falsely optimistic evaluations.  
• Given that our culture has the concept of negative numbers already established, when we don't use 'em there's a good chance that we're still factoring in their existence.  Consider an example where your brand ends up with a score of "3 out of 10" for some hypothetical quality.  There's a strong inclination to think "Well, at least we got three points, right?" since three is indeed a positive number and it is above the lowest potential score.  
  
• Now - shift the scale five points down (and add a zero to balance things out) and see what happens... A score of 3 turns into a score of -2.  Still think that score is harmless?  Scooting down the scale lets you accurately reflect the impact of the measurement without needing to spend large amounts of time explaining the scale.  "Negative is negative" is much easier to communicate than "4 is negative"
  
• Using only positive numbers cannot adequately capture the effects that campaigns (or branding work) can have on a brand.
• Sadly, marketing campaigns and branding activities can actually damage brands.  An all positive scale makes interpreting this potential for harm very difficult.  If a 1 to 10 scale were to be truly representative of brand potential then a score of 4 wouldn't be slightly below average - it would actually have a slight potential to damage your brand.   
• Using only positive numbers leads to inconsistently interpreted scores.  When someone says "I give that a seven out of ten" what does that mean?   Does a score of seven give you a grade of C (barely passing) or does it mean that you're rated "good" as is often the case on product evaluations? 
  
• Each of us has a different way of interpreting the scores based on our background.  A baseball player (from an environment where hitting 3 out of 10 is very good) is going to see things a bit differently than a nuclear engineer that would be unable to accept any score of less than 10 without putting lives at risk. 
  

Why does this matter? 

Because in looking around the branding world - when it comes to evaluating names - everyone who does it only uses numbers to the right of (or perhaps including) zero.  (At least as far as we can tell.)

Here's a sampling:
Talking Names
Igor's Evaluation Chart
Black Champagne Band Names
The Branding Blog

(We did find a couple sites that use negative numbers - but they had nothing to do with evaluating names across various qualities.)

I'm not meaning to bash anyone here.  There are dozens of examples out there but we namers are pretty damn hard to find.  This means that the better-known folks may take a disproportionate amount of the heat.

Ultimately my intent not to bash is best proven by the following admission...

You might be wondering why we know this much about a form of scoring that we don't use.  Well, Stokefire was in the same 1-to-10 crowd up until about June.  It was around that time we finally got it into our heads that our clients were all seeing the same thing and reading it differently.  (You'd be amazed at how many clients are perfectly happy with a score of "5" - even we explicitly state that "5" is "neither positive nor negative."  A "5" meant the negatives and positives were balanced - and that the name basically offered no help to the brand at all.)  We had to make it clearer.  "0" does the job very well.

So, fellow namers and even current and past clients... does this diatribe make sense?  Do you see the value in moving the scale down so that "bad" actually registers as a negative?  And should a neutral name be given a neutral score?

Does it clarify things at all?

(And for what it's worth - I rate this post a 4.  But I'm not going to tell you what the scale is.)

Alternate Title: Moron Name Generators

Okay, so the alternate title is probably a bit harsh - but it does help me introduce my topic for the day. 

I got a couple emails from folks who weren't entirely happy that I listed their site yesterday and did so without trumpeting the party line for name generators - which, if you don't know, is "Why the heck do you need a professional namer when all you have to do is click this button and you have a name?"

Name generators are a great tool (I did say that yesterday - so I wasn't completely biased) but they don't name companies or other stuff automatically.  I just can't make myself say something that isn't true.  (Okay, my sister might tell you stories from the seventies that would indicate otherwise - but on this topic and in this decade I'm not prone to making stuff up.)

Let's see if I can come up with an inoffensive metaphor...

How about:
Name Generators are a lot like a passenger train.  Sure - you know where you're supposed to be going, but without a trained engineer at the helm chances aren't good that you'll get there on time... if at all.  And there's a real good chance that if you DO get to where you're going someone is going to end up injured along the way.

Not too shabby.  And I think I've done a good job avoiding offending anyone except perhaps novice train engineers.

See, there's this problem with automated stuff, which is that it is probably really good at the stuff it is trained to do (like cramming morphemes together) but is absolutely horrible at the stuff it isn't programmed to do. 

Here's a random (and partial) list stuff that name generators (generally) don't do:

1. Check to see if the name conflicts with existing trademarks on a State, Federal, or international stage
2. Determine if the name sounds like something naughty in languages other than your own
3. Check for parsing issues (like penisland.com) when hearing or reading the name
   
4. Check to ensure that the name is easy to be pronounced for your target audience
5. Create a compelling story for your brand (other than "I clicked a button and got a name") that allows people to form a bond with your company
6. Ensure that the name has memory triggers that help the name to stick in the mind
7. Build consensus amongst your team and various stakeholders
8. Determine if there's anything in the name that can help to strengthen your brand
9. Determine if the name is a good match for your personality, voice, and mission
10. Determine if the name meets the goals you have for it
11. Ensure that you actually have goals set for your name
12. Check business directories and phone books to make sure your name won't have a lot of local competition
13. Talk to linguists and perform other searches to ensure that the name doesn't use terminology that is already conceptually owned by something or someone else.  (You could name your new shoe the "Thanksgiving Turkey" but it probably would result in a lot of people returning their inedible holiday meal.)
14. See if the shape of the word is easy on the eyes and easy to read.  Tillillypyg might seem like a good name when you hear it - but it's really hard to decipher when you see it.
15. Ensure that you're not using word-parts that are unpleasant to hear for your particular audience.  Ending your new perfume with an "-uck" sound might get you noticed - but probably not for smelling nice.
16. Check both the number of letters and syllables to make sure you're not expecting too much from your audience when they try to recall your name
17. Ensure that the name ties in with your business strategy
18. Check to be sure that you have a business strategy
19. Check to be sure that your business strategy is viable and can be supported by a name
20. Check to be sure your name is believable (if it makes any claims)
21. Check to be sure that the name actually does support the business strategy
    
22. Train users in how to evaluate whether or not a name is any good
23. Warn users when a name has major weaknesses that could lead to embarrassment or legal issues down the road

Sadly I'm growing tired of coming up with reasons why Name Generators aren't the ultimate in naming solutions.  I truly could go on all day (I'd guess there are a couple hundred things I could list) but I have work to do.

I do like name generators.  They can help get minds unstuck.   When quantity without context is needed they're a great source.  

But I don't think I would ever have a firm I worked for named by one.  And it isn't because I'm a namer.  It's because I don't have faith that a machine can understand the complexities of my business, my audience, my goals, and the complexities of developing a name that works.

And quite frankly I don't have faith that the people who programmed the machines in the first place have any real understanding of these factors either.  Or if they do they didn't take the time to put that part of their brain into the code.

It takes a person with a deep understanding of brands and naming to reliably do the job.  Kinda like the way putting a real engineer at the controls of that train will greatly increase the chances of that train arriving in Boston six hours after leaving Union Station. 

Moral of the story:  Don't mess with Thingnamers with blogs who give you free links.  Especially when they have an infant son who is both really hungry and teething.  All the FEED ME NOW - GET THAT OUT OF MY MOUTH - DOG TOYS ARE YUMMY - I DON'T CARE IF IT SAYS NOT TO FREEZE IT... DO IT ANYHOW (or at least that's how I interpret his squeals and demands) can shorten one's patience a tad. 

(And yep - it's all worth it Teddy.  You da man.  Keep slipping me those smiles and you know I'll do whatever I think you want.)

I've been sent perhaps a dozen free books on branding and marketing in the year and change I've been blogging. I've never written about them - mostly because there's rarely anything about naming or verbal branding in them.

This book doesn't have that disconnect...

The Soul of the Corporation by Hamid Bouchikhi and John R. Kimberly is an impressive book. And it is almost entirely related to what I do for a living. I'd suggest that it's one of the more advanced books on the concept of corporate identity, and it is backed by a slew of research (and the Wharton School.) While I didn't read it cover to cover yet, I did read the chapters that discuss the role of identity in situations that matter to naming - such as mergers, acquisitions, the beginning of new brands, and such. All of 'em were spot on - or a least headed in the right direction.

As an example - the book identifies the ingredients of Successful identity Change as:

1. Vision
2. Effective Communication
3. Consistency
4. Leadership Continuity
5. Luck and Positive Signals

While Stokefire's number one ingredient is missing (leadership involvement!) the list is one that is worth spending time to understand. It is clear that without any one of the five items a project will likely fail. They've at least provided a good starting point to work with.

Other interesting tidbits:

• An analysis of evolutionary vs. revolutionary change
• The difference between organizational and brand identity
• The downside(s) of branding (narcissism, id conflict, drift, & fragmentation)
• How to handle mergers, spin-offs, joint ventures, and more.
• Four leaders who've managed identity well, and four who haven't.
• Transitioning from a single brand to a portfolio...

If these topics don't get you motivated to read the book then chances are excellent you're not in the naming field. Or, as a former SecDef might say, "you don't know what you don't know."

Perhaps most refreshing was the near total lack of talking-heads from major branding firms that typically populate books like these. We get to see things through the eyes of employees, stakeholders, and customers - not the guys that developed (and are defending) the brand. Who cares what we, the creators of the identity, think. If the people who live the brand don't say it then it ain't real.

Bravo!

Many thanks to Wharton School Publishing for the comp. I've dog-eared so many pages that it's beginning to look like there's been trouble at the printer (since most of the upper-outside corners appear to be missing.)

How do you talk about "metering" without mentioning the meter?

That was just one of the challenges we faced while working on this project.

We're proud to announce another of our clients (The Automated Meter Reading Association - or AMRA) has launched their new identity. They needed a name that appealed to their core audience of senior leaders, could double as a new name for the industry as a whole, and avoided the verbal association between "meter readers" and "men in overalls" that seemed to be a bit misleading.

UTILIMETRICS was launched on October 2nd after over a year of brand analysis, development, and design. Check 'em out.

The AMRA/UTILIMETRICS team really impressed us with their understanding of what was needed to reestablish their brand. It isn't every day that you see an association take such a progressive step. Kudos also go to Bates Creative Group for their work on the graphic identity.

Can't wait to see what's next for the organization and the technology they represent.

I'm not sure how I missed this site amongst the clutter of naming sites on the internet. An intriguing concept - using a marketplace of sorts to sell names that someone has thought of and wants to sell. If you're a great namer then this just might work...

...but I think that great naming must be in the eye of the beholder because I'm not so sure that the names being sold are the sort of thing I'd advise my clients to buy - even if I was the one to invent the terms.

Consider the following:

• Juventure -
  • Supposedly an ideal name for a young venture capital firm. Someone might like to check their homonymic dictionary before grabbing this one. May work very well amongst the Hasidim, however.
• Stringia -
  • The site lists this as inspired by string theory. We've got friends from Jersey that are already using this word to describe their hair in comparison to someone who uses conditioner.
• Xirant -
  • The claim on this name is that it is "semantically meaningless." We don't see that. We see "tirant" with a single letter x-ed out. Or if you get creative the "t" just got lazy and flopped over at a 45 degree angle. "Fast, strong, and masculine?" Sure. And prone to genocide too!

Okay, so I'm being a little picky here. We've said it before - any name can be ripped to shreds by someone with even a little bit of experience. But these names certainly make it easier than it should be. (Perhaps if the analysis hadn't been provided we'd be less likely to jump on the issues. If the site had advertised just domain names we'd be far more kind.)

What really got our blood flowing this morning wasn't the quality of the names themselves... it was the use of the (r) after every single name listed. You see, you can't just slap an (r) on something and have it protected. Trademarks don't work that way. You've got to file for protection in specific classes and receive notifcation from the US government. NameSale has never done this for any of the listed names (that we can find.)

They did file for protection on their own name - but that lapsed on July 7, 2005... meaning that the (r) after their own name isn't there legally either.

It's a Monday so I've almost got enough ire to slap "NameSale" in my own website name just to prove a point. Sadly "The ThingNameSaler" looks absolutely horrific and makes no sense at all. It was a good idea though, no? Maybe I could sell ThingNameSaler.com(r) and make a fortune!

What should the folks at NameSale have done? Well - if they wanted protection in the US they should've used (tm) or (sm.) Perhaps someone over in Sweden can search the PRV and tell us whether some of these were actually registered over yonder. We're guessing that since there's money involved in both filing and searching that neither was done for these names...

Come on people! If you're going to play in the naming space at least come with your B game.

(Actually, the names provided aren't bad ones... they're just not great names. It's obvious that many of the names in the list were rejected by clients of theirs and they're just trying to recycle them. They're just going about it a little backwards.)

If you want to have more fun just check out The Wayback Machine.You can see how the list of names has evolved over the years. Interestingly enough, the Juventure name hasn't sold since late 2001. (But maybe this post will be the one to push it into the sold column!)

Good luck in the sale of the domain NameSalers! We'll check up later in the year to see what's goin' on.

What would happen if Saddam's "Mother of All Wars" fell in love with Putin's "Father of All Bombs?"

"Mother of All" has become a trendy way of saying "best" or perhaps "will redefine the meaning of" (though the latter doesn't feel particularly prone to trendiness.)

How does this relate to naming? Well, there's the obvious fact that both Saddam and Putin used these lofty words to refer to important things (okay, so they weren't really products, but they still needed names...) And there's the more relevant fact that "MoA" has been used thousands of times in products and services since it was coined. MoA appears to be more commonly used in commerce than FoA - at a ratio of about four or five to one.

Of particular interest to me is the fact that (as far as I can tell) there are exactly zero products that use the phrase "Mother of All" in their names that have become wildly successful - other than the originally referenced war, of course.

I predict that we'll see similar results from "Father of All" in the coming years. We may even see it become more popular than MoA for a while. But I'd be willing to wager that no product with FoA or MoA in its name will ever crack the top 100 spots on Amazon or any other reputable mass retailer.

Could it have something to do with the fact that the terms are typically used tongue-in-cheek? Or that they're too closely linked to pop-culture and prone to becoming dated too quickly? Or is it that the logical impossibility of something becoming the mother or father of anything *after the thing is already born* is just too goofy to consider seriously?

I'll leave you with this thought. How is it that "The Father of All Bombs" could be invented more than a half-century after the nuclear bomb (a much more powerful weapon) was dropped? It seems that the FoAB is more like the smaller, better behaved nephew of the atom bomb, doesn't it? But "The Nephew of All Bombs" just doesn't have much oomph...

So much for truth in advertising....

(No, We Still Don't Like Acronyms.)

Why? Because except in rare instances they're forgettable, confusing, costly, and time intensive. ...among other things, of course.

Forgettable because most acronyms (and initialisms) have no connection to the idea behind the letters.

Confusing because if someone wants to get to know the organization or product behind the letters they've got to learn two different names - the abbreviated one and the long, drawn-out one. Additionally, the pronunciation of an acronym or an initialism is often not intuitive.

Consider:

• ICQ = "I Seek You" (instead of "Ick!")
• IEEE = "I triple E"
• IALA = "Eye Allah"
• LED = "Ell Eee Dee"
• IUPAC = "Eye You Pack"
• SQL = "Ess Cue Ell" or "Sequel"
• FNMA = "Fannie Mae"

Each of these examples follows a different rule for pronunciation. And this list covers less than half of the potential pronunciation issues. It seems to me that taking the extra effort to say your name, then spell your name, then explain that the letter sounds are actually letter sounds and not full words (as in "ICQ") is more trouble than it is worth. Which leads me to...

Costliness... Supporting two unique identities - the short and long version - takes money. It appears in the use of different names for internal and external documentation, or in different logo presentations, or in linear inches when writing job descriptions for publication in the paper, or - relating to the last issue listed - in time spent explaining what the acronym means.

Time is a significant disincentive for the use of acronyms. If the goal is to do something productive with the hours in your day and your staff is forced to expalin the acronym every time they say it to someone new... aren't you losing a bit of money every time conversation is side-tracked? Yes, you could argue that the additional conversation is about your company so it's "all good" but wouldn't you rather have a conversation better targeted to what you want from the person you're talking to? If it takes 15 seconds to clarify your name each time you say it and you say your name to ten new people a day... that's 2.5 minutes a day or 12.5 minutes per week per staff member. Almost an hour a month of lost time multiplied across your entire sales staff.

It seems to me that it is better to have the listener ask a question about what you can do for them or the value of your offerings intead of asking the most basic question (i.e. "Umm... what's that mean?") Acronyms have a way of making people feel stupid - they're the professional version of "AMonkeySaysWhat?" - forcing us to stop the speaker to clarify an issue that the speaker should've addressed or let the speaker go on as we focus on the fact that we have no clue what was just said. There's an old military prank that guys pull on new recruits - commenting that the hardest part of the job is cleaning up after all of the spent B-1RD (pronounced "Bee One Arr Dee") fuel in the hangar. It's a rare recruit that figures it out in the first couple days.

Want a few more reasons?

How about these:

1. We did fine for centuries without even having a word to describe what an acronym was. It wasn't until the 1940s (shortly after The New Deal) that the mess of long-winded government programs likely forced us to come up with a way to describe the alphabet soup. Do you really want to be associated with annonymous government programs?
2. Typically you can't trademark your acronym by itself. And you can't prevent others from using the same one that you do. There aren't enough letters in our alphabet to allow every company and association to get their own short acronym reserved all for themselves. So...
3. You end up sharing your acronym with hundreds our thousands of other entities and no one can ever find you.

Think the big guys are immune? Think again. ABC - an acronym "owned" by the American Broadcasting Company - seems to have a bit of trouble keeping others off of their letters. On the first page of an ABC Google search we find:

• " yet Another Bittorent Client"
• Australia's public broadcasting network
• The national trade association representing merit shop contractors
• The audit bureau of circulations
• ...and references to three different branches of the American Broadcasting Company.

If we're generous and we allow a contextualizing term like "towing" to be added to ABC we should be able to find our local tow shop, right?

Nope.

Unless you're fortunate enough to be in Hammond, Indiana. Those guys are easy to find. Most of the other 1.8 million "ABC Towing" hits are for other companies in other cities and states - and are entirely unrelated to the guys in Hammond.

Acronyms, plainly stated, are perhaps the fastest way to become permanently anonymous in business.

That said, there are exceptions. One quick look at FCUK and you'll see there are ways to get attention. But (thankfully?) there can really be only one FCUK. However, I know without even looking that even this name has been copied. I'll give ten to one odds that FUKC and FCKU are both being marketed as copycat brands... (But that is a rant for another day.)

Aww heck... I couldn't resist!

Looks like the DSCC has selected the four finalists to vote on. (See yesterday's post for context.)

They are:

1. Sorry W - I'm The Decider
2. Now You Know Why I'm a Democrat
3. About Dem Time
4. Look where voting republican has gotten us

Anyone feel moved?

Quick thoughts:

1. The first concept references the President - even though he's not running for office. Why would we apologize to him - or use his language to justify voting Democrat? And weren't we all the "Deciders" last time (and the time before) when he won? If we're the deciders then we're worse at it than he is.
2. The second concept makes little sense to me. I actually don't know why you're a Democrat - and the statement prevents me from asking any questions. We feel like an idiot for not knowing. Or at least I do. And the fact that the Dems already have the Senate (and haven't done a helluva lot with it) calls into question the entire statement. Lastly, I thought you voted Dem to prevent W from wreaking havoc. That's not an issue any more.
3. About Dem Time? Cute. Slogan-like. A little bitter. And... Dems already have the Senate, so it sort of lacks punch. How can it be about Dem time when it has been Dem time for the last two years? Are we talking presidential, senatorial, or just general politics here?
4. And the last? Where has voting republican gotten us? And why does it matter since most voters didn't vote that way in the last election? Sure there's the whole war debacle, but a Dem controlled Senate hasn't fixed it. On the plus side - if we did vote red last time then this is the only message that speaks to us. But it only has teeth if we voted red and regretted it.

We can do better.

Really.

Maybe if they started by telling us what the slogan was supposed to do for the party and the platform we could've produced something better... That of course would require the party to have someone who knew what the heck you could achieve with a slogan.

Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?

Okay, I’ve had it. We’ve all grown tired of names without vowels in the cell phone industry: Razr, Slvr, Krzr, etc. [Ed.: And don't forget the Interweb!] So today I’m trolling through luggage on the Target website and what do I find? A rolling carry-on bag called the BAUER ORGNZR. I’d just like to say for the record that I don’t want my clothing orgnzd when I travel. If all the vowels were missing from my clothes, how would I bttn my shrt? Would my scks and shs still fit my ft? And I shudder to think what would happen to my laptop. I’d end up writing like an advertising geek, lose all my friends, and spend my waning years alone in a thrd-flr wlkp. Too sad.

...and another Stokefire name hits the market.

How do you develop a name for a green media firm without using the words "green," "eco," or any of the other current buzz-words used in the space? By focusing on how you're different and what you're trying to achieve rather than slapping a "me too" name on that blends in with the crowd.

emPivot opened for business this week and is already gaining attention as the place to go to find and share new perspectives on green issues.

Why emPivot? Because the founders (Chace Warmington and Thom Wallace) felt strongly that their purpose was not to spread the gospel of green to the choir, but instead to offer a place where real people can discuss every aspect of green - whether they're passionate supporters, detractors, or on the fence. This is about empowering a change in perspectve - a change in opinions - or a change in lifestyle. The concept of being green doesn't move all that much, but our understanding and perspective can change rapidly.

While "green" was off-limits for the name, it was still in play for the tagline - something we proposed using to contextualize a name that didn't immidiately shout its purpose. (You'll note that Google, Yahoo, Kodak, Exxon, Sears... and just about every other great brand in the world... doesn't disclose their market in their name. They use advertising, taglines, and other tools to get the context across. We think we're in good company here.)

Stokefire developed both the name and the tagline for the new company (a brand owned by Ecofusion.) The result:

emPivot: View Green From Every Angle

We also developed alternate taglines for future use - and we'll trumpet those as emPivot grows their brand over the coming years.

We'll post a full case study and press release later this month - and will have even more information available once our redesigned corporate website sees the light of day in September.

Great job thus far Thom and Chace... looking forward to more great things from your team!

This is only loosely related to naming. And yet I find myself unable to stop myself from writing about it. Perhaps you can scream at me (like a banshee?) and I'll stop.

According to Web sources, a banshee is a wailing, weeping, screeching, or screaming harbinger of death.

So why is the term coming up in business? Perhaps as a warning to those that make bad business decisions? Or because of the reference to Celtic mythology?

Sadly, no. Mostly it's just because people don't know what the word means.

There's "Grow Business Like A Banshee" from the American Chronicle - perhaps a reference to the fact that when you tell people they're going to die they're more apt to buy life insurance? Chet Holmes (CEO of Chet Holmes International) wrote the article without a single reference to the helpful screeching babes. Based on the article it seems, in fact, that the term "like a banshee" is actually a stand in for "people who can multiply by two." Who knew?

There's someone going by the handle "daibebtates" on 43things that wants to "learn to type like a banshee." This is one guy I do *not* want to have in the cubicle next to me.

Though not technically business related, there's a woman who met a guy who'd "want to kiss and make out like a banshee" but never went any further. I'm tellin' you... death can be such a turnoff. Makes sense to me that after shouting into a woman's mouth about morbid stuff I'd be in absolutely no mood for hanky panky.

Only related to business when preceded by "doing my...", Kitty Foreman of "That 70s Show fame shouted "I have to pee like a banshee" as she rushed to the bathroom. We are left to wonder why we heard nothing from her once the door shut.

Professors even fall victim to misuse - saying things like "This thing will be spinning like a banshee" as if it were a subclass of dervish. Or perhaps a brand of wooden top.

The real cause for this post was something read to me by my wife (honest!) that came from O, The Oprah Magazine. The name of the piece was "Network like a banshee." Is it just me, or does everyone else also picture someone showing up, grabbing a beer, a snack wrapped in a greasy napkin, then turning to the crowd and shouting,

HI EVERYONE! I'M TATE! YOU ARE ALL GOING TO DIE!

OH! AND HERE IS MY BUSINESS CARD - LET'S GRAB A BITE SOMETIME. BUT SOONER RATHER THAN LATER! PREFERABLY BEFORE... WELL... YOU KNOW."

C'mon - with all Oprah's money you'd think she could hire editors that catch this stuff...

At least Yamaha got the name/sound connection right. (Though the whole ATV as symbol of impending death is a little distasteful to me given the safety issues it has...)

Lesson in naming:(?) Don't use a word just because it feels right. Make sure you spell it right and don't unintentionally choose a homonym or eggcorn that makes you look foolish or uneducated. The ear isn't always right...

Ever want to have a big-time title? The Republicans are ready to let you earn one. For five million dollars.

Yep. Five big, big, big ones donated (or rather offered to the RNC to sponsor the Republican National Convention) gets you:

• A private reception with Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Sen. Norm Coleman, and the mayors of the cities ear the convention.
• A private dinner with Republican leadership.
• Golfing with Republican leadership.
• An opportunity to sponsor water bottles, volunteer outfits, city banners, billboards, bus signs and events.
• Access to the media party.
• VIP access to the convention.

And... best of all... the RNC will officially give you the title of "Finance co-chair."

(Perhaps this is because as the minority party they figure someone on the right side of the fence should get a co-chair title.)

And the Democrats, you might ask? What are they offering up?

For the bargain price of $1 million you can have:

• Invitations to private events with the Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, Mayor John Hickenlooper, Sen. Ken Salazar, and more.
• VIP access to the convention
• Premier sponsorship of the media party
• Top sponsoship of the "coveted fete" media party
• An opportunity to place products with corporate logos in delegate and media goody-bags.
• Invitations to all host-committee events

And yes... the Dems are offering up a title. Sort of. Actually, they're selling adjectives.

The adjective in question? Presidential.

If I were going to donate a million bucks I think the more obvious title would be "Rich." It's a good thing that the title the Dems selected doesn't suggest that power and influence can be bought, isn't it?

If you don't have that top level of funds available you can consider offering up a bit less. Both parties have developed nifty - and strangly similar - levels and titles. Check this out:



What does this tell us? Perhaps:

• There are no Democrats with more than a million dollars to spend.
• If the Democrats win the presidency all precious metals will be cheaper.
• For Democrats, though there's assuredly a second place, there is no third.
• Republicans are either having their convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul, or they're really big fans of Norse mythology.
• You probably don't want to use that plane restroom after a Democrat has vacated it. Or if you do, bring some Sani-wipes.

I'm not saying that naming funding levels is easy. But "Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze" is only slightly less mundane than having "Red, White, and Blue" levels (which isn't often done on a national level nowadays since no one wants to label a donor as "white.") Why aren't we seeing a tie-in to the party platforms? Is appreciation for precious metals really that much of a key to the identites of both parties?

You want to see a spike in donations? You want to get press? You want to get people talking? Here's how:

Use controversial platform topics as your funding levels.

Imagine the Democrats having an "Equality Advocate" level or the Republicans with a "Protectors of Marriage" sponsorship. Sure it is divisive. But imagine the power of being able to show that there are 5,000 people or companies willing to not only say that they are for (or against) gay rights, but show they are committed with a dollar sign next to their name. You want more notice? Add in right-to-life issues, death penalty, and the like. How many churches and community groups wouldn't be throwing dollars at the campaigns to show their support for a cause that mattered to them?

Will it happen? I'll almost guarantee that it won't. But I'd love to actually see a party or candidate take a stand like that. If it matters to the candidate/platform then why not allow the constituency to show their support for the idea? We'd know real fast whether or not an issue had real support.

Are you with me?

Interested in more on this topic? Earlier this year I wrote a post about the terms the individual candidates used for their fund-raising efforts. I must admit that even the worst ideas used by the candidates can trump the best the DNC and RNC have pulled together.

Is it because the categories were developed by committee? Probably.

Add another nail to the coffin that contains focus groups and working committees, please. (Though "Mile High Plus" is a pretty impressive name to be approved by committee... hard to believe someone didn't choke on the sexual connotation.)

While researching our peers in the naming industry we came across an interesting situation. Every month we swing by all of the naming sites we can find to see where the competition and the industry as a whole is headed. You'd be amazed what you can anticipate by looking at the lists of recently named companies out there. (Evocative single-word names, anyone?) Or the stances that companies take on what sets them apart. (In this industry attitude is apparently just about everything. Well, that and your portfolio.)

Anyhow, we came across a site that listed a name that was very familiar to us. In fact, one of our friends in the naming industry had also claimed they had given a firm the same label. And when you clicked the links provided by each naming company they both brought you to the same site!

How can this be? Did the two companies work together on developing the name and not tell anyone?

The answer? No.

It appears the following occured:

1. Company "Alpha" had a naming contract and developed a name that the client liked but for which the .COM address was camped.
2. Company "Beta" (also a naming firm) was squatting on the website and was willing to sell it.
3. Alpha brokered the sale of the website from Beta to their client.
4. Alpha lists the company name and the story behind it on their website, along with quotes from the client, and provides a link to their client's website.
5. Beta lists the company name in their portfolio, provides a link to Alpha's client, and provides no context about what services were provided. (Note that Beta does not say they developed only the ".COM" - they list the name without any URL suffixes.)

This, to me, is a sticky ethical issue.

Alpha obviously selected the name as right for this client, but Beta seems to have been the originator of the name concept and was savvy enough to reserve the website.

Which one counts? Legally it would seem that each has a claim to the name, though one has a claim to naming a ".COM" and the other a company.

A couple weeks back I found a corporate namer that listed numerous names that were obviously fictional. (Spunkwave, anyone?) This isn't quite the same. Korwitts hadn't even reserved the websites (which were often still available, mind you) so the names were purely theoretical. In her case she's just slammed some letters together and put them on the web. There's no registration and no ability - should she have actually come up with a strong name - to defend a name as her own.

So, putting aside the previous example, can someone claim credit for naming a firm if they weren't the ones to work with that firm? Does camping on a website name give you the right to claim that you named the company that buys it from you? If so, at what point does the claim of "inventing the name" not ring true? If I just write a word on my blog (e.g. "Alacabraxify") and someone comes along and uses it for their company name can I say that I named the firm?

If I hire a group of punters to help come up with ideas and one of 'em says the name that we eventually use (note that we don't typically hire punters) must I say that the hired hand came up with the name? Can the hired hand claim it (barring any signed documents preventing said claim?)

Where is the line? And what would you advise Alpha and Beta do to resolve this?

Update 1:38 EDT - Alpha and Beta came to an agreement after this post was written but before it was published. Beta has kept the name on their list of names they've created, but they've removed the client link.

Anyone out there have an opinion as to whether or not this is satisfactory?

It's getting pretty crowded in here, ain't it?

Athol Foden - head namer over at the descriptively-named Brighter Naming - has started up the Name Awards blog.

While I haven't yet figured out what the Name Awards have to do with the content on the blog, it is obvious that Mr. Foden has considerable experience he brings to the table. His opinions are interesting even if they're often on the opposite side of issues from the opinions we (or more accurately "I", in this case) hold. (I wasn't immediately attracted to the name Alinghi and am not a big fan of Blu-Ray.)

Side note - Stokefire was named during the "blue craze" that is still echoing on today. In fact, Bluebulb was one of the early concepts we came up with. We ditched it because it wasn't deep and felt like a "me too!" response to the naming environment.

Mr. Foden is asking interesting and unusual questions - such as how you would market the Osama brand in light of recent world events, and how Adam and Eve got their names. (We think we might know a guy who could help with that last one. But he hasn't talked for a while...)

Welcome to the conversation Mr. Foden. Looking forward to getting to know you through your words...

To those of you who are on the executive team, board, and who assisted in the development of today's newly named association... actually now an alliance... I just wanted to publicly say "thank you." You did a great job coming to a unanimous decision after so many diverse opinions were voiced. Having so many people who start with diverging opinions coming together to further their organization is a beautiful thing. Especially when you select such a versatile name. Can't wait for the launch later this year.

Hope you enjoyed both the process and the result.

Waiting is the hardest part. Especially when we're wanting to talk about you out in the open already.

Kudos!

And to everyone else... you'll have to wait a few months until we pull the wraps off this one. But the wait will be well worth it.

We talk to many marketing, branding, and graphic design firms in our area and frequently ask about where they got their name. Typically the answer is something like "It sounded cool" or perhaps "we kept searching until we found one where the website was available and made a bit of sense."

Today I spoke with Bruce Gemmill, president of Campbell and Associates - a marketing firm located in Herndon Virginia. In addition to being an all-around good guy who is involved in the local chamber and other organizations, he had a nice story to tell about his firm.

I was curious how a guy with the last name of Gemmill might end up becoming president of a boutique marketing firm with the name Campbell. I was guessing he'd bought it from someone.

I was wrong.

As Bruce told me, he'd spent years leaving messages and talking with administrators for his clients - and invariably people would respond with "Thank you Mr. Campbell." As noted above, that is not his last name. His last name, Gemmill, is a name not many people have heard of - and it sounds awfully close to Campbell when heard over the phone - or even in person.

Rather than spend the remainder of his career correcting people on his last name, Bruce went with the flow. He named his firm "Campbell and Associates" and in the process ended up with a name that is highly memorable even though it appears on the surface to be common.

Sometimes it isn't the name itself that lends character to the company. Sometimes it's the story. Okay, often it is the story. (In fact, we tend to prefer the story behind the name to be at least as powerful as the name itself. It lends strength to the brand.)

Bruce's selfless act of removing his own last name from his firm showed a lot about the company's core values. And it gives him a nice story that helps people remember who he is, what his firm's name is, and even provides a peek at his own persona.

Kudos, Bruce. Thanks for taking the extra thirty seconds to tell me your story. Hope others enjoy it as much as I do.

We're occassionally asked how important it is to have a unique name - as in one that exists nowhere else in the world. And our response hasn't changed much over the years.

Unique in your industry is likely important. Unique in the world is not.

While it isn't necessarily a bad thing to coin a new term, it certainly makes a naming project more challenging, and the resulting marketing campaign will likely cost more. (You're not only paying to put your name out there, you're also having to use 'air time' to explain what it means or ensure that people spell the name correctly.)

How hard is it to come up with a unique term?

Taking a look at the US Patent and Trade site we find that it's actually pretty easy to find a combination of letters that have only used once. Just starting with the letter "A" we quickly discover some unique opportunities.

There are 1,326,511 documents filed with the letter "A" standing alone. (Note that this doesn't mean that the word is in the name, only that it is in the filing somewhere - perhaps in the description... but since we're looking for something unique we don't even want to see the word in the description.)

Moving on th "AA" we find we're down to 1122 documents.

AAA gives us 780, AAAA has 28, and AAAAA finds just 3 filings. If you want to find an existing unique name you're looking at SIX letter As in a row. And it looks like there've been a few people who noticed that six As were taken and moved even further. Check out ACTIVE LIQUID MINERALS AAAAAA, STAR-ZYME A AAAAAAAAA, and even more impressive, "AAAAAARGH! Inc" - the registrant for the mark "COMEDYCITY."

While computers are getting better at suggesting the right spelling for a name we're searching for, we still occasionlly rely on correct spelling to find things - such as in a phone book, an off-line index, or even when searching online in a search engine like the USPTO.

Imagine having a name like "AAAAAARGH!" How would you explain how to find your firm online? Would you say "Just type in ARGH with six As and an exclamation?" (That's the way we'd do it if we were saddled with the name, but it's still a mouthful, and who is to say anyone would remember the number six here?) Maybe it's better to say "Sextuple-Argh!"?

A decent rule of thumb: If your average ten-year-old doesn't know the short-hand for the number of letters (e.g., "double" or "triple") then you've probably put too many of the same letters in. Anything more than three in a row is hard to count quickly, and the short-hand for them would be unfamiliar. How many Americans could find an organization that went by the shorthand - "Nontuple-A?"

Unique can be found through the use of repetition, yes. But a company that works this hard to be unique may be expecting too much from their audience. And additionally, in a world where every website misspelling is camped, having seven or eight As in your name just means that you'll lose traffic to the guy with six or ten of 'em.

Originality ain't easy. And it takes more than math to get there.

We don't have the answer yet, but we're checkin' it out.

We've identified a few patterns and we're lookin' to see which one takes the cake as the all-out-overused champion of them all. We'll look to Seth Godin's list, TechCrunch, and a few other places to see what we find. Is it:

• Peri.ods.inweirdplac.us
• Trunkatn Wrds
• Zwitching Lettorz
• U51ng Numb3r5 4 n0 r34s0n
• Using "-ster"
• iThink uKnow dPrefix thing...
• Calling yourself a ".com" (kinda like we do... only serious-like.)

Or something else? Come take the survey and tell us! And if you don't want to hazard a guess at which is most common, at least grace us with your opinion as to which is the most annoying.

My peeve? I'm pickin' truncation. Flickr be damned. And I'll go out on a limb and pick truncation as the most common fault as well.

C'mon folks - show that you care! We might not be able to stop the madness, but at least we can show we won't go quietly.

Results of our back-of-the-napkin research to come next week.

The folks over at Igor's Snark Hunting site have been sending us a bit of traffic due to the fact that our site may have had a bit of social networking overkill.

We have a popular post here from February that discusses and rates the trends in Web 2.0 naming and might be of interest to you.

But if you're clicking through just to see the offending links you're going to be disappointed. We'd been quite fond of them as they were colorful, pretty, and acted as a nice visual indicator that one post was ending and another was beginning. (Okay, so when I think about it a bit more I've gotta agree they were just clutter and there for absolutely no reason at all... but still... It made me feel popular. Or at least potentially popular.)

Sadly, I have thin skin (and little talent) when it comes to my blog-designing skills so I have put my tail betwixt my legs and removed the ninety-dozen links that got the hump-backs on my case.

I was going to say something witty here about the hatin' being directed at us due to Igor's fear of fire, but realized just before I hit the "publish" button that Mary Shelley might've risen from the dead to correct me.

So, Igorians... if you think of any appropriate comebacks you can feel free to pretend they were hurled by us and be suitably humbled and intimidated.

Yeah. We roll like that.

Maybe it'll have something to do with 'stooping to your level' (Oooh snap!) Though we'd appreciate it if you could make it a bit more witty and significantly less obvious.

We'd be more agressively peeved if it weren't for the fact that they called us "an actual blog" - thus alleviating our fears that we were only hypothetically a blog, or worse, only metaphorically blog-like. Here's to hoping that the "actualness" of our blog was not inextricably linked to our abundance of clicky bookmark art.

Anyhow, thanks for the tip, Igorians. You're enabling positive change from afar.

And maybe... just maybe... tomorrow I'll be back writing about names and stuff.

This Post is PG-13. Youngsters please go about your business elsewhere.

Frequent readers will know that I really do try not to slam peers in the industry over their work. I will occasionally discuss slip-ups (and we've pointed to a few from Landor), negative stakeholder reactions (Weber Marketing Group has been exceedingly helpful in bringing an inside look at a difficult project,) and bad decisions made by consumers. I did once tear apart a firm in New York for putting together a video that was so awful I couldn't help but watch the catastrophe multiple times to be sure I absorbed all of its horribleness.

After yesterday's post and numerous comments and emails on how strange Maryanna's business was, I was prompted to look into what else she has going.

Lo, she's a corporate namer.

...With an online portfolio containing "just a few of the many names created at Biz Naming Central."

This is the part of the story where things begin to go badly for Maryanna. Sadly it appears that it's the start of the story - and it pretty much stays on track from what we can see.

Maryanna has listed a slew of names - many of which are highly evocative. And most of which (again sadly) are fatally flawed. Also note that we couldn't find a single name on the list that was connected to a business we could locate online (not even a mention of the company in an online phonebook!) But maybe we didn't look hard enough.

It is obvious that Maryanna is a highly creative individual - we at Stokefire just happen to believe that creativity must be tempered by practical and experienced analysis, and we find that the latter is severely lacking. Here are a few (or more) examples:

• "Accesstar" - Mortgage and Lending Services. Not too bad until you do a parse check and find out that that final "s" doing double duty ending "access" and beginning "star" now makes the name parse literally as "Access Tar." Might be good as an asphalt supplier, but the connotation that getting to your money might has anything to do with that sticky black substance rather ruins the name for us. It's a name that will horribly backfire the first time there's bad press.
• "Buildonics" - Construction Planner and Developer. Okay, this one has two issues. The first is that the "bui" is an awkward grouping of letters. The eye expects to see "bul" and (two of the three people that read the name over my shoulder thought it was the latter.) The second - and more critical - issue is that the name doesn't make audible sense. Buildonics links (for us) to Ebonics (though we suppose any phonics would likely do.) We think that Maryanna was going for "We're fluent in building" but what it strangely evoked for the Stokefire staff was "We know how to mimic Bill Cosby." No, this wasn't a race thing. It's just that when you say "Buildonics" out loud it sounds just like "Bill-donics." As in Cosby. Is it just us?
• "The Nutshell Cafe" - Organic Food Deli. This is another two-banger. First, the connotation that the organic food (already thought of as less flavorful than the bad stuff like Twinkies) might have the texture of nutshells... probably isn't going to win much business. Second - let's do a quick parse check. "Nutshell" parses into "Nuts Hell" - and again makes an easy insult when the service is a little slow. Is it so bad that we'd never use it? Nope. But we'd certainly make the ownership aware that the name could backfire.
• "Head High Living" - Image consultant/coach. Lesson number one for an image consultant: Don't use a name that makes it sound like you're stoned. Unless that's what you are... and then we'd wonder why you didn't use "420 Living" since everyone we know who is into that can't help but giggle when they hear someone say that number.
• "Clique Hire" - Recruiting Firm. Yeah, we get that "Clique" and "Click" are homonyms (for people who don't know how to pronounce "clique.") That's pretty cool. But there are two big problems. First, no one will know how to find the company when they hear the name unless you take the time to explain how to spell it. Second, the term "clique" brings to mind all sorts of negative qualities that one typically doesn't associate with good workers. I personally hear "clique hire" and the image of a gum-snapping, fur boot-wearing admin who can't answer the phone because she's drying her nails. Again, it's probably just me.
• "Hyyrus" - Computer and Small Business Support. Hey look - it rhymes with "Hire Us!" Coolness. Oh, and it also rhymes with Virus. Regardless, it makes us wonder what the alternate spelling does for the company. It feels like creativity for creativity's sake, not because it has a real purpose. (We hire our computer guys because they get the job done, not because they try new ways of fixing things.)
• "iiDon Security Associates" - Hi-rise Security Firm. We didn't know this line of work existed, but it does make sense. We have to wonder about a few things - such as how the name is supposed to be pronounced ("Two Don," "Aye Aye Don," "Edon"), what the two "i"s are supposed to mean, why they aren't capitalized, and whether or not they're supposed to evoke the twin towers (and why a hi-rise security firm would ever want to be linking their own success to such a tragedy.)
• "Phlaire" - Unisex Hair Services Salon. Thankfully people don't need to know how to spell a barbershop to get their hair cut. However, I'd argue that any spelling of the word "flair" is going to be hard-pressed to pull in the average American male as a client of a "hair services salon."
• Pebblethorn Landscape & Design - "High-end Soft & Hard Landscaping Company." Potential slogan - "Pebblethorn - For Quality You Feel In Your Sole" or perhaps "Another Yard By Pebblethorn - Shoes Strongly Advised"

But one name had us in tears for a good 15 minutes. Apparently there's a sound and recording company with some real... gusto... out there. Had it not been for this wonderful treasure of a name this whole blog post never would have happened. But it did.

The name?

"Spunkwave."

Rather than explain to you why this name is so striking to us, I will instead just list what we found in Google when we looked for the company. (I've edited the findings for our most delicate readers. If you search Google you'll likely see the beautiful/horrible truth.)

• From "Surf Messages" - "if you stay in the south of my pants you can get access to my d*** real quick and surf my spunkwave. oh and bring some f****n weed..."
• From "NG BBS - weirdest fetish you've heard of?" - "Watch out for the spunk wave Chun-Li! O no she's drowning!"
• From "SENT IN THONG PICS!" - "The people on the beach wouldn't have a clue... until I c***, then they would have to run for cover cos of my tidal spunk-wave."
• From a thread on a bulletin board entitled "I have the sperm capacity of an oil tanker" - "watch out for a tidal spunk wave..."
• And most incomprehenibly and poetically of all - from a site called "white teen sex orgy" - "She His young hard teen archives threw many her was head other back and name let When out moan a long, deep upon moan as embraced the tidal spunk wave floor..."

We await Spunkwave's first release with, well, to be honest... a bit of anxiety.

For some creativity comes easily. Sadly it often is the case in this world of specialization that creativity and hard analytical skills aren't paired in the same person. Perhaps this is the case here.

And bringing this back to something a bit more related to what we do at Stokefire - we know that there are different skills required to name well. It's why we break our name generation process into multiple parts. We've found that the skills required to pull names out of thin air are different than those required to iterate on a single promising idea to find the best option. A mix of pure creatives and analytical types is required to discover, develop, analyze, adjust, and release a great name. Having all of one type results in greatly reduced chances for a strong identity.

That said, we did think there were a few interesting or promising names on Maryanna's list. She's certainly got creativity. But her apparent approach puts the responsibility for knowing whether or not the creative name is a good one on the shoulders of the client. We at Stokefire feel strongly that our clients shouldn't have to know what makes a good name - that's what our expertise is for. We're not cheap - and part of what you're paying for is our ability to prevent you from (and this is going to sound really bad, but we don't mean it that way) releasing your own "Spunkwave."

The names on Maryanna's list appear quite similar to the stuff that shows up during our creative sessions. Perhaps that's what the list actualy is - since there's no mention that the names are in use (only that they were created.) And for a creative list it ain't bad. But creative lists aren't what a client needs.

Clients need guidance.

What good is a big bunch of creative names if the client has no tools with which to measure how appropriate they are for their particular goals? Sure, it's better than a kick in the face (though that kick will often be less expensive) but what does it actually get you?

More on name lists versus brand development and on the creative process... to come.

I'll be the first to admit that naming your kid takes a lot of effort, thought, and in most cases comprimise. I would even go so far as to talk with someone - perhaps a historian or psychologist - about whether or not the name has any negative connotations. You could even open up any one of hundreds of naming books that tell you what every name means - or one of dozens of websites that allow you to search for names by their meaning.

One should also take the thirty seconds necessary to ensure you're not creating a catastrophe down the road when little Albert Sammy Smith is asked for his initials.

For me, naming was an intensely personal thing when it involved my own son. The question of who we wanted to honor (a great grandfather and both of his grandpas), how we wanted him to have options as to what he would use (Ted, Teddy, Theo, Theodore, TJ, etc...) to express his own personality...

Now that you know my views - read this article.

Yes. People really do that for a living.

Once you close your mouth (or stop laughing - if you're a corporate namer) I'd love to know what you think. Is there a place for people who offer a baby naming service where the names "Liz" and "Doug" are seen as first and foremost pertaining to fat kids? (Our new intern, Liz, would prove an exception to this rule, by the way.) Sure, almost every name is going to have connections for people - but if you know a Doug from decades ago who was the brightest and skinniest kid in your 3rd grade class aren't you going to have different thoughts about the name?

For me, I'm hoping that little Teddy doesn't select Theo as his preferred name. People in generations before and after mine don't understand why. But ask a Gen-Xer and you'll get the same answer every time: "Oh yeah - that's way too Cosby." If you only know one person with a name, then that name will be inextricably linked to that person in your mind. I only know one Theo - and though I did think he was pretty cool in the eighties - I don't really want that in my mind when I think of my son.

I'll make my question more clear. Is there a reason to pay $350 to get someone else's prejudices and experiences applied to your own flesh and blood?

Whaddaya say? Are you going to hire self-named "Nameologist" Maryanna Kowitts?

It's a rare day that we get to offer our blog readers something more than just information.

Today is a rare day. Stokefire's Southern retreat in OBX (North Carolina) just finished renovations and we didn't schedule anything there for the next three weeks on the off chance the work wasn't finished in time. The property is located in Corolla Light in the outer banks. Sleeps ten, has space for seventeen eaters (more if you eat on the couch), less than two minute walk to the beach, small shopping area, and the local private clubhouse (access is included.)

While we typically only discount for business partners (and we offer a week's stay to clients engaging in major contracts) we're opening up the discount for the next few weeks to anyone that's interested in staying at our little corporate playground. So - if you're interested in staying here just tell 'em that Tate sent you and they'll agree to the discount.

Naming Content:

There appear to be some hard and fast rules when naming a resort home. You can pick:

• A name that has a deep emotional connection with the owners (Alma mater, a child, parent, pet, etc.)
• A name that describes the experience or atmosphere (Refreshing Breeze, Ocean's Friend, Beachcomber, etc.)
• A name that is cute or a pun (Beez Neez, Noah's Arf, Ocean's Ten, or Prow'd Mary)

Why did we name our property Prow'd Mary? Because it's a prow front home that isn't within view of the ocean (thus giving us a reason to name it after the view.) There are three homes between us and the ocean and we didn't feel as though "Fourth In Line" or "Awaiting 300 Feet of Erosion" were really appropriate for the area. The place is a prow-front home (looks like the front of a ship) and it's the major feature of the building. We were shocked when the first name we thought of wasn't taken (given the enormous number of prow-fronts in the area) and since we happen to really like the homonymic song by John Fogerty it just felt right.

And as an extra bonus, there's a mondegreen in the song that has been interpreted as:

• "pumped a lot of pain"
• "pumped a lot of 'pane" (as in propane)
• "pumped a lot of of 'tane" (as in octane)

So the name of the home and the line in the song are both a little difficult to get right. (Thankfully, people don't look for our resort property by trying to spell it.) Can't say that we meant the name to be a lesson in naming, but we takes what we can gets.

We wanted fun, we wanted memorable, we wanted not to offend our neighbors.

Check, check, and check.

Done.

(Should we have done a contest?)

Quite a few of our clients often call into question one of the most basic assumptions we tell them to make. The assumption? If a name can be shortened in any way - via acronyms, dropping syllables, or just using the first portion of the name - your customers will find and use it.

(The companion parable to this - that you should never try to create your own abbreviated name from your full length name unless your clients force the issue - is something I'll address another time.)

Most recently a client protested that I was being overly pessimistic and that people aren't that lazy. Here's what they said in as close as I can get to an exact quote:

That's an overreaction, Tate. You should have more faith in the human race, nyo? We're not that lazy.

Perhaps you can guess which word I'm going to point out as proving my point.

No, it isn't the apostrophe-"s" of "That's". It's "nyo."

If we can't take the time to pronounce a two syllable thought ("You Know") then how can we expect ourselves to say the long version of anything?

If you examine where this particular example of truncation and shortening comes from I think you'll find that it traces back something like this:

1. Do you know what I mean?
2. Ya know what I mean?
3. Know what I mean?
4. You know?
5. Y'know?
6. Nyo?
7. (and very recently) Ye-o?

Listen closely next time you're having a conversation. The verbal shorthand we're using for "You know?" has almost nothing to do with the letters contained in the words of the phrase. We've got a definite "y" sound and an "oh" sound - but everything else seems to have fallen away.

I'm sure there are linguists out there that would be upset about this for all sorts of reasons. And I'm certain there are others that show this as proof that our language is healthy and adapting. My only reason for bringing it up is to show that we're always going to try to make things easier for ourselves.

It isn't General Electric, it's GE. It isn't Kentucky Fried Chicken - it's KFC.

And Stokefire? You'll never see us call ourselves "SF" or any other shortening. It's one of the reasons why we don't use mid-Caps in our name. Midcaps promote the use of acronyms and abbreviations. We figure if we're going to go to the expense of creating a name for ourselves and printing it on business cards we probably shouldn't be using a name that begs to be abbreviated. After all - we try hard to get our name in front of our prospective partners and clients... why would we want to double our effort by putting two names out there? (The real one and the abbreviated one.)

We endeavor to have a name that doesn't go the way of "Do You Know What I Mean" and instead begs to be sounded out. Maybe even emphasized. And we endeavor to create those for our clients. Sure, there's power in GE, KFC, and IBM - but those names have millions of dollars of marketing to keep them in the minds of prospective clients. For companies that wish to be a bit more economical with their marketing dollars it makes sense to get a name that doesn't break down into an acronym.

Seems to be working well for Google, doesn't it?

I received a letter in the mail from one of my representatives yesterday. It contained a newsletter with the title "Whippletter."

As you can probably guess (since you're one of our highly intelligent readers) the esteemed Senator's last name is "Whipple" (First and middle names are Mary and Margaret.)

My question: Does this cramming together of words actually do anything positive for the Senator's brand?

My follow-up question: Since no guide is given to how to pronounce this munged word what would you think the pronunciation should be?

1. "Whipp-Letter" - ignoring the emphasis and going with the intuitive identification of word parts.
2. "Whipple-TER" - going with the change in emphasis as the type indicates
3. "Whipple-Letter" - ignoring the shortening entirely and forcing the word to make audible sense.

Potential lesson in naming:

When looking for creative ways to conjoin two terms you should consider the impact to more than just the way the words look on the page. Show them to people and ask how they'd pronounce it. If people stumble (as most did when I asked around the office) then consider getting rid of the confusing bits. (This is related to a widely accepted concept - that the human brain will look for familiar patterns when trying to figure out how to pronounce something. But sometimes the model identified doesn't provide clear guidance - like the brand "Vild" - is it pronounced like "Wild" and "Mild" or like "Sild" and "Gild". Interestingly most people hit on the latter pronunciation even though the former is more common.)

What do you think?

Managing expectations is one of the hardest parts of developing powerful names. We work hard at the beginning of a project to ensure that expectations are set correctly. There's a misconception that names can do absolutely everything for a company. For example, here's a (slightly modified) list of things a client wanted from their name on a recent contract - before we helped them pare it down.

• The name should not use any of the current buzz words or industry descriptors
• The name should double as the new industry terminology of choice
• The name should publicize both the existing industry and our own company
• The name should be easy to say and spell
• The name should not feel out of place amongst the existing company names in the space, but should still be unique.
• The name should be intuitive
• The name should make people feel good about being associated with us
• The name should attract upper-echelon clients
• The name shouldn't alienate or existing lower caste clients
• The name should help to keep clients engaged with us for multiple purchases
• The name should be progressive and contemporary but should not need to be renamed again due to it going out of style.
• ...

The list went on from there. And it got even more conflicted as we got into it.

Let me be very clear: Names are the starting block, not the finish line. A good name can help set you apart from your competitors - and can perhaps help with a couple other goals as well... but it cannot get you repeat customers in most situations.

You cannot, I'm afraid, have a name that does absolutely everything for your company. You also cannot have a name that doesn't have at least a few drawbacks. All the best names in the business have flaws - Google sounds like baby-speak, Caterpillars are squishy and eat crops... But the names set them apart - allowing them to get noticed and position themselves versus the competition. From there the companies can take over.

Memorability, evocativeness, pronunciation, strategic fit... these are things we can work on with a name. (We have twenty-six other variables we throw in there too... but you can't have a name with all thirty variables pegged at "10.")

For anyone out there struggling to find the perfect name... just stop. Perfection is not attainable. When you break a name into its constituent variables some will be strong and others won't. Just ensure that the portions that you're leveraging the most for your business are associated with the strong aspects of your name and you'll be set.

Forget the All-Everything name. Just try to get one that is good at something while avoiding any major pitfalls. You'll be so far ahead of most other companies that you'll forget you ever wanted anything more.

Here's a quick aside - since I'm still getting back into the swing of things after spending time with Theodore (more on the story of his name another time.)

The night before Teddy was born we went to see Garrison Keillor's Prarie Home Companion. It was a great experience and Wolf Trap is an exceptional environment to take in a show. We sat on the lawn near the front and listed to beautiful music, heard Garrison talk, and basically enjoyed ourselved on what we had been planning as our last pre-kiddo outing. ...though we had no clue how literal that was.

The show ended and we walked about a mile to our car. And then sat.

And the weirdest thing happened... This group of people who had a pleasant evening together turned into the rudest bunch of drivers I'd ever seen. As we attempted to get out of the parking lot we spent about ten minutes trying to catch the eye of drivers so they would let us into the exit lane. This didn't work at all since no one would look at our car. We followed this with about five more minutes of frantic waving - which we should've known wouldn't work since (as noted previously) no one was looking at us.

Next step - I asked my lovely wife to ask a driver if we might cut in (since the cars were coming from the passenger side.) Sure - it took a few cars before anyone would even admit that they could hear her. (And for the record, it is remotely believable that someone might not have seen our frantic waving and yet was still allowed to drive a car - but for someone not to hear my wife say "excuse me" when both windows are rolled down and to also ignore the polite wave - that's just... yeah... rude.)

But the rudeness got worse. We finally made eye contact and were able to get an acknowledgement to our greeting (probably after 20 minutes total of trying) and we asked "May we cut in?"

The driver of a Lexus SUV smiled at us and said...

"No. Sorry."

Well... at least she apologized immediately for being rude.

The next car again was with the "I can't see nor hear you" crowd. The one after that saw the whole thing and actually was very pleasant - its occupants saying "it's not like anyone will get out of here much faster by squeezing you out."

A special thanks go to these kind anonymous people.

However - to the folks that didn't let us in - particularly that last two... I have this lesson in naming:

If you are going to be rude to other drivers while driving your own car and sitting in traffic that doesn't move - perhaps you should get license plates less memorable than "RN I HOT" and "TWITTY"

Should you see them on the road please give them an appropriate "hello" from me. Wave with as many (or as few) fingers as you please.

I suppose this actually does have something to do with naming for business. If you're going to put out a product that angers your customers you probably want to avoid a memorable name. This is one reason why we didn't take the "herbal Viagra" contract that came up last year. I didn't want to be the guy that named the product that caused semi-virile men to storm the gates of a product manufacturer. And I'm not a big fan of naming for obscurity.

And in fairness to the ladies in both offending vehicles - perhaps they were in a hurry to get out of there because they had a woman going into labor in their car.

Oh... wait... that was me.

If you attempt to make any comments on our blog in the future you'll note that we've added a CAPTCHA plug-in that will ask you to input a couple words before your post is approved.

Normally we find these programs annoying and would avoid them. Sure, it only takes an additional 5 seconds or so - and given that we've had less than a thousand valid comments on our site it would have been less than an hour and a half of time wasted for you readers. The only benefit is that it would save our precious time and effort. We use Akismet - so most of the comment spam doesn't get to us - and the stuff that gets through takes us about 30 seconds a day to eliminate.

So, why are we giving reCAPTCHA a try? Because we love the name and the idea behind the company.

The idea is this (taken from the reCAPTCHA website):

About 60 million CAPTCHAs are solved by humans around the world every day. In each case, roughly ten seconds of human time are being spent. Individually, that's not a lot of time, but in aggregate these little puzzles consume more than 150,000 hours of work each day. What if we could make positive use of this human effort? reCAPTCHA does exactly that by channeling the effort spent solving CAPTCHAs online into "reading" books.

To archive human knowledge and to make information more accessible to the world, multiple projects are currently digitizing physical books that were written before the computer age. The book pages are being photographically scanned, and then, to make them searchable, transformed into text using "Optical Character Recognition" (OCR). The transformation into text is useful because scanning a book produces images, which are difficult to store on small devices, expensive to download, and cannot be searched. The problem is that OCR is not perfect.

...

reCAPTCHA improves the process of digitizing books by sending words that cannot be read by computers to the Web in the form of CAPTCHAs for humans to decipher. More specifically, each word that cannot be read correctly by OCR is placed on an image and used as a CAPTCHA. This is possible because most OCR programs alert you when a word cannot be read correctly.

But if a computer can't read such a CAPTCHA, how does the system know the correct answer to the puzzle? Here's how: Each new word that cannot be read correctly by OCR is given to a user in conjunction with another word for which the answer is already known. The user is then asked to read both words. If they solve the one for which the answer is known, the system assumes their answer is correct for the new one. The system then gives the new image to a number of other people to determine, with higher confidence, whether the original answer was correct.

Currently, we are helping to digitize books from the Internet Archive.

How cool is that? This company is trying to "recapture" 150,000 hours of human labor per day. Of course their product isn't omnipresent, but still - going after that much lost productivity is admirable - and the cause is worthy. Capturing the text of books in the public domain and making them available online is an admirable goal. Thousands (or even millions) of texts can be made available to those without the ability to read or see - the digitized text can be read or translated far more easily when in electronic form.

As for the name itself... It has just a touch of wit to it - since it sounds an awful lot like a New Englander saying "recapture" - and recapturing is exactly what the service does. We are recapturing words that would otherwise be lost to the printed page.

And for those that are interested, CAPTCHA is an acronym/initialism coined at the turn of the century. It means: "Completely Automated Public Turing Test to tell Computers and Humans Apart", and was trademarked by Carnegie Mellon University. (And yes, "CAPTCHA" is a bit of a stretch, isn't it? Shouldn't it be CAPTTTTCAHA? Or Maybe CAPTTCHA? I suppose aesthetics count for something...)

Any other naming blogs (or other blogs...) that are looking for a way to reduce comment spam and make the world a better place... I can't think of a better way to do it than getting reCAPTCHA going on your own site.

Given all this, I think that an apology is no longer warranted for putting a CAPTCHA on our site. Sure, you're taking five seconds longer... but somewhere and sometime there will be someone who hears or reads that word you identified and will be unknowingly appreciative... And isn't that payment enough for your time?

Wiseacres need not answer.

May 26th, 2007 at 8.30 pm Theodore Joseph Linden was born. Weighing in at 6 lbs 10 oz. Congratulations Sarah & Tate!

Oh, cute! A whale naming contest!

The local CBS affilliate is having a contest to name a mother and calf that have gotten lost up the Sacramento river. Cool right?

Right.

Except as I seem to recall, many of these whales that wander up rivers tend not to live to see the ocean again.

On the plus side, there's not much at stake here with the names. Whales probably don't care - or know - what we call them. On the down side we're going to have a whole bunch of little kids following Bonnie and Clyde - or whatever their names will be - and I don't know how easily they'll believe the whales went to live on the farm with the pet dog.

So we're naming two animals that may be doing their best to off themselves for some reason. Let's make it a fun story for the kiddies!

Whee!

Interested in a better story about dying or dead whales? This one is my all time favorite. And it may just be the first story to ever use "Splud" to describe the sound of a whale exploding. After you read Dave Barry's version I encourage you to watch the video - especially the 30 seconds following the explosion.

Bring the family!

I've had a few emails this month from readers who were interested in hearing what was on my bookshelf. It's probably been about a year since I wrote anything about our reference materials, so I figure it's about time to update.

But first, I must say that I'm not going to tell you what's on my bookshelf. There are about 200 books there - most of them only read once or twice and now only very occasionally thumbed through. The stuff I use more regularly has a place on my desk. Forty-two books have that place of honor in my office - running along the back edge of my desk within easy reach. Thirteen of these books have a major "How-To" aspect to them - shedding light on how to develop, categorize, or evaluate names.

Here’s a list of the current "How-To" type books on my desk that are dedicated almost entirely to naming. The snippets of information aren't really reviews. They're just a bit of context to help you understand how the book is used:

1. Blake, George. Crafting the Perfect Name: The Art and Science of Naming a Company or Product. USA: Probus, 1991
   1. An excellent, if dated, reference for people looking to name their own company. As with most of the books here, it does a great job educating you on the basics of naming, and even provides lists of source material in the appendix so you can start naming immediately. Unfortunately the lists are far short of what would be needed to perform a comprehensive naming project for a mid-size (or larger) firm. The age really shows when it addresses the legal aspects of naming - including the hoops one must go through to check if a name is registered. I refer mostly to Chapter Six when I crack the cover - the chapter on Names to Avoid.
2. Barrett, Fred. Names that Sell: How to Create Great Names for Your Company, Product, or Service. Portland: Alder Press, 1995 (Amazon Rank = #993,472 in Books)
   1. A book aimed at people who have a basline of experience in naming. Barrett runs through all sorts of criteria for how to name companies, but in his effort to cover everything (he does come close) he drops any sense of order. He provides Twenty-Five different techniques for developing names - and these appear in a jumble of methods we've been unable to untangle. There's gold here - it's just a little hard to find. Barrett also provides another list of source words at the back of the book - and again the list is a bit lacking. A bit of a peek inside a namer's head - all sorts of information but not in a structure that aids in learning. We've opened it a few times in the past year - mainly to remind ourselves how another namer might approach a particular problem.
3. Cader, Michael. The Name Book: A Unique Reference Listing of Everything Imaginable That Has a Name (Except Babies!) New York: Random House, 1998 (Amazon Rank = #505,676)
   1. A book of lists that goes quite well with the how-to books. It offers very little how-to and a whole lot of reference. What's great here is that the lists are intuitively sorted into groups. Interested in a powerful name? Perhaps you want to examine lists of Spanish monarchs, or Roman emperors, or military ranks... An amazing number of ideas to get the mind moving. Feels a touch dated, but when referencing historical stuff this might be a benefit.
4. Charmasson, Henri. The Name Is the Game: How to Name a Company or Product. Homewood: Dow Jones-Irwin, 1988
   1. Charmason may be smart, but he suffers from the same affliction that Barrett does. There are some interesting methods listed here, but the book is dense and cluttered. Again suffers from age as major passages of the Trademark section are no longer applicable. Charmasson has some interesting takes on naming, though after the first couple reads I must admit I haven't gone back to this one. It's just not that useful and has been overcome by better and more readable books. (We're putting it back on the shelf today.)
5. Frankel, Alex. Wordcraft: The Art of Turning Little Words into Big Business. New York: Random House, 2004
   1. Prior to meeting other namers at Alexandra Watkins' party I had little idea how the other namers worked. This book brought new insight into both the process of naming within major branding firms and the presentation of fully developed names. It is rarely cracked other than to illustrate a point to a client who wants to know how others do something. Incidentally, this is likely the best book ever written about the naming industry (in my quite humble opinion.)
6. Javed, Naseem. Naming for Power: Creating Successful Names for the Business World. Toronto and New York: Linkwood, 1993
   1. You may be sensing a pattern here. The How-To books just seem jumbled. Javed is a famed speaker and columnist and this book appears to be a compilation of his speeches and writings. Again no real order here, and no overarching messages or lessons. Add in the fact that I can't personally follow what he is saying much of the time - and that time has proven quite a few of his examples false - and this has little value. Why is it on my desk? Because I can use it to show how our views, practices, and opinions differ from the mainstream. Some of the names he really likes fall into traps we try to avoid - and having an expert advocate for names a client likes (and then have that expert proven wrong) adds power to our words.
7. McGrath, Kate, Trademark: How to Name your Business & Product. 1994
   1. We use this only as a primer for the basics of trademark law. It is not up to date at all, but the terminology it uses and the classes of names referenced haven't changed much. If you want to understand what sorts of names can be trademarked and why then this baby is a good bet.
8. Morris, Evan. From Altoids to Zima: The Surprising Stories Behind 125 Famous Brand Names. New York: Fireside (Simon & Schuster,) 2004
   1. Not a how-to, really, but a "how they did it." Fun to read and a good reference to trot out when a name covered within the pages is in the same industry as one of our clients. It usually helps expand the thinking at the brainstorming meetings. (We have a long list of books that cover the etymology of corporate names - we'll get to that another day.)
9. Nussel, Frank. The Study of Names. A Guide to the Principles and Topics. Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1992
   1. Really only on our desk as a reference, this book helps us remember the science of naming - especially some of the more obscure terms and their full definitions. Can't remember what Morphosyntactics are? This is the book for you. I personally open the cover about once a month to a random page. It's helpful in getting my mind onto a different path when naming. The whole book explains terminology in naming and lists examples of just about every type of name known to man. AND it is highly organized! Oh - and the reference materials cited contain some of the hardest to find and most useful older research documents on Onomastics.
10. Rivkin, Steve. The Making of a Name: The Inside Story of the Brands We Buy. New York: Oxford, 2004
    1. Perhaps our second-most-favorite book on naming. Somewhere between a how-to and an industry overview. Fun to read. Can't say I read it that much, except for the appendix containing the reference materials. We actually found many of our materials here. If you want to create a library of easily accessible naming books this isn't a bad place to look for titles.
11. Room, Adrian. Trade Name Origins. Chicago: NTC, 1982 (Amazon Rank = #1,006,067)
    1. Similar to the Morris book, this one does the same thing, but for more companies in less detail - and twenty (plus) years earlier. Great for finding patterns in naming that you want to latch on to or avoid.
12. Wegryn, Jim. Funny Thing About Names. An Entertaining Look at Naming in America. Lincoln, NE: iUniverse, 2005
    1. This is a new addition. It's on my desk mainly because it's new - and because Wegryn appears to be just as much of a statistics geek as I am. Nice list of more recent research papers at the back, and a strong index that helps me to find relevant examples to share with clients and partners. A little more humor here than I'd like to see - but the title does warn us. I'd be more interested in reading the pure research behind this - because it looks like he did a lot of it (including an interesting bit on the history of street names that have impacted the English language.)
13. Williams, Phillip. Naming Your Business and Its Products and Services: How to Create Effective Trade Names, Trademarks, and Service Marks to Attract Customers, Protect Your Goodwill and Reputation, and Stay out of Court! (City Unknown): P. Gaines, 1991
    1. Horribly out of date book that attempts to cover everything under the sun about names and trademarks in 90 large-print pages with lots of clip art. Covers some interesting territory with its random list of things you can name your product after (symbols, mythology, history, bible, geography, literature, and puns... yep, that's it!) This is my "there is no one book that can show you how to name" book. From what I have seen so far there isn't even a good list of name classifications in print yet. There is an interesting appendix at the back that shows all the pages of an old trademark application, but it bears little relevance to naming today.

Yep. I'm addicted to The Office - and am not quite sure what I'll do to recreate those uncomfortable laughs I've become accustomed to for the off season.

But this post isn't about my love for the NBC show, it is about the website and company names mentioned on the show's season finale.

The website mentioned? Try: www.creedthoughts.gov.www/creedthoughts. Yeah - it doesn't go anywhere. But you wouldn't believe the number of hits that "creedthoughts" is getting all over the internet. Someone had the foresight to register creedthoughts.com a week before the episode aired (one can only assume someone on the production staff did it to prevent someone else from profiting) but the .net and a few other sites were snapped up shortly after the line was spoken.

As far as names go - I actually quite like "Creedthoughts". I imagine that for lovers of the show the site would speak directly to those who wonder "what the hell is he thinking?" and it would attract quite a crowd of regular readers. Much like schrutespace, I suppose.

UPDATE: There IS a creedthoughts blog. It is here.

The show did have a rather uncomfortable naming-related moment when Michael Scott wraps up his interview with David Wallace (CFO of Dunder Mifflin):

David: What do you think we could be doing better?

Michael: I've never been a big fan of the name Dunder Mifflin. I was thinking we could name the company something like "Paper Great". Where great paper is our passion. We're grrrrreeeat! I dunno. Could be good. Or, uh, "Super Duper Paper". It's super duper. I dunno. Something like that.

Interviewer: Okay.

Michael: Okay.

Interviewer: Thanks for coming in Michael.

What scares me the most is that this sort of thing really does happen in conversations with prospects and clients. I'll be the first to admit that client-submitted ideas often do quite well and we can build strong identities around them. However... In this case I just was made uncomfortable on every possible level. Wonderfully so, but... still... And if anyone is interested, both www.superduperpaper.com and www.papergreat.com are available for immediate camping and opportunistic exploitation as of 11:47 EDT on Friday, May 18th. Imagine the peaks in traffic you'll get when the DVD launches!

I'd never 'cracked the spine' of the online OED before. I'm not quite sure why. Especially after looking at my own name.

c1375 Sc. Leg. Saints iv. (Jacobus) 328 For scho had bulis wilde and tate,

at scho nocht trewit mycht okkit be In carte, na wane, be ony degre.

What does that mean? Those that work with me probably could figure it out if they thought about me a bit. Also, I'm guessing my lovely wife could figure it out... My name (according to the OED) means "wanton, brisk, untamed".

How cool is that?

Was I predestined to be like I am by my name? Or is this just a grand coincidence? Bah. Doesn't matter. I'm going to play it safe...

In light of this new (to me) definition (and the fact that I've found a way to live my life in a way that fit the definition of the word) I am going to reconsider the list of names I've been advocating for my soon-to-be little tyke.

Out:

• Jezebel
• Twitchy
• Hebetude
• Pigpen

In:

• Pension
• All-star
• Dad's Hopes and Dreams

It's not like this could backfire or anything...

No... not with Stokefire. (We're done hiring until we find a bigger space.)

Try Landor - the Grand-daddy of the industry. I received this in my in-box this morning with no mention of copyright or non-distribution policies. So I'll help a competitor out... (They're not competing in my space at the moment so I'll play nice.)

If I were in New York and didn't have my own firm I'd consider talking with them about it... But I'm not and I do, so there shall be no talks.

Landor isn't currently known for their creativity in naming, so perhaps the new person can bring a little spark to the organization. (If I'm gonna help 'em I gotta get a little dig in, don't I?)

If you're applying I'd love to hear about it.

Applied Linguistics & Naming Architecture: Director, Naming & Writing, Landor Associates/Young & Rubicam Brands, NYC, USA

Organization: Landor Associates/Young & Rubicam Brands Department: Naming & Writing Web Address: http://www.landor.com

Specialty Areas: Applied Linguistics; Verbal Identity

Description:

In the 'agency world' and among marketing professionals on the client side, Landor Associates is known as the world's most accomplished and internationally recognized branding and design consultancy. For 65 years we've delivered a multidisciplinary range of brand strategy, design, naming, interactive, and research services, helping clients around the world create, renew, and strengthen their brand power. Besides being a solid career credential for the best designers, marketers and all sorts of advertising, strategic and creative professionals, Landor is also well known as a fun, collaborative, and intellectually stimulating place to work.

The Director, Naming & Writing, based in Landor's New York City office, will be a strategic thinker and doer with expertise in developing branding and naming architectures, nomenclature systems, and naming guidelines for complex corporate and product/service projects. You will also be an expert in name and tagline development and brand voice strategy and guidelines.

Here are just some of the other things we expect from you: - help clients make decisions about strategic and creative work - sell naming solutions and bring ideas to life - provide clear direction to team members for creative efforts, helping them to optimize creative output - identify and take the lead on developing new products, methodologies and processes - be the problem solving "hired gun" on relevant client engagements and function as client leader on all types of Naming and Verbal Identity engagements - have strong and lively facilitation and moderation skills - manage, mentor and develop multiple direct reports - take the lead on creation of proposals and pitches - formulate, assess and manage overall department budget - handle day to day management and operational issues related to the Naming & Writing practice in Landor's NY office.

Qualifications: - The ideal candidate will have a Bachelors Degree in English, Linguistics, Liberal Arts, or related studies with a minimum of 8 - 10 years of Naming/Writing/Verbal Identity experience (on the agency or client side). - Must have leadership experience and worked in an organization as a Naming/Verbal Identity Consultant. - Significant experience with naming and nomenclature strategy is an absolute must. - A "wide angle" view of branding and ability to represent Landor's range of offerings to clients is necessary.

Landor Associates, part of the WPP Group of companies, provides a competitive compensation and benefits package.

To apply, please visit our company website listed below. Please create a new member profile and upload a copy of your resume (Word or PDF format is preferred). If you choose, you may submit samples of your work by clicking on the 'Add Documents' link after creating your profile.



Application Deadline: 30-Jun-2007 (Open until filled)

Web Address for Applications: http://www.landor.com/careers

Contact Information: Manager, Human Resources: Ira Beckman Email: ira_beckman@nyc.landor.com

This is something I often have trouble with. As namers we are in an odd place - we are held responsible for knowing all sorts of words (both English and otherwise) and yet if we're any good we know that most of these words are not only unsuitable for use in naming, we can't use 'em in conversation either.

In the past few weeks I've been told numerous times (maybe five?) that one of the things that I need to portray to my clients is that I'm smarter than they are.

Where does this come from?

I have no clue if I'm smarter than my clients. My intelligence shouldn't matter. My facility with words and knowledge of naming is what matters. And in my humble opinion that facility must include an ability to prove itself without sounding like a pompous human thesaurus.

Yeah, I think I probably just sounded pompous right there.

It's tough. A namer shouldn't have to 'dumb down' their language to be understood, but they also can't speak a language that only naming geeks understand. We don't name companies to impress other namers (okay, so maybe there's a little of that sometimes) we name them to help our clients meet their goals.

So... blog readers. Tell me. What do you expect from your namer? Do you want to see the dictionary-reading word-nerd? Do you want an every-man (or every-woman) that you can relate to? Do you want someone smarter than you are? What is it you look for?

I'm thinkin' that you actually don't want someone smarter than you - you want someone better at naming than you are. I don't want my chef to be a genius - I want my chef to be a good cook. And they can do that without needing to make me feel like an idiot when I talk with them about what they do...

Right?

This will be a short post.

It's just a question:

• Other than "acme", has a company name ever changed the conversational use of an existing word?

I thought that "standard" might qualify, but have had troubles tracking down when the term started to adopt the "ordinary" connotation (instead of what appears to be the older connotation of "excellence.") The etymology of the newer meaning is something I just can't find.

I suppose you might disagree with my supposition that the word acme has been affected. And you'd have a point... the dictionary doesn't take note of the connection between Acme and generic, confusing, or sub-par products.

The idea that names can become a part of the lexicon has been proven many times over (Google for "look up", Cadillac for "best", Coke for "soda", and more... ) But has there been a strong case for a real word being assumed by a company and then redefined?

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

It certainly beats banning them outright, doesn't it?

I'm really not quite sure how I feel about this story:

An energy drink called Cocaine that was pulled from store shelves in Illinois last week is being discontinued nationwide.

The company that produces the drink said today it's pulling the drink because of concerns about its name.

What the company doesn't say is that some states had banned the sale of the product because they felt it glamorized drug use. So - I've a strong feeling that this was less about "concerns" and more about "bottom lines."

The company is taking the step of re-naming their product.

As I think about it more I think I am leaning towards an opinion... I don't like it. There are quite a few reasons to be concerned. A few right off the top of my head:

1. Free Speech: Do companies have a right to sell products with provocative names that do not cross the line into profanity? Heck, do they have the right to sell products with profane names? It seems to me that the answer to the first should be "yes." The answer to the second question I'm not as sure about. I've strong opinions about free speech and its value - and limiting someone's ability to say a word or sell a product is a step that I'm not sure we should have taken here.
2. Censorship: Similarly, I hadn't heard any advertisements about the product. Only the media (and we bloggers) were giving it publicity. I can understand the FCC cracking down on this if they broadcast it - but they didn't (as far as I know.) It is fine for the press and public to criticize a product and say that it shouldn't be sold - but for the government to act on these opinions and force the company to rename is different. Opinions are one thing. Enforcing opinions leads to censorship.
3. Where do all the bad products go?: The only reason anyone was buying this drink was to push the envelope and show how edgy they were. From the folks I know that have tried it I've heard it tastes horrible. Have a crappy product? Give it a name that pushes people's buttons. Make it collectible. It is a time honored tradition to find ways to move product. Saying that certain types of names are off limits for no reason other than that they offend some people's delicate sensibilities (there's no profanity here, remember) means that products without strong appeal in and of themselves will have a harder time selling. That's great for product quality overall, but bad for the average or below average product that loses an escape route.
4. Slippery Slope: Okay, so we know "Cocaine" isn't allowed. What about "Dope", "Morphine", "Speedball", "Ganja", "Uppers", "Drug of Choice" and the like? Are all of them not allowed? How about naming an energy drink "Vodka?" Would that be allowed? Or "Binge/Purge" because that would glamorize a sickness. Or "Steak" because Vegans everywhere would be upset. Or "Eenryg" - because it might offend dyslexics.
5. A Clueless FDA sez What?: In a warning letter to Redux - the folks behind the Cocaine drink - the FDA claims that the product being sold is not only a drug, but a new one:"Your product, Cocaine, is a drug, as defined by Section 201(g)(1) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1), because it is intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, 21 U.S.C. §§ 321(g), 321(ff), and 343(r)(6). Moreover, this product is a new drug, as defined by Section 201(p) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 321(p), because it is not generally recognized as safe and effective for its labeled uses. Under Sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. §§ 331(d) and 355(a), a new drug may not be introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce unless an FDA-approved application is in effect for it. Your sale of Cocaine without an approved application violates these provisions of the Act."

Yes, Cocaine is a provocative name. It was named purely as a PR stunt and it worked. (Sadly.) But no one is claiming that there is actual cocaine in the product. Note that the FDA hasn't taken action against Sunny Delight - and these people are selling cancer (or is it instant immolation) in a bottle! Imagine if a piece of the sun were to get into the hands of an unsuspecting consumer! Oooh! Or what about Victoria's Secret? What if her secret was actually cocaine? Sounds like we'd have to ban it, right?

Both the FDA and consumers at large are smarter than this, aren't they?

The real reason I'm a bit up in arms about the action taken here is that there is no law that I know of that prevents people from selling products named after illicit drugs. I remember there were nail polishes a couple years back that referenced illicit sex and drug use. Why didn't we ban them?

C'mon US and state governments - if you're going to ban something with the backing of the government YOU NEED TO PASS A LAW MAKING IT ILLEGAL. Until that time you're just using knee-jerk censorship.

So knock it off. Let Cocaine (the non-controlled energy drink) be sold. Figure out how to limit commerce in a way that isn't going to backfire (no "I know it when I see it" stuff) and put it on the books.

Namers across the land will thank you. Or at least I will.

And if I'm mistaken and there IS a law about names that glorify certain substances I'd love to hear about it.

Tate Linden Principal- Stokefire 703-778-9925

Stop with the emailing! I will write about it. (But I do so under protest.)

Yeah, you all are exactly right. I don't like it. There are so many reasons for me to potentially be displeased that it becomes even less likeable due to the fact that I have to sort through the pile of bad stuff figuring out what reasons I want to share...

Whatever... Let me start digging.

1. Where the heck did Google pull the "i" prefix from? I don't see it on any other products or services provided by them. iGotnoidea.
2. Okay, so I know where they pulled the "i" from. They got it from Apple. (And I suppose until recently they might have gotten it from Cisco too.) Note that only the iMac, iPhone iTunes and iPod are well known - and Apple has tons of stuff with the iPrefix that we don't talk about much.
3. Five years after they send a cease and desist order to WordSpy for verbing "Google" they appear to be verbing the word themselves. If I'm not mistaken, if you hear "I Google" doesn't that imply that Googling is something that one can do? Think about it... if someone says "iGoogle" couldn't a logical response be, "you do?"
4. With all the great new ideas Google puts out there, where do they get off using a copycat name? (Is it because they're trying to disprove my theory?)

The only way I can see this name as being good for Google is if there's a merger coming up that we don't know about.

I have about five other reasons why this ain't a good thing, but I'll leave it to the many other bloggers who have already covered this. Just rest assured that I'm probably as peeved as you all thought I'd be about it.

I'd be more peeved if I didn't just get "Shaun of the Dead" for a birthday present from my wife. (Yeah, I'm probably the only person in the world that has this on his top ten movies list, but I wear that badge proudly!)

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

...or maybe by both "A" and "E". We're not really sure.

The English language is a funny thing. You see, we English speakers have this strange way of turning the letter A into a diphthong. (This has a lot to do with something called "The Great Vowel Shift.") So even though we mentally think we're only saying one thing when we pronounce the letter "A" we're actually using two quite distinct vowel sounds - both "ehh" and "eee" (shown as /eɪ/ when the educated linguist folks write it.) That nice bright mental A sound you get isn't a single sound at all - it is a blend.

Still need more proof? Try pronouncing the letter "A" without moving your jaw, lips, or tongue. Can't do it, can you? (And yes... those of you who just did this out loud in your cubicles... your neighbors do think you're going insane.)

What does this have to do with naming? Not a whole lot, unless you're considering an acronym. Specifically an acronym with the letter A followed by the letter E. And further, it is only for acronyms that can't be pronounced as words in and of themselves.

Consider the following potential acronym of "AEDP." You can't pronounce it easily in the English language (though if you tried it'd likely come out as "Ayeedipuhh".) Since the word doesn't work the reader or speaker is forced to sound out the letters themselves as "A-E-D-P". Seems okay so far anyway, right? Well, not really.

Here's why:

1. As noted, the letter A is a diphthong containing the sounds of both the letters A and E.
2. There is no intervening sound or disconnect between the first and second letters (like a glottal stop or a percussive burst, or anything to indicate that a new letter is starting.)
3. Since the letter A sound ends with E and the following letter is actually an E there is no indicator that the second letter exists at all unless:

• You artificially stop the flow of air somehow between the first two letters
• You emphasize the second letter with a change in pitch or volume
• You sustain the second letter unnaturally so that it is obvious that the E-sound isn't part of the A-sound.

In Stokefire's informal tests, the speakers strongly believe they are saying AEDP naturally and yet the listeners consistently hear "ADP" with a slightly elongated letter "A" sound.

The E vanishes!

How about that? A letter than can be fully voiced and yet not registered in the mind of the listener. Pretty cool, eh?

Unless of course the name is yours and you're hoping that people interested in your organization will be able to find you.

(Hello to the wonderful association folks that just learned this as we reviewed naming candidates yesterday. Thanks for giving me something fun and informative to write about today.)

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

It is a sad day for us. A potential client came to us asking for help with a name a few months back. We loved the concept, we loved their attitude, we loved the people - but for a few reasons they decided to name themselves. These things happen...

But so do unfortunate names.

I won't mention the full three-word name (out of respect for what is actually a great company,) but the logical shortening of the name is The VD Group.

"Not that there's anything wrong with that"

Sigh...

...but sometimes it can help.

VIMO - a search and comparison engine for finding doctors announced a new name in 2006. They used to be "Healthia."

I personally have no problem with the name VIMO - it evokes the concept of Wine for me - as in "Vino". This led immediately to a connection with the toast "To Your Health!" And that seemed to make at least a little bit of sense to me.

This, however was not what the company leaders apparently intended. Here is a quote from a VC blogger who wrote about it last year:

So the folks at Healthia were happy to announce yesterday that they have selected a long term moniker for their company (and without retaining a "naming consultant"). The new name Vimo evokes:

(i) vim, as in health, vigor, and vitality;

(ii) the Gujarati word vimo, meaning insurance;

(iii) the Swahili vimo, meaning measurements and also stature;

and, most importantly

(iv) the urban slang vimo meaning sexy, cool and impeccable.

I was unable to figure out where the blogger got the connotations from (The press release doesn't mention them) but I hope that the justifications he provides aren't the ones they used.

Here's why -

1. VIMO doesn't connect strongly to "vim." Why? Because Vimo appears to naturally be pronounced "Vee-Moe." While I don't condone it, if you wanted to make the connection with vim noticeable you'd have to play with capitalization - like "VIMo" or "VimO" - or you could force the correct pronunciation by using "Vimmo."
2. Given that the service is sold in the United States and that their target customer likely speaks neither Gujarati nor Swahili, the fact that the name has meaning in those languages means absolutely nothing to the consumer. Since the service being sold is a portal and not an end-use (e.g., they are going to find someone who will solve a problem - and that someone will require a discussion or visit off the website) there is no incentive to stay with the site long enough to have these definitions sink in.
3. The urban slang dictionary is notorious for having bogus definitions. Most of the terms in it appear to be from people trying to make up new trendy-speak so that they can say they started it all.

Still, this isn't a bad name - and I'd even go so far as to say it is a good one. Nice length, nice sound, fun to say...

The place where the name falls down (and where a naming consultancy can help) is in telling the story. Rather than telling people what the name evokes:

"Our new name, Vimo, communicates vim, vigor, energy and enthusiasm -- collectively characterizing our commitment to empowering consumers in their quest for reliable healthcare information,"...

... the leadership could make a stronger connection. Sure, the first three letters spell "vim" but where is the rest of that communication coming from? The letters themselves? The implication that wine is involved? And then there's the question of how "vim, vigor, energy and enthusiasm" characterize a commitment to empowering consumers to do anything. It just sounds like marketing-speak to me.

I can't stand marketing speak. As soon as I start hearing words like "paragon" or having a search engine described as enabling a "quest" I just tune out. Does anyone out there listen to this stuff? I certainly hope that the stories Stokefire builds actually sound like something people might say in real life.

Vimo is a fine name. Just give the bogus stuff a rest and speak with your own voice. Leverage the more obvious meanings not the hidden ones... and tell it like it is.

I wish you all a pleasant start to your day, and may you have the best of occurences coincidentally befall you as you progress towards the darkening hour.

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

We had a client a couple weeks ago who was astonished that we would claim we could usually tell what era a corporate name was created. They seemed somewhat mollified when we trotted out the ".com" example - as a sign of the post Amazon.com Internet boom. They were a little more convinced when we brought up Flickr and the flotilla of corporate names with the missing penultimate letter.

Copycat naming isn't new in the corporate world.

I've gone back as far as the early 1900s and found examples. I'm sure there are more even earlier than that - we're just working our way backwards...

In the year 1900, the term "Pianola" came into use. A few years later Victrola and Crayola joined in. By 1928 there were almost 100 companies with the -ola suffix in America. For a world without much in the way of instant mass media this proliferation is quite impressive. Granola, Shinola, Coca-Cola...

What do these names have in common? To us it seems that they indicate a connection with what was new in the first third of the 20th century.

Think Motorola is an exception? It isn't. Registered in 1930, the company likely leveraged the word Motor (as in car) and ola (to reference music) as a way to carve out a new niche for music on the road.

The next time someone asks you if you know how old a company is you may want to take a look at the structure of the name. There's a lot to be found within the patterns you may find.

Tate Linden Principola - Stokefire 703-778-9925

Over at Ubernamer there was an interesting post on the 21st of the month about using the name Qwertypie for a blog. While we haven't developed a process for naming blogs, we noticed there was a little bit of a parsing problem with the name - visually the term wasn't easy to break into constituent parts. (I personally read the name as pronounced "Qwer - Type - Ee" the first time through.)

We suggested some sort of visual indicator was needed to tell the reader where the lexical parts went - like changing the font type or color to show where Qwerty ends and "pie" begins.

We did not, however, think of what the Ubernamer did - and when we saw it we not only knew he got it right, but we felt pretty darn dumb for not thinking of it ourselves.

The fix? "QWERTYpie"

Not only does the use of caps for the first wordlet present the letters in the fashion they're typically presented on the keyboard, the change from CAPS to lowercase strongly forces the visual parse into the right place. It also gives the name the intuitive verbal emphasis that matches how we say "cutie-pie" which I believe is the connection they were aiming for. "qwertyPIE" would bring about an emphasis on food (think "apple pie" - where unless you're answering the question "what kind of pie is it?" you'll place the verbal focus on "pie" - or pronounce them with equal weight - rather than emphasizing "apple.")

I can't speak to the other important facets of the name here as I don't know the subject of the blog, the personality of the author or dozens of other factors that determine appropriate strategic fit. I can say that for a whimsical presentation of a word without resorting to graphic designer the solution he came up with is pretty darn good.

As for why I didn't just outright suggest the eventual solution instead of just leading him to the solution? All of us have our off days... I suppose.

Good job, Ubernamer. Nice workin' with ya.

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

Someone - we're not quite sure who it is that runs the Ubernamer site - rated our blog's name as better than two of the sites we think are the bee's knees - NameWire and Wordlab.

We're glad someone online likes the name. We'd heard a bit of disappointment from the masses when we moved away from Stoked Brands and the "Poking brands with sticks just to see what happens" line. One benefit of the change is that when we tell people the name of our blog they either blush or break out laughing. Or both. (We've had a bunch of requests to make tee-shirts and just haven't had the time to do it right. When you ask a namer to put something in print you're going to have to be patient!)

I personally am not quite sure what Ubernamer is measuring when he scores the names in question, but we do feel that our name is just right for our target market - the inquisitive marketer, linguist, or even an employee of a company going through a rebranding who isn't an expert, but has some exposure to the concepts or practice of naming and wants to know more. We're not a source for consistent news in naming, we're not here to help beginners create their own name - we're here to give people a window into how namers think, how names are created, and what sorts of things can trip up (or make successful) the process.

There is a quote I'd like to address from the Ubernamer's post:

So who wins this name war? Thingnamer. And yet, Thingnamer is not as interesting as, say Brandnama or, even, Brandaclaus. Learning: Portmanteau words work better as brand names. Not that any of that matters. At the end of the day, for whatever reason, all the three names being compared here have more clients than both Brandnama and Brandaclaus put together. Just goes to show, again, that a name is only a small part of the branding game. Unfortunately.

My thoughts:

1. Thingnamer vs. Brandnama vs. Brandaclaus - We're more partial to Thingnamer, but that may be because Thingnamer speaks to who we are and what we do more than the other two names. I could not possibly run a blog with either of the other names on it - Brandnama sounds like it's too cool (I may play at being cool, but I'm a name geek at heart), and Brandaclaus has implications that don't blend with who we are (we don't run an elf sweat-shop, and our work is most certainly not provided for free.) That said, I feel strongly that both Brandnama and Brandaclaus have a place in the blogosphere - and perhaps even in the corporate world as naming companies. They're going after different markets than Thingnamer/Stokefire does.
2. And more on comparing names: One aspect of evaluating a name versus the competition is determining the strategic fit. I'm not able to adequately evaluate who Brandnama and Brandaclaus are going after or what their goals are. I only know my own. If you've ever been to one of my lectures or presentations you've heard me say this before, but I'll put it in writing now: Yahoo is a pretty damn good name for a search engine. It is not, however, your best option for a funeral home. Thingnamer meets my needs and the needs of my target market better than any of the other names that have been mentioned. It is approachable, accessible to all generations, humorous, easy to spell and (based on our own proprietary scoring system) the best name we could find for what we wanted to do. Brandnama and Brandaclaus aren't me. Even if the names are better (and I'll leave that judgement to others) they wouldn't address my personality, my desire to say things as they are, and my vocabulary.
3. Portmanteau Words: We absolutely agree that there is a place for them in naming. They're a tool we use and and evaluate when developing names. They are not, however, the balm that turns a bad name into a good one. Thingnamer as a name doesn't break down into a portmanteau easily, and the full power of the name can only come across through the full presentation. "Thinamer" is a pretty crappy name. Oddly enough we've found that while using portmanteau words has the benefit of adding depth to a name, that depth is often gained at the cost of clarity and power. Not every portmanteau can be "SPORK" - which to us is nearly perfection for more reasons than we can list here.
4. On client count: You have to start somewhere. Also, it may be that the market in which you operate (Dubai, in this case - I believe) may be influencing your success. I'm not sure how the market is over there - and I don't know if writing in English helps your cause. We've worked on a single naming project in that area and had to develop a name in Hindi, not English.
5. On names only being a small part of the branding game. We actually like this fact. If names were the only thing that mattered then the world of marketing and branding would be hugely dull. We enjoy being a part of this complex process that links brands to consumers. There's far more of a challenge involved when you have to play nice with everyone else working on the brand. That's just one of the reasons getting the right name can be a significant investment - and can take larger companies months or even years to develop. If it were easy we'd be out of a job...

That's it. We wish the Ubernamer the best. Here's to hoping that they can open up the naming market in Dubai. After our experience trying to learn the finer points of conversational Hindi we've decided that the languages spoken in the Middle East and Asian markets are just a bit too much to take on.

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

Okay, there's more than one thing, but this one is on my mind today. A fellow namer came up with a great name and I was about to go give 'em major kudos - and maybe even mention their name here... and then I saw how the client had executed on the name.

Sadly, we as namers often don't get the opportunity to do more than we're hired to do - which is to name a singular thing. Companies identify a need to create a new product name, or perhaps rename the entire company, and set about finding a provider for that service. Once the provider is found they allow the provider to work within the confines of the project, but don't allow the provider to affect the rest of the environment at the company.

My friend renamed the company, creating a rich and meaningful word that leads the mind to all sorts of visual cues and imagery. The client apparently loved the name and adopted it. And then the project apparently ended...

Here's the problem. The company changed their name - but their product naming is still more in line with who they were before the change. So we have this wonderfully flexible and approachable name on the masthead, and then we see these flat unpronouncable three letter acronyms for the products they sell.

Let's let namers name, eh? If you stop at the name on the masthead or door your clients are going to be confused when they get to you. There's a reason why Apple sells the Macintosh and not the APL-05G. If you give yourself that cool name you've got to embrace it and what it means.

Here's to hoping those three letter acronyms at the afore(un)mentioned company are gone post haste.

I'm rooting for you!

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

I'll be the first to tell you that I've got a really cool wife. She's stylish, smart, funny, and there's that whole thing about her carrying my unborn child that makes her all the more appealing...

Anyhow, my wife was flipping through a magazine about pregnancy and came across this great little invention that is basically a soft and stylish blanket with a short strap that links around the neck of a nursing mother so that the little tyke can drink in privacy. The product is made by BEBE AU LAIT - a very classy sounding company in this namer's opinion. Even the tagline, "nursing covers for chic mothers" points to upscale and stylish customers. So it rather makes me wonder what the heck they were thinking when they named this spiffy new product...



Hooter Hiders(tm)

Really. That's the name.

Apparently it got the name because some male friend called it that upon seeing it in use.

I must admit that the name is quite descriptive.

But, no, I don't like it.

My reasons:

1. When was the last time you heard a style-conscious breast-feeding mom refer to her life-giving breasts as "hooters?"
2. The disconnect between the word "chic" and "hooters" is huge. In fact, when searching the internet for "Chic Hooters" I found many hits. All of them seem to be porn sites that evidently can't spell "Chick." Imagine walking into a trendy boutique in New York... now ask yourself if you'd expect to see the bra section labeled "hooter holders."
3. If a husband is going to buy his wife something for her... assets... I'm guessing more often than not it is going to involve the displaying of said assets rather than the hiding of them. Why does this matter? Because the name "Hooter Hiders" is a name that I believe is more targeted at the male psyche than the female one. Think I'm being stupid? Ask yourself this: Why aren't there any companies marketing breast pumps as "Knocker Kneaders?" I don't think it has anything to do with the fact that men aren't good at spelling silent letters.
4. It is never a good idea to go up against La Leche League. Based on what I've read of theirs (and I do like 'em... I really do) it seems that anything that inhibits the fresh-air experience of breast feeding in public is to be shunned. The Courts often support them. Feeding an infant is pretty-much the only time a woman's breast can be publicly displayed in the United States while staying within the bounds of the law. Upsetting a bunch of lactating women by suggesting that they abandon their rights... yeah... not so smart.
5. You will never get any desireable spokespeople to stand up and proclaim your product is worthwhile. Can you imagine Oprah, Gweneth, or Angelina saying they can't live without Hooter Hiders? Anna Nicole (GRHS) might have been up to the challenge, but few others would dare.
6. EXTRAFUNTIMEBONUS Reason: The name logically doesn't work. Hooter (singular) Hiders (plural) implies one of a few things. Choose from a sampling:
   1. More than one of the product is needed to entirely hide one hooter
   2. Only one breast should be hidden
   3. The product is sold in packs (and thus must be referred to with the plural) like Huggies.
   4. A secret membership organization that advocates either:
      1. Going around placing one of their breasts in hard to find locations OR
      2. Finding owls and forcing them into said hard to find locations (presumably after aforementioned breasts have been removed.)

• Note that there's a pretty good reason they likely didn't go with the grammatically correct version of "Hooters Hider" since it would be homonymic with "Hooter Cider" and I'm thinkin' that wouldn't go over well.

There are a couple of ways that the name could work - but they're even more risky than I would personally advocate for

1. Get the backing of La Leche League and use this as a way to dissuede the populace from asking to have breast-feeding women cover their breasts. Make them use to "proper name" for the product. "Oh, you mean you want me to pull out my Hooter Hiders? Sure... just ask me to use it and I'll do so." Most of the people offended by the sight of a woman's breast probably will have trouble saying the word "breast" so I'm guessing that "Hooter" will be a near impossibility.
2. Market 'em to husbands. Instead of going for chic and trendy go for comical. Have the designs show a woman holding a big bottle of beer up to her chest instead of a kid.
3. Wait for the next "Sex and the City" type show or movie and pay major bucks to get the product mentioned in the script or used by one of the sexy progressive women.

If Hooter Hiders does choose to market to men I know just the professional race car driver to pitch the product.

Until then this one goes in my naming Misstep Hall o' Shame. (I may change my opinion of the kind folks at BEBE AU LAIT send us a sample and my wife can actually use it and also tell her grandma what it is. I think I'm safe in saying that she won't be able to bring herself to do so...)

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

I'm not sure how other namers out there are approach the naming of associations, membership organizations and societies. Really. I'm not.

Here's why:

We're getting swamped by calls from associations wanting help recovering from naming projects - mostly internally led. They want help recovering from membership revolt or to head off what they see as an impending confrontation.

From what we can determine the causes for the alienation are from one of two things. Either the leadership team went off on its own to develop a new identity and presents a single option for the membership to vote on out of the blue - usually at the annual meeting... Or the leadership team goes to the membership and asks what the name should be - resulting in thousands of submissions, factionalization of the membership base, and no majority approval.

Membership organizations have a rather interesting aspect to the development of a new name. Rather than trying to attract dollars, the name is often better tasked in helping to raise the profile or morale of the membership. Organizations have come to us seeking help in making the members sound more credible, in finding new ways to refer to terms that are outdated, or to invent a word for a concept that is so new it hasn't even had terminology coined yet.

We're really enjoying the work - both on the creative side and on the membership-involvement side. The reason why so many association rebrands fail has more to do with not understanding how to involve the membership without ceding control than it does with finding the perfect name. Stokefire doesn't build perfect names and brands. There's no such thing. The best brands in the world are flawed. They do, however, have exceptionally strong aspects to them that outweigh the weaknesses in the current market.

So... word to the wise on association naming. Don't try to get your membership to name your association for you. It won't work - and the majority of your members won't like the name. Also don't attempt to force a singular identity upon your members - they'll mutiny. Find a way to involve membership in the process without allowing the masses to pull you in ten thousand different directions.

It's possible... honest. We're doin' it today.

Tate Linden Principal - Stokefire 703-778-9925

The RelaxOne. The RelaxOne Massage chair offers dynamic relaxation by listening to the peaceful music, through the audio system of the chair. Its dome-like style is intended to plunge you deeply into the music to rouse a natural relaxation. Created by Swiss inventor and experimental psychologist Hugo B. J. Soder, it is equipped with multi-dimensional sound system, a CD player and an internal ambient lighting for reading. Is is it not deserving of another name?



[Brought to us by Trendhunter]

Time Shutters Life

Three years after relaunching Life magazine as a newspaper supplement, its third incarnation, Time Inc. said it would fold the title with the April 20 issue, citing the decline in the newspaper business and outlook for ad revenue in the newspaper supplement category.

The iconic titles name, which will continue to operate online and through its books, had begun to find its footing after rocky start since its most recent reincarnation.

A Little Brittan. A Little Corner of New YorkAnyone walking east down Jane Street in the West Village yesterday morning would have known they were approaching the border. There were puddles on the road when the rest of Manhattan was bone dry and somebody had laid little sections of plastic lawn around the bottoms of all the trees. All right, we are a little ahead of ourselves here. Wrest yourself from your daydream and look at the little green street sign. It says Greenwich Avenue as it has done for generations. Never mind that the block is home to that little oasis in Gotham of British comfort cuisine, Tea & Sympathy. But renaming the block Little Britain is, in fact, exactly what the owners of the restaurant, Nicky Perry and Sean Kavanagh-Dowsett, have in mind. They are quite serious. So serious, they launched a petition drive last week to persuade the local community board and the Mayor to allow them to do it. There is nothing unsophisticated about their campaign. They hired a marketing company to create a website - www. campaignforlittlebritain.com - brought Virgin Atlantic on board as a co-sponsor and staged a press event with flight attendants and the English soul singer, Joss Stone.

It's pretty well known that when Microsoft wanted to develop a cool name for their new music player - Microsoft's attempt at taking a chunk of business away from Apple's iPod - they contacted one of the biggest branding houses in the business - Lexicon.

Lexicon developed the name Zune - a name that seems to connect with the word "tune" and has a "z" at the beginning of it. Lexicon's staff used words like "fast" and "full" (focusing on the zoominess of the Z and the roundness of the "ooh" sound) to describe what the name does for the product. When Lexicon talks about it the brand sounds almost well put together.

Steve Ballmer evidently didn't get the memo, however.

When asked what the name means he responded, "It means nothing. It's just a cool name." (listen for the quote in this YouTube video at about 1:01 into the clip.)

Sadly this sort of thing happens all the time. Someone, be it a naming firm or an internal asset, develops a name and finds all sorts of interesting factoids or associations about the name, goes to the trouble of creating an identity. The branding team embraces that identity and works hard to make it compelling.

But somewhere along the line someone forgets to brief the CEO. Or maybe they do brief him and he's got other things on his mind. The problem is that the CEO isn't actually involved in the branding process (or at least I would guess that is the case here.) If the folks at the top aren't involved and haven't been brought up to speed then all the work done by the branding team is pretty much worthless.

If I say we chose a name for the next new thing because it is laden with connotations and my CEO says it's meaningless, what does that say about the product, the name, the CEO, and me? Pretty much nothing good:

• The product doesn't have anything interesting enough about it to get the attention of the CEO - or he'd have been involved in the branding process
• The name isn't compelling enough to engage the interest of the CEO to the point where he knows what it means
• The CEO doesn't value the work done by his branding team and marketing staff enough to remember it
• The branding team produces work that gets ignored by the guy footing the bill. How good can the work actually be?

It's stuff like this that shows the importance of executive involvement and buy-in. Just saying you're willing to pay for a name isn't enough. You gotta be up to speed.

I wonder how many other naming organizations won't take a project if the top-level representatives of the brand aren't on board? We won't take a job in which we can't access the top of the pyramid. It wasn't always this way, but we've had issues just like this - where we build the brand and either the brand gets canned before launch or the launch gets completely bungled because the senior executives didn't read a positioning brief that clearly states the whats and whys of the brand - and instead went with gut instinct. Imagine the horror experienced by a marketing team that is ready to roll out a fun-loving brand identity only to hear their leader convey the importance of gravity and attention to detail just days before the rollout.

We've learned our lesson.

It's been quite a while since we would take on branding engagements where the top of the pyramid can't be found. In fact, we've even made senior executive sign-off part of our contract. We're not done until the CEO types can convincingly represent the brand identity. If they don't believe in and understand the brand then we've still got work to do.

Side note: Just because the CEO understands the brand doesn't mean that it will be successful. New Coke went down in flames even though the company leadership was thoroughly behind it. Bringing customers and membership along is a different issue - and one that we've addressed in the Optiva threads.

I'm sure other namers have some horror stories here... Maybe someone else can share. I'm especially interested to hear from Lexicon about how they responded to the Ballmer slip-up.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Monster launches new product

Monster Worldwide Inc. launched a new recruitment media product designed to aid employers in seeking people who are not actively looking for a job.

This one is courtesy of YouTube.

The name is M5 Industries., but evidently Adam Savage was hoping for something a little more British...

The tale of the name picks up part way through Adam's answer to an unheard question.

This is an example of what can happen when you don't do the required research when developing a name. Memory is a funny thing, ain't it?

My guess? Though he says he was going for a reference to James Bond's tech shop (MI6) I think he probably was remembering their Secret Service (MI5). Additionally, in the US we really don't use "MI" for anything - but we do have a fondness for guns like the M60 and fireworks like the M80. There also might be a little bit of Europe in the name if you consider the BMW M5 as an influencer.

I'll call this one "Plausible."

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Tech products get a shot of bling with the new line Active Crystals which named between a partnership formed between Phillips electronics and Swarovski Crystals. First itmes to come out will be a flash port and headphones. Smiliar items that use the Swarovski crystals can be foundn on shinyshiny.tv.

If you have a product that needs a name you probably have at least a few ideas about what that name should be. Great. Chances are good that before you find someone like us to name your product (or company) you've actually written down a few of these names and played with 'em a bit. Maybe you've asked other people what they think about your potential names, even. Perhaps you and your peers throw a code name or working name back and forth as you work on your project just because you have to call it something, right?

Well, that's fine. But you should be aware of a couple things that are happening while you're doing this.

First, as noted in Monday's rant about cool code names, you're setting up your clients for a disappointment.

Second, and more importantly, once you begin to use a code name, working name, or even if you just start bouncing some ideas around in your mind you're beginning to lose the objectivity you need to name your project well.

Recently one of our clients came to us with just this issue. After months of considering names internally they were stuck. They hadn't chosen a name yet, but they'd been playing around with the same group of names for many weeks.

After our first round of naming the client was disturbed to find that some of their favorite pre-existing names had some rather large problems to overcome. For instance:

• The nonsensical word that they preferred happened to mean something in a foreign language that would limit their ability to own the word locally or globally
• The word has no meaning or connotation amongst the target market
• The word doesn't allign with the goals they've set out for the name or the company in general.

And there was more to it, but I'll leave it at that.

The real issue we had to overcome wasn't that they were in love with the name - it was that they'd become so familiar with the name over time that they couldn't objectively evaluate the difficulties that their clients would have in saying it, reading it, or understanding what it means. They'd come to embrace the term as catchy, when in fact it was downright awkward.

Think about it. You invent a term - say... "Cobonovirtuate" and you think about that term for months. You say it every few hours during the day. You go to sleep thinking about it. You use the term to reference something important in your life. You think of words that rhyme with it.

After those months have passed you are so familiar and comfortable with the term that you think it is the most natural thing in the world.

It can be tough to hear, then, that the name is flawed. I give big kudos to my client for trying to see past their familiarity

In fact... They're still not through it. But I'm rooting for 'em big time.

And if they don't see past it? We're gonna build 'em the best damn support structure for a flawed name that we can.

But, yes. Still rooting. (And perhaps next post I can address some ways to avoid sticking the wrong label on to begin with...)

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

There is a new San Jose-based company behind an elegant new product taht makes wine in your kitchen. It is called the WinePod. It is digitally networked, 4-foot-tall machine that ferments, presses, and ages wine in one self-contained device, the $3,500 WinePod can produce varietals in batches of up to 60 bottles, controlling temperature via a wireless connection to the owner's personal computer. Wine experts who've tried the first batch from a WinePod--a light pinot noir--give it a thumbs-up, but to get upscale oenophiles to take him seriously, Snell tapped product designer Loren Sterling to create a brushed-stainless-steel and white-oak cask that looks right at home next to a Viking range.

A good friend sent me a link today to an (expired) vote on what to name Adobe's new "desktop runtime." For the record I have no idea what a desktop runtime is and I really don't much care to invest the time to find out. The key here is that it was given a pretty cool code name by the folks at Adobe prior to launching the full product. Here's what Adobe Labs has to say about the product and code name:

Apollo is a cross-OS runtime that allows developers to leverage their existing web development skills (Flash, Flex, HTML, Ajax) to build and deploy desktop RIA’s.

All you developers out there probably now understand what the product does. I'm still clueless. But that's beside the point. The point is that the code name "Apollo" is still pretty darn cool.

Now the downside.

Adobe is now in the position where it must alienate the developers that have been working on or hyping the product code named Apollo. Why? Because Adobe can't use the name, and doesn't want to come right out and say that they were foolish and didn't check the US Patent and Trade Office before they started using it. If they'd checked they'd have seen over 1300 live and dead marks pertaining to the word.)

Mike Chambers - Sr. Product Manager for Apollo over at Adobe - says as much on his own blog when you read through the comments (starting at about XIII or so.) Sez Mike:

Hehe... Yeah, I like Apollo too. Just remember that there are a lot of considerations when choosing a name, not all of them in our control. (for example, is it already in use, is it something that we could trademark, etc...)

I've said it before. I will continue to say it in perpetuity. Code names that have any meaning at all are bad.

1. If they have any meaning that pertains to the product or its goals then the intended audience will latch onto that meaning and identity.
2. Once the audience has accepted the code name they'll raise a huge cry when you try to change it. (Apollo is a cool name. It's just a name that they can't have.)
3. Typically companies don't want to look like idiots so they refrain from giving the real reason for the change from code name to production name (A.K.A. "we were too lazy to do a five minute search at www.uspto.gov to figure out that we were going to have some big problems pushing this name through legal.") Kudos to Mike for letting word get out in a friendly and informative way.
4. ...of course, if the code name misses the mark (as did Google's initial name of "Backrub" - which was meaningful, but rather awkward) then all you've done is weird people out before you try to convince them that you do in fact have a cool product on your hands.

So - if your meaningful name hits you've got a battle to reorient your clients to the new identity and if it misses you've got to start all over again with a new image. I'm not seeing a benefit either way.

If you instead have a policy of naming every product after something innocuous (and gods are not innocuous, by the way) or - even better - don't give your product a code name and instead push to get the real name reserved as quickly as possible then you almost all of the potential headaches.

You've still got to find the right name, however.

If only there were Thingnamers in the world to make things even easier. What a wonderful world that would be...

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

InstaGreen Tea Beverage Mix is a vitamin-packed green tea product that delivers EIGHT TIMES the antioxidants of regular green tea.

To deliver this punch, Jackie Chan, kung-fu master, backs the product with his name and verve.

The Three Little Puppies. That's what one British school renamed the traditional Three Little Pigs story for a school play, so as not to offend Muslims in the community, London's Daily Mail reported.

Shot Dog Camera. No, not named after dog that throws back alcohol shots, but a camera that lets you see life from your K-9's perspective. Brought to you from Japan by Takara Tomy.



_____________________________________________________

Announcement made for the official name of the new baseball stadium at a park in Lorain, OH– the Pipe Yard.

The U.S. Steel company was granted naming rights after a generous donation to the project. U.S. Steel spokesman John Armstrong commented “It sounds like a good name for a baseball park. And we thought it would be an appropriate name since it’s being sponsored by a tubular pipe maker.”

Well put Mr. Armstrong.

Starbucks to launch its own music label named Starbucks Records. It is unlikely however that they will sell any records at all that the name is just marketed to consumers who remember the vinyl days of past. Paul McCartney rumored to be the first to be signed. Full story here.

In a Global Marketplace, Claiming a Name Becomes an Art in Itself.

When a snazzy new product goes on sale in many countries, its name must be one of a kind. Yet today it has become increasingly difficult to find a name for a company, a product, or shade of lipstick that has not been taken.

AgroLabs, Inc., announced today its new product line of single-serve, exotic The lead item in the Bali Island line is White Peach Juice made from peaches grown only in China.

Huh.

We've got a fun challenge coming up in the next couple months. Another membership organization has selected our team to help them rename.

The challenge? They've got a four letter 'acronym' with letters that no longer represent what they actually do. At one point the letters were an initialism (like "GE" stands for General Electric) but the way in which the group described themselves has changed (as if GE changed its description to Mostly Lightbulbs And Electronics but neglected to move away from "GE".)

The biggest hurdle in most naming cases like this is to make the membership a part of the process. How do you make 5,000 members feel like a part of the process and still end up with a singular name that meets the needs of a diverse organization? If you neglect to bring the membership along for the ride you can end up with a revolt or a failed vote. If you do bring the membership along you can end up with factionalism as various constituencies lobby for their own approach and views.

Our approach is to involve the membership from the very beginning. It was the membership that asked for the new name here - and we're going to listen to everyone that wants to participate and guide us in the crafting of the new name. Rather than ask the membership to suggest the names, we ask for their input as to what they want the name to do for the organization. Sure, we'll take name suggestions too, but we want to be sure that any name we consider will meet the needs of the membership as a whole. By keeping the goals of the name distinct from the name candidates we enable the membership to make an informed choice when making a vote. The impulse to pick a horse and root for it to win gets pushed down by the more objective decision to determine which horse best fits the job at hand.

You don't want to choose a racehorse when the job at hand involves plowing the field.

Thankfully, in our experience we find that memberships are very good at making decisions like this when presented with the facts and context they need to make an informed decision. It's only when you don't give them the tools to evaluate the names and the opportunity to affect the outcomes that you end up with major problems.

Our friends over at ZilYen brought us into this project and we're looking forward to working closely with them to develop the final pieces of the brand they've already begun to solidify. And a big howdy to the project leaders at the organization (Jill and Lander) as well. We'll see you in a few weeks!

Tate Linden (and team) Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

You've all heard about this, right? Eskimos (okay, actually the Inuit) are so intimately familiar with snow that they have up to 400 different words to describe it.

Right.

Having talked to parents of infant twins and to those that have had little tykes in the house for over ten years I think I can safely call this one a myth. They've seen more different kinds of poop than most Inuit see different kinds of snow in a lifetime and yet they're able to classify it with at most a couple dozen terms - including the profane ones. (This is not, mind you, a challenge for you to list all the four letter words that you can think of.)

Dave Mendosa has a short piece about this on his website and he covers how the myth got started - when an explorer visited the area and claimed that the tribe had four names for snow.

Four?

Stephen Pinker - a prominent linguist - suggests that today the Inuit have only a dozen words for snow, and that is if you count generously. And here you can find a list of snow morphemes (note that there aren't many more in Inuit than there are in English.)

Most on the Internet seem to conclude this is a case of gradual exaggeration - each person repeating the story adds a percentage or two as they retell it.

So why am I (as a Thingnamer) bringing up this linguistic fallacy? Because in a few ways it parallels issues we face in naming things. But I've only got time to address one today, so here it goes...

Let's address the possibility that we could build 400 words meaning essentially the same thing. Oddly this doesn't get my hackles raised. When we develop new names for products or companies we may consider thousands of potential names on our team before weeding them down to a select group to pass on to the client. In effect, before we deliver our prime candidates we live through the hell of trying to identify the same individual thing with a virtual Babel of morphemes and other lexical bits.

How do I know that there can't be 400 terms for "snow?" Because early on in my Thingnaming life I used to deliver all of the naming candidates to the client to sift through. They'd be given hundreds or thousands of candidates to consider instead of dozens.

Know what happened? Almost nothing. With so many options to choose from my clients were unable to even begin to evaluate the terms for fit. They were overwhelmed. When trying to compare one candidate to the mass of others there was too much to evaluate. Discussion was perpetually focused on how the client could possibly know if a name were better than every other candidate - even when we tried to narrow things down to an either-or decision.

I think this parallels what would happen in real life. Imagine if you had to go through this process just to describe what was falling from the sky. Was it snow54 that was falling around you, or perhaps snow323? Does snow313's aspect of supreme fluffiness better fit the situation than does snow299's reference to the slowness with which it falls?

A quick side note: My personal feeling is that inventing so many words for snow is impractical if we can take existing terms (adjectives, mostly) and connect them with the core term. Consider "driven snow," "wet snow," and "dense snow." If we make every single possible quality of snow into its own unique term then we lose the ability to compare the particular quality of that snow to other items without relying on metaphor.

Second side note: There are some things that have 400 different words to describe them, but they're not used in conversation by laypeople. Consider the color green - when you look through paint chips you'll find hundreds of different words to describe slight variations in the presentation of color. Is it "Pinesage" or "Forest Growth?" The names, however, aren't meant to be used in every day life. They're mostly just to give people a way to refer to the color while holding it in their hand and comparing it to another color. It's just easier to understand than "this green" or "that green." (Yes, I know that the greens in question are actually different greens - but I'd assume that this argument holds for snow as well - the hypothetical different words for snow are pointing out that the snow itself is not the same in each case.)

I guess that technically speaking those previous two paragraphs weren't side notes since they were actually at the end of my meandering post. Perhaps we can come up with 399 terms that better fit their true purpose?

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

The Wallingford district of Seattle's Chamber of Commerce has it's hands full. Complaints about a store's sign turned into a major publicity coup for Lori and Ryan Pacchiano, owners of the High Maintenance Bitch pet shop.



Source: click here

[Thanks for the tip Denise!]

About six months ago this blog was essentially an invisible blip in the universe. Today it is likely still invisible, though the blip has grown greatly in size. I believe that the growth is due in part to the participation and even advocacy of Nancy Friedman, Chief Word Worker for Wordworking (a company providing naming and copywriting services in the San Francisco area.)

I met Nancy in person last month at the Party for Thingnamers and enjoyed talking with her and the rest of the industry movers and shakers. It got me thinking that the rest of the world should get to hear from them too. To that end, I imposed upon Nancy to let me ask her a few questions.

Thingnamer (Tate Linden): Hello Nancy. Great to talk with you again. I’m hoping we can start out by having you tell us a little bit about your background. Nancy Friedman: I was born and reared in Los Angeles. (The real L.A. I graduated from Los Angeles High School, to which I walked—yes, walked—every single day.) I got a B.A. in comparative literature at UC Berkeley, then moved to Israel (my father’s native country) for a couple of years. I attended a graduate institute and later held various secretarial jobs, including one in which I wrote English-language correspendence for the surgeon general of the Israel Defense Forces. Returned to the U.S., attended graduate journalism school at UC Berkeley, went to work on the night copy desk at the S.F. Examiner, moved over to a regional magazine (New West, later renamed California), then did freelance magazine writing, mostly on women’s health topics, for several years. I also wrote a book, Everything You Must Know About Tampons.

Thingnamer: Okay… I don’t think I’ve come across that one in my pleasure reading. With a start like that I’d love to hear how you go from Tampons to professional naming. Nancy: I remember picking up my mother’s college dictionary when I was eight or nine and discovering an appendix that listed common English first names and their meanings. I think I committed it to memory. I was fascinated that people’s names had meanings (“Nancy: diminutive of Ann, meaning ‘grace’”) and that you could pull them apart to create more names. Margaret, for example, could become Meg, Maggie, Marge, Margitta, Greta, Gretchen, and so on. But I got my professional start in 1987. I was back in the 9-to-5 world, working at Banana Republic as editorial director, when a fellow writer told me about this peculiar opportunity to brainstorm product and company names—and get paid! Back then, professional naming was a very new profession. I had the good fortune to learn the ropes from a master, David Placek, founder of Lexicon Branding (which named the BlackBerry, the Pentium chip, and many other famous brands). We always named as a team of eight or ten people, and we always did structured exercises that forced us to produce lots and lots of names. David cited Linus Pauling, who said, “The best way to have a good idea is to have a lot of ideas.”

Thingnamer: Is there anything in particular you like about producing all these names and trying to pick the right one? Nancy: The puzzle-solving aspect of it. First, there’s the puzzle of the client’s needs: what are the real objectives here? Then there’s the wordplay puzzle, matching letters and sounds to the brand objectives. And of course I love it when I can make my client happy by finding a really good solution.

Thingnamer: Anything about the naming process that rubs you the wrong way? Nancy: When clients check their email and take phone calls during a presentation. Hang up and pay attention!

Thingnamer: I note that Wordworking provides more than just naming services. Tell us a bit about the other stuff that fills your days. Nancy: I’m also a copywriter, but a choosy one. I write certain kinds of web content (the brand story sections), ads, annual reports, and video scripts. I still have one catalog client, a remnant from my early career when I specialized in catalog work. I enjoy writing speeches and would love to do more of that work. Lately I’ve been ghostwriting books for corporate clients, which is as different from naming as possible—except for when I create the book title—yet equally satisfying.

Thingnamer: Is there anything about the naming process – be it for books or for, um, feminine products… that might surprise people? Nancy: Everyone’s surprised by how long it takes. To create the naming brief, manage a team of namers, do the creative work, check domains and trademarks, and craft a convincing presentation takes a minimum of three weeks. And there’s usually a follow-up round after the trademark lawyers have their say. Another thing that surprises people is that domain (.com) availability isn’t as big a deal as they think.

Thingnamer: Are you willing to give us a peek at what goes on behind the curtains of your naming process? Nancy: I start by gathering a ton of information about the company or product and the people associated with it. I try to get a sense of the personality involved—is this a serious, science-driven enterprise or a more playful or eclectic business? What story are they trying to tell? What names are they drawn to—real words, coined words, foreign words, descriptive words? I put all this knowledge into a detailed creative brief and use it as a springboard for my creative work. I generate at least 250 names per assignment, and expect any namers I contract with to do the same. Then I cull the master list to find the best matches with the objectives in the naming brief. Then the grunt work: checking domains and trademarks. And finally the storytelling: selecting twelve or fifteen names to present, along with a strong story for each. If necessary, rinse and repeat.

Thingnamer: Interesting. How do you guide your clients toward the best name possible? Nancy: I tell my clients that finding a good name is more like an arranged marriage than a love match. You’re looking for a name with a good meaning, a solid story, a satisfying sound, and a clear trademark and domain. It’s like finding a marriage partner from a good family, with strong prospects and decent habits. Love comes later.

Thingnamer: Is there a name you’ve created that has moved into the ‘love’ stage for you? Nancy: Only one? Well, I’m very happy with Mobius Venture Capital, which used to be called Softbank. The client team was exceptionally intelligent, responsive, and realistic. They didn’t insist on a “pure” dot-com domain, which was completely out of the question anyway given our aggressive schedule and limited budget. They were quite satisfied with mobiusvc.com. And I was delighted that when they announced the name change they used the name story I’d provided for them.

Thingnamer: Given your answers it seems that you don’t believe that every product or company has only one ‘right’ name. Is that correct? Nancy: Correct. Different names are “right” for different reasons. I always encourage my clients to select at least four “right names” to submit to comprehensive trademark review. That lessens the pressure to choose just one, and it reduces the likelihood of disappointment.

Thingnamer: I notice that you haven’t mentioned naming contests or focus groups in your discussion of naming processes. What do you think about them? Nancy: Not much.

Thingnamer: Very succinct. I like it. Okay – what do you think about the naming industry in general – or is there a naming industry at all? Nancy: There are definitely a lot of namers in the Bay Area—from graphic design firms that do a little naming as part of their identity work to global branding firms with verbal-branding divisions. But no organized industry that I’m aware of.

Thingnamer: And yet here we are. I guess this is a start! But if you weren’t naming, what would you do with your time? Nancy: Blogging, reading, swimming in the San Francisco Bay, baking, and trying to re-learn everything I’ve forgotten about playing the piano. Maybe I’d even write a book.

Thingnamer: Sounds like a great life. Hope you find a way to do those and name stuff in the years to come. That brings us to the end of the very first Get To Know A Thingnamer interview. It’s great to get some insight from another namer! It reminds me of that poster on Mulder’s wall in the X-Files – “We Are Not Alone.” Somehow I feel comforted. Nancy: It was a rare and enjoyable opportunity to talk about my favorite subjects. Thanks for the opportunity, Tate.

Thingnamer: My pleasure! Thanks for taking the time out of your busy day to speak with me and the Thingnamer readers.

Nancy can be reached via email at (nancyf @ wordworking.com) and she has a very interesting blog that addresses many naming issues here. Examples of some great posts include this one on why Viagra is a great name (though it wasn't invented by her) and this one on how to become a namer of things.

And she ratted out a bunch of promising future interviewees (at my behest) such as David Placek, George Frasier, Rick Bragdon, Alexandra Watkins, Mark Gunnion, Steve Manning, and Brent Scarcliff. All of you (and more) should consider yourselves on notice.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Retail giant Federated Department Stores, Macy's Cincinnati-based parent company, made that move Tuesday, announcing that its board will ask shareholders to change the parent name to Macy's Group Inc.

...I'm sure I could think of a better parody given time, but... well... this result doesn't really fill me with joy.

Actually, it wouldn't have mattered which way the vote went - the fact that the credit union was unable to disclose the real reason for the name change (hint: it probably wasn't just confusion) meant that the membership didn't have enough data (in either vote) to cast an informed ballot.

While I don't have 100% confidence that the University gave an ultimatum to the CU, I'm more confident in that cause than I am in any other. I'm pretty sure that if this cause had been disclosed initially the name Optiva would've been accepted more easily. In my casual perusal of online commentary I've found that many of the complaints about the new name reference the fact that the old name was the whole reason that they were a member in the first place. Many wanted the strong tie to the University and thought it was almost criminal to tear it away.

But what if the CU had been able to communicate that they had to disassociate themselves from UofI?

Imagine if Weber Marketing Group had been able to work with the full membership to find a way to honor their desire to feel connected to the school? Disclosing that the university was trying to protect its brand (saying, in effect "you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here") could've brought a rallying cry from the membership instead of a cry of foul play.

This is not to say that a naming contest was the right way to go - but certainly offering members a chance to contribute to the identity - to make sure that the new identity at least addresses the values the membership holds most dear... that would've been worthwhile.

At Stokefire we're approached occasionally by membership organizations and non-profits that wish to have their leadership team develop names without involving (or occasionally even informing) the membership until it is time to vote. While we may offer consulting support for these organizations we've never taken on a full naming project under these terms. (And FWiW, a good portion of our consulting effort goes towards trying to persuade the client to involve the membership and be as forthright as possible.)

This Optiva re-vote seems to validate our take, no?

Kudos to OptivEx for beginning to tell the full story, to the membership base for showing that there are consequences when an organization becomes disassociated from its membership, and yes, even to Weber for weathering the storm.

To those that find it surprising that I might not be ripping apart Weber... I find it interesting that no one has ever questioned whether the name Optiva was one of the top candidates suggested by the Weber team. Maybe that's because not many people know what the naming process is like. I don't have inside insight into how Weber runs their projects, but when Stokefire works with clients we present numerous candidates and make suggestions as to which are the best for various purposes. We've had a few clients go through the process and select a name that we think is a poor candidate (or that we didn't develop.) The client still has every right to disclose that we were the naming expert for the project - and it isn't likely that we would ever mention publicly that we advised against selecting a name our clients end up with. (Dissing clients - or making them look foolish - is never a good thing.) Our goal is to advise our clients as to the strongest identities available and then to do our best to support the identity choices that our clients make - even if they don't exactly follow our advice.

A few links for you:

I have enjoyed (albeit wincingly) reading the opinions of Nicholas Johnson and see them as an example of what happens when a really smart guy who cares doesn't get enough access to the information he needs. Today he provides an overview of the second vote and links to areas where you can find more backstory. Any CU or membership organization considering a top-down naming effort needs to read Mr. Johnson's words before they go through with it.

I've also watched Michael over at Popwink as he has opined on the issue - today just summarizing the final vote and showing some snapshots of the CU's home page before and after the vote.

[Edit - Thank you to JT the 'Hawk-eyed' reader who noted that I've been watching hermits rock as well. Greg's post today has some interesting quotes from the event last night.]

The story was also picked up by the Iowa Press Citizen and what appears to be another site owned by the same folks - HawkCentral. Both sites have comments enabled and the boards are heating up quickly. My quick Google search found no other news outlets covering the vote.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Can nicknames serve a purpose other than to make you look foolish in retrospect? (Did I really let people call me by the name of a small fried nugget of processed potato bits? Yes... yes I did. But in my defense I was only three.) Apparently they can.

Ernest L. Abel, Ph.D. and Michael L. Kruger from Wayne State University found a connection between the use of nicknames and living longer.

Here's the abstract from their report:

We investigated the effect of having a nickname on the longevity of major league baseball players. Ages of death, birth year, and career lengths of major league baseball players who debuted prior to 1950 were obtained and we compared longevities of players with nicknames with those who did not have a nickname. After controlling for these factors in analysis of covariance, there was a statistically significant increase in longevity of 2.5 years associated with having a nickname. Players with nicknames (N=2,666; 38.1 %) lived an average of 68.6 (±15.1 S.D.) years compared to players without nicknames (N=4,329; 61.9%) who lived an average of 66.1 (t16.1) years. We attributed this nickname-related effect on longevity to enhanced self-esteem.

Reprints of the report can be requested via email to: eabel@wayne.edu

While I agree that a name can have major impact on the success of a product, person, or business, I'm not sure that this report is throwing strikes.

I have to wonder how self-esteem can be quantified when the only variables controlled are age at death, birth year, career length, and whether or not they had a nickname. I did not read the full report but would imagine that there are better ways to determine if self esteem is a factor. Consider the more tangible variables of:

• Salary rank (versus contemptoraries)
• Stat rank (versus contemporaries)
• Inclusion in team or league hall-of-fame
• Records held (and for how long)
• Position played (since some positions may be more likely to have nicknames than others - and each position requires different physical skills and body-types)

My feeling on this report is that there is some confusion between a "nickname-related effect on longevity" and another cause (the real one) that the nickname is also caused by. It could be physical attributes, increased skill, or something else. The fact is that people who get nicknames typically have something different about them (as proven by the fact that there aren't many ball-players called Joe Average.) Maybe these differences are the cause rather than the label that we put on them...

How does this apply to the world of branding and naming? When looking for true causes for success or failure it helps to look deeper than just the surface. I've found that many of the best-named companies aren't just named well - they're responsible for great products and they're managed well too. The name is the crowning achievement rather than a mask to hide a weak product.

A great name can help a company with other differentiators stand out from the crowd. It can also help a company stand out in an a commoditized industry. But as I often say, giving a piece of poo a great name may get that piece of poo a lot of press, but at the end of the day it will still only be a very well named piece of poo.

(You'll note my use of three-letter words instead of four. With the baby on the way I'm having an irrational fear that the kiddo will read this stuff and blame me for a nasty swearing habit.)

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Introducing Meth Coffee. This rather controversial named product is marketed as a high caffeine beverage that provides an intense buzz and cocoa-tobacco finish. The "Meth" branding could generate a storm of publicity for this product in the same way that the use of the word "Cocaine" did for a recently launched energy drink.

We had a discussion yesterday with a prospective client that uses an acronym as their name. Or it used to be an acronym. Now it is just a few capital letters that have absolutely nothing to do with the organization. At some point in the last few decades the words used to describe organization changed (no longer matching the letters in the acronym) so they had to adjust the way they referred to themselves. The acronym became an anachronism.

Imagine a company called the National Record Player Company - that goes by NRPC. This name would serve them well through the 1980s - at which point the company switched away from record players to things like CD players, and soon after that to DVD players.

Kentucky Fried Chicken had a problem similar to this when they decided the word "Fried" held too much baggage. They are now officially named "KFC" and the letters themselves have no official meaning anymore.

If you owned NRPC what would you do? Would you keep using the letters as you've been doing for decades because that's how people know you and there's strong brand recognition (even though the letters have had no words behind them for three decades?) Would you attempt to kluge together new words that fit the letter pattern better than the old ones (like BP did with Beyond Petroleum?) Or would you ditch the acronym and go for a brand new name that better positions you for the next three decades (while potentially honoring your past at the same time... but no pressure, of course?)

Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages. Each one will be loved by some and hated by others. Just take a look at our own blog and you'll see that major backlash can occur when nothing other than the name changes.

Membership organizations are particularly vulnerable to backlash when even the slightest adjustments are made to the brand. Today's society defines people by the company they keep. When an entity with which people are associated changes it reflects on the the members themselves. For naming this means that people who associate with an organization in part because of the name (perhaps because it is their alma mater) will not respond positively to a name change without a significant amount of justification and participation.

When was the last time you heard of a company or organization with a strong brand and lengthy history that renamed itself and received unanimous accolades? I certainly can't remember one. There's always dissent (though I believe that dissent is a good thing - but that's a post for another day.)

Off for my second cuppa joe.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2007 they haveCisco Systems Inc. and Apple Inc. said settled the trademark-infringement lawsuit that threatened to derail Apple's use of the "iPhone" name for its much-hyped new iPod-cellular phone gadget. Cisco Systems Inc. and Apple Inc. have agreed to share the "iPhone" name, but both companies are staying tightlipped about what future products might come from the resulting deal to collaborate on "interoperability" between the companies' products.



Redrock Oil Sands, Inc. has changed its name to Redrock Energy, Inc., effective immediately.

I just watched an advertisement about five minutes ago for Special K2O - a fruity protein-water drink.

I am truly saddened for 2(oh) reasons.

First, it is my belief that this is an unwise brand extension. I'm sure that some executive at Special K Headquarters thought that this was a logical step - probably using a justification like: "People eat Special K to get their vitamins, so it makes sense that people will think of us when they need a healthy drink. It's like a fruity breakfast in a bottle you can drink any time!"

The problem with this line of thinking is that people typically don't drink protein water for breakfast - and breakfast is what Special K is most strongly connected with. You'll note that Special K hasn't moved into the frozen dinner aisle, and has avoided developing lunch meats... They're strictly an early morning thing.

Think about Special K for a moment. What are the qualities that come to mind? For me I think of crispy flakes accompanied by cold milk. I also have a secondary response connected to healthfood (albeit processed health food.) The only connection to fruit I may have is via my addition of a banana or strawberry to the bowl (though I'm sure Special K has experimented with fruity cereals and breakfast bars.)

This isn't brand extension, it is brand dilution. I expect we'll see this product disappear (or get rebranded) within a few months.

The second reason I'm displeased with the product is the name. Even upon reading or hearing the name I'm not quite sure how to spell it. Do a search on the (presumably) correct name via Google today and you'll get approximately 850 hits. Now try a search with the "Oh" as the number zero. As of this moment there are at least 10,300 mentions. That means that less than ten percent of the people trying to write about the product are actually getting the name right.

The folks at Kellogg didn't factor in a major linguistic change that began in the 1990s (or perhaps earlier) and really took hold in the last couple years with Web 2.0. When a word ends with a phonetic "oh" sound most tech-savvy types will assume that the sound refers to zero. "Two dot oh" or "two point oh" (and even "two oh") have strong connections with numbers, not letters.

You know there's something wrong when your own investor site gets the name wrong.

Special K20 Protein Waters deliver five grams of protein per 16 oz. bottle with 50 calories. Special K20 is available in three flavors: Strawberry Kiwi, Lemon Twist and Tropical Blend. Suggested retail price for four 16-ounce bottles is $5.99.

I admit that the product name is saved somewhat by the fact that most buyers don't need to spell the name to buy it. The supermarket (thankfully) doesn't require you to spell the products before purchasing them. I can think of some specialty ice-cream brands that wouldn't make a dime if spelling mattered in brick & mortar product sales.

Still... don't you think it odd that 92 out of 100 mentions of the product don't actually mention the product? Add in the fact that specialk20 is camped and the correct product name (as of right now) is still available for registration and you've got a strong indicator that something is very wrong.

What do you think?

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

 

 

XM and Sirius Satellite Radio announced that they're confident they will be a single company by year's end, but they haven't decided what they new entity would be called, nor the location of its headquarters.

 

BioPharm Informatics LLC, a premier provider of Laboratory Information Management Systems consulting services and lab technology solutions, announced today that its name will change to LabCentrix^SM. LabCentrix is a coined word that connotes putting each lab at the center of everything the firm does to ensure the very best technology solutions are deployed for each customer.

I'm starting to get worried.

In the last few weeks I've noticed more people are asking me about focus groups. Every couple days a client or prospect suggests that we use focus group data to either:

1. confirm the direction we should take for a rebranding effort - or
2. confirm that the name(s) we have developed are worthy of launching

Color me displeased.

Those that know me well can probably pick out the word that annoys me in both suggested uses. The word is "confirm."

Focus groups don't confirm. Focus groups just focus. You give them something to discuss and they discuss it in ways not done in the real world. Unfortunately many companies use the results of focus group testing to change their strategic direction, target audience, or even their name.

I recently talked with a financial firm that used "reliable focus group data" to determine that the thing their customers wanted in a financial institution was trustworthiness and financial stability. Great... except that I'd guess that these same qualities have been identitified by every other financial firm in the country. By saying these same things about themselves they disappear into the mess of standard-issue companies.

I absolutely abhor hearing companies and organizations espousing trust as a primary virtue. They end up looking like NAR - who decided that they should shout about the ethics training they give their agents because their focus group data showed that people don't trust real estate agents.

How many of you would buy from a used car salesman that repeatedly told you that he took ethics training - and told you stories about how trustworthy and friendly he was?

Very few companies know how to use a focus group correctly. It seems counter-intuitive to use them to find new ideas, but that's the only thing we've found them useful for. Instead of asking what is important to a focus group - why not ask:

• What is it that we do differently than other companies
• Why did you choose us over the competition
• If you didn't use us who would you go to for our type of services
• Why would you choose them?
• What could the competition offer you to entice you away from us?
• Is there something that we do today that if we stopped doing you'd leave us?

Get people to discuss the stuff that really matters. No one selects a bank because they're the only bank that is trustworthy. They're all supposed to be that way. If everyone is supposed to do (or be) something then why say that you do it?

Here is my plea: Stop trying to confirm your ideas with focus groups. You will rarely learn anything other than how smart you are (and you'll wonder why your smart ideas don't work.) Instead use them as a tool to help you come up with new ideas.

How do you know when you've got a new idea? Take the output of the focus groups (using questions like those above) and compare the answers to your own internal responses. Then look to your competition and see what they're saying in their marketing. If you've got output that isn't being used elsewhere in the industry and is underappreciated at your own firm you've got something that could actually bring positive change.

Ideally the output will focus on things that are the opposite of what your competitors state. Like "we like you because everyone else wastes our time trying to be our friend and you just take care of business and let us get on with our day." That's a market opportunity waiting to be exploited.

I will guarantee you that your new idea will have nothing to do with "trustworthiness."

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

You'd think that enough had been said about the renaming of the University of Iowa Community Credit Union to Optiva (effective March 1, 2007.) Even our little corner of the world racked up dozens of comments about it.

A new controversy (or perhaps the old one) has erupted and a revote is on the way.

If it isn't clear yet, there's a lesson here. That lesson is: Renaming is Hard.

As for my opinion on this whole thing... I'm a bit confused. I don't understand why the folks at the credit union didn't more vocally support (or at least listen to) the people upset by the name change. Sure, I'm not particularly pleased by the name "Optiva," but if I were a member I'd at least want to have my opinions made available to other members and discussed via the membership pipeline.

The justification for the name change is that people were confused by the old name. Folks thought that it was only for alumni and students when it is in fact open to everyone. Fair enough. But I question whether the name is the right thing to change when facing this sort of confusion. This credit union has a huge and vocal group of people that want to be associated with the university - and this group of people grows every day. It wouldn't be difficult to adjust something like the tagline or even create an ad campaign to solve the problem. In fact it would be cheaper, easier, and more practical.

You'll note that the company made no mention of financial problems or legal issues - just confusion.

I'm getting confused myself now. Why would an organization that benefits from a huge number of rabid fans and alumni ditch that association for something innocuous and Latinate?

Weber Marketing Group did their job in creating the identity, but I'm not certain that if confusion is the primary mover a new identity was the right response. No matter how great Weber's work was it wasn't going to solve the confusion and still maintain the same strong tie to the University.

So the real question (at least to me) is what the real reason for the name change was. No one throws away millions in free advertising and positive associations just to solve confusion. If that is honestly the cause then I'd suggest that the leadership of the CU needs a lesson in economics.

I'm pretty sure they've got Econ 101 covered, so that means the answer is elsewhere.

What would make a CU change its name without putting up a public fight? Let me know your thoughts. I have my own ideas, but I'd like to hear yours first. If you could name your own business after your alma mater and benefit from that association every time the name was mentioned in the press - wouldn't you? What would make you change?

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Coty Inc., the world's largest fragrance company, announced today the creation of a new global business unit which they have named, Coty Beauty, which will combine the mass businesses of the Americas, Europe and Asia.

Two concepts that I thought would never successfully mix: anything involving the word "viral" and my nether regions.

I have been proved wrong.

(Please note that I am going to do my darndest to make this a PG-13 post. Maybe even G if I can find a way. If you are offended by "Hoo Has" and the like you may want to surf elsewhere.)

In what may be one of the most unusual successful viral marketing ploys, Philips Norelco has launched shaveeverywhere.com - a site dedicated to getting men to shave... well... everywhere. Backs, buttocks... and a couple other things starting with the letter b. And throw in a couple "p" words too.

The product they're pitching is the "BodyGroom" - a razor specifically made to shave you all over. I'm not quite sure how this particular razor was modified from, say, any other electric razor on the face of the earth, to perfectly shave your business, but it certainly is causing a stir. Thousands of bloggers are talking about it already - and it was mentioned in the Wall Street Journal yesterday as well.

More intriguing to me is the fact that the term "Optical Inch" is spreading like wildfire too. The website with the name is already camped and for sale. There are hundreds of bloggers talking about it.

But why? Why is it that an optical inch is desireable at all? This strikes me in just about the same way that the logic used by guys with combovers and toupes use. Something akin to "Hey, if I wear my hair just right I might fool people into thinking there's more here than there actually is."

This line of logic is one that doesn't sit well with me. Long ago I decided that the moment I had an urge to start parting my hair near my ears I would shave it all off. As you can see this moment has come and gone.

Men of the world -consider this: You may be gaining an optical inch by using this new wonder-product, but (hopefully) at the end of the day the final method of measurement isn't going to be visual.

In establishing your brand it is often said that you want to under promise and over deliver. I think that this product (and its marketing method) are ensuring that its clients do the exact opposite.

The ad campaign is in my opinion a good one. The brand that they are building, however, seems critically flawed. I don't think I could ever willingly associate myself with a company or product that so overtly preyed on a man's insecurities with a solution that so clearly didn't help the situation.

That said, I am involved in open-source research that could make this "Optical Inch" laughable. Get 'em to stand back a bit and who knows how big the "benefits package" could get.

Operators are standing by.

At a distance.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Oklahoma Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Company Changes Name

The name change affects only the mutual insurance company that carries the Oklahoma Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Company label. See video of announcement.

[Ed. - updated with new links, grammar fixes, and a dose of humble pie. Apologies to those that I may have carelessly forgotten to credit.]

Many thanks to the kind folks at Igor and Eat My Words for hosting a great party with dozens of namers from around the world. Okay, not really the world, but at least all over North America. Or more precisely the United States and Canada. Well, it was one guy from Canada, one guy from DC, and everyone else was from the Bay Area. Still, though, it was very impressive.

Really! (Investing $2000+ for entertaining a room full of your primary competitors in the industry is no small thing, either. If it had been at Stokefire's pad we'd have had party ice and a few footlong subs.)

Thanks specifically to Alexandra Watkins, Steve Manning, and Nancy Friedman for their efforts in hosting, funding, and organizing the event. What started out as six people at a bar turned into a wonderful industry-wide event with dozens of people making new connections.

Unfortunately the pictures I took are too big for my server, so I'll have to wait until I get back home next week to edit and post them. Check back Tuesday-ish for the goods. Or you can click here for Alexandra's (our party-pad hostess) pix. She seems to have captured many of the same shots I did.

Pretty amazing how many different types of businesses are involved in naming. Lots of copywriters, branding agencies, marketers, list-farms, and full service advertisers. There were a couple businesses that were strikingly similar to what we do at Stokefire.

As for the reaction to my persistant mouthing-off on this blog about the lack of industry representation I'd say the response was a cautious interest. There's a little bit of disagreement as to what naming is and how it might relate to the larger industries of graphic design, advertising, marketing, and identity development. I heard quite a few folks advocate joining AIGA to further our cause. Perhaps starting up a focus group within their organization.

I guess I'm a little wary of that path since I believe that traditionally a name flows from a core identity more readily than it does from a sense of design. The design would traditionally flow from the same place the name does. The question for me is whether we want verbal branding, naming, and identity development to be supplicant to the visual aspects. That's something I strongly disagree with. Both the name and design are supplicant to the identity/strategy of the company.

I've never developed a name after the logo and design have been set and before the identity has been developed. It's backasswards. Ain't it?

The topic came up quite a few times and has me wondering a few things:

1. Is there enough interest in the concept of a group that represents namers to support our own organization? Are there enough of us to do it? I've gotten interest from about a dozen companies and a handful of freelancers - but no one is committed to it yet.
2. Is there a stronger call to create an organization dedicated to the creation of identities rather than names - and in this way enable the participation of partner fields such as design, scent, colors, and the rest of the pieces that are involved in the creation of strong identities...
3. How will an organization that represents namers handle the various approaches (sometimes conflicting) to name generation and evaluation? Can an organization meant to raise the profile of an industry do so without demeaning some of its constituents?

That's it. I'm going to try to enjoy the rest of my pseudo-vacation with my wife. Can't believe I have the good fortune to be in sunny San Francisco while DC is under inches of ice and snow.

I think I'm going to ditch my light sweater for a long-sleeved tee. (I know you all miss me back there. Admit it.)

Cheers!

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925 (but the office is snowed in, so no one is going to answer the phone today.)

Stokefire's chief Thingnamer (A.K.A. "me") is in San Francisco this week for (among other things) the first meeting of a huge group of folks that do what I do for a living - name stuff. I'm staying at Hotel Triton - a boutique owned by Kimpton.

Kimpton's slogan is "every hotel tells a story" so I figured I'd try and figure out what the story is at this one. I recently helped another boutique hotel create their own story, so I'm particularly interested in the topic.

Here's what has happened thus far:

• We called ahead to ask if we could get early check-in. They couldn't promise it, but said they'd try their best. We were very thankful for anything they could do.
• Pulled up in front of hotel at a sign saying "valet parking" for Triton. We got out of the car and for two minutes wondered where the valet was. They did show up. Our car is now being kept in an extremely safe place. At least it should be for $37 a night.
• We walked into the lobby (very colorfully decorated) and up to the desk where we were asked for ID and credit card. They told us about the schedule at the hotel and welcomed us while preparing our room keys. We asked some questions about the decor and neighborhood - the staff was highly knowledgeable. Kudos!
• The elevators are lit with deep blue and purple lights. Tres cool.
• One of the room keys didn't work, but we got in anyhow. The room was a bit dated and scuffed. And small. But this is San Francisco - so it's expected.
• Five minutes after we checked in there was a knock on the door and a very friendly gentleman gave us a note, a bottle of water, and six chocolates. Talk about service. Here's what the handwritten letter read:

Thanks for joining our KIMPTON IN TOUCH program! Should you need anything, please do not hesitate to contact us! Enjoy!

- the Triton Family

I was very impressed until I realized two things. First, I hadn't registered for any program, and second, my name wasn't Mr. Gray - the man to whom the very kind letter was addressed. This did not, however, keep me from being appreciative, nor did it prevent me from tasting the very fine gifts. In my defense, I didn't actually catch the error until after I'd sampled both.

• The bathroom has an unintended extra bit of entertainment. The toilet isn't particularly well bolted to the floor, so when you sit or adjust your position there's a bit of a thrill. Will you fall in? Will the toilet tip? Will your unmentionables be unpleasantly moistened? We informed the front desk of the issue and await any potential remedy.

The story thus far is a little hard to read. I can see that a lot of thought went into certain things, like the decor, the attitude, and even some of the personal touches - but the execution isn't really there. Sort of like a puzzle that has pieces that just don't quite fit together right.

I didn't spend any time looking into why Triton was named Triton - though there's a mythological green-patina guy in a little fountain in front of the building, so I'm guessing there's a story there that I could learn if I wanted to. I haven't been compelled to look into it yet. (I'm pretty sure that's not a good thing. I'd love to have a story behind a boutique brand... that's the whole point about boutiques - they've got personality and a story...)

More interesting to me was that most of the materials given to me upon check-in (including our keys, our welcome pack, and the KIMPTON INTOUCH program materials) had no mention of Hotel Triton at all. There's no real effort to create an experience here - just stuff to point out that you could also be having an experience at other Kimpton locales.

Why would a hotel conglomerate allow an owned hotel to have its own name and yet not allow them to personalize the experience down to the way they communicate with their clients?

I think my perception of this place would be better if they (Kimpton) had avoided one of the things I find truly annoying about many service industry marketing campaigns. Rather than showing me that they've created a place I'll enjoy they instead tell me that they've done it. Here's the quote that came along with my card key:

Our Hotels embrace their own unique story to create a unique guest experience with only one person in mind. You.

This is complete bunk. If each hotel has its own unique story then each hotel is probably going to appeal to a different type of person - many of which are explicitly not me. Got a hotel that plays hard rock? Not for me. Got a hotel all done up in pastels? Not for me.

I'm not sure where this idea that personalization on a global scale is a good thing (or even possible) got started, but it has got to stop. It is a logical impossibility.

You can and should build a hotel experience that focuses on creating a memorable guest stay for every guest. You cannot build that brand by saying the experience was expressly created for every individual in advance. Customization is only effective after you establish a relationship. Customization beforehand means you're probably going to give me a product that doesn't fit.

I think Kimpton would do well to step back a bit and let Triton try to spread its wings a bit. The fact that the two identities don't know how to relate to each other (Triton coasters and Kimpton keys) implies there's something amiss. It seems a perfectly nice hotel, and I welcome the coming chapters in the story over the next few nights. I'm certain that they'll fall into place better the first.

Gotta head out to the Thingnamerfest... so I'll be talkin' at ya again tomorrow. Perhaps some pictures and stories are in order. I'll see what I can do.

LONDON: Richard Branson's Virgin Group has announced several packages for the television and telephone subscribers of its Virgin Media, which formally got the name Thursday last after the successful merger of Virgin Mobile and satellite broadcaster NTL Telewest.

 

GE's LED lighting business is renamed Lumination

GE Consumer & Industrial has changed the name of its LED business from GELcore LLC to Lumination LLC.

GE says that the new name "reflects the fast–growing business unit's vision of imagination with light, and embraces GE's heritage of innovation and optimism for the future." ."Our name change emphasizes an important element of our growth strategy," states David Elien, president of Lumination. "Our focus since our inception has been lighting applications that leverage the benefits of LEDs to drive real value for customers."

PHOENIX, Feb. 7 /PRNewswire/ -- British grocery store chain Tesco announced today that its new chain of grocery stores in the U.S. will be called "Fresh & Easy Neighborhood Market," and formally revealed its new logo, during an event hosted by the Greater Phoenix Economic Council. The company is focusing on the Greater Phoenix area, Las Vegas, Los Angeles and San Diego and stores will begin to open later in the year.Tesco USA has plans of opening 300 small grocery stores in Southern California, Las Vegas and Phoenix. The openings would cost approximately $2 billion and would take five years to fully complete. The company plans on opening the stores in the second half of next year.

In an effort to distinguish itself from other grocery or produce stores, the emphasis at Tesco will be on the freshness of food. The company hopes to ensure this freshness with large distribution centers and quick turnaround times.

Has anyone seen the new logo (the one above is not it)?? I could not seem to track it down. I would love to get a look.

Thanks for the pointer to the new loge Denise. Much appreciated!!! >>>>>>

Pork Racing Starts its 8th Season with Frank Kimmel

Last fall the Pork Racing team celebrated Frank Kimmel’s eighth ARCA championship. It was also Kimmel’s seventh consecutive championship. During this unprecedented run, one sponsor has been a constant with the #46 team – America ’s Pork Producers.

As the team heads to Daytona, Kimmel will be trying once gain to tame Daytona International Speedway and come home with his first ARCA 200 victory, one of the few trophies not on Kimmel’s mantel. Cheering him on will be 50 of America ’s Pork Producers who will descend on Daytona Beach from across the country.

“Some sponsors tend to dabble, but for America’s Pork Producers, when we find something that really works, like our relationship with Frank Kimmel, the #46 team and ARCA, we stick with it,” says Karen Boillot, Director for Retail Demand Enhancement with the National Pork Board. “For example, we started using the term ‘The Other White Meat’ nearly 20 years ago. All these years later, ‘The Other White Meat’ is not only still at the core of our marketing efforts, but has become one of the best known taglines in the world.”

 America ’s Pork Producers, represented by the National Pork Board, use their sponsorship of the #46 team as an important part of their “The Other White Meat. Don’t Be Blah.” marketing campaign that challenges consumers to make meal-time more exciting.

Some call it "corn mushrooms" or "the fungus delicacy that attaches itself to corn." But those that don't have the gift of marketing-speak seem to talk a little more freely. Consider "Corn Smut," for instance.

Or my favorite... (Boy I wish I could make this more suspenseful...)

"Sleepy excrement"

The product? Huitlacoche. (or Cuitlacoche)

Hungry yet? Just wait!

From recipes to go:

...common in central Mexico; during the rainy season, a fungus develops between the husks and the ripe kernels where the kernels will blacken, contort and swell to form this musty fungus; valued for centuries in Mexico; has an earthy and distinct taste finally similar to mushrooms or truffles; lends a black hue and resonant aroma to stuffings for empanadas, tamales and quesadillas; makes distinctive sauces; usually sold cut from the cob and frozen; needs cooking to release flavor and aroma; often sautéed with roasted garlic and onions, and either fresh marjoram, oregano or epazote, then simmered with a little water or stock; harvested during the rainy season, usually late spring to early fall.

This lovely delicacy has been the target of USDA eradication efforts (they view it as a blight) - which may be one of the reasons why it is so darn hard to find in the States.

In the late 1980s the James Beard House attempted to popularize the food by calling it "Mexican truffle," and some unknown marketer calls it"corn caviar."

This post was inspired by an old blog post at TheSneeze.com wherein the author eats an entire can of the stuff. You gotta go read it - mainly to see pictures of what they put in the can. (Imagine corn on steroids. Now imagine corn on steroids getting covered in mold. Oh. And filled with puss, too.)

Why am I writing about this on a naming blog? Because I think this is an excellent example of a product that ain't gonna benefit from a name change - no matter how great that name change is. Call it Ambrosia, call it Cocaine, or call it McDonalds... the name won't help it. It still looks like doo-doo (those Aztecs were smart.)

Remember the "You're soaking in it" tagline? Or secretly replacing the house coffee? That's just about the only approach that I could see working here. Hide the food inside stuff that people can't see and then surprise the audience with the fact that they just ate some really good tasting... mold.

On second thought, perhaps that won't work. I smell lawsuits.

Fellow namers - what do you think? Could you name (and brand) this well enough to make it a popular delicacy in the US? (No fair paying Oprah and Michael Jordan to endorse it. The Corn Smut lobby couldn't afford it.)

This one is beyond my pay grade.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

DETROIT - Ford Motor Co. will rename its slow-selling Five Hundred model the Taurus, a name Ford previously used for a car that became the nation’s top-seller, two company officials said Tuesday.

The officials spoke to The Associated Press on the condition they not be identified by name because the official announcement had not yet been made.The Taurus, considered by some the car that saved Ford, revolutionized the way autos look and feel when it was introduced in 1985.

Photo - Ford Motor Company President and CEO Alan Mulally introduces the 2008 Ford Five Hundred at the 2007 North American International Auto Show in Detroit, Michigan January 7, 2007. REUTERS/Gary Cameron (UNITED STATES) 9:37 a.m. ET, 2/6/07

I'm speaking for the DC chapter of the International Association of Business Communicators Thursday night. Amongst the things I'll be reviewing in my 20 minute discussion (followed by Q&A) will be:

• The purpose of names
• A sampling of key aspects of a good name
• Seven things you never want to do with your name
• The most important aspect of a successful corporate naming project
• How to make a bad name good and a good name great. (The trade secret of the great namers.)

I'll try to throw in some examples and audience participation if possible. 20 minutes is a bit tight, but I'll do my best to keep it interesting.

I've been told there's still an earlybird admission (through the end of the day today - Feb 6) and you can get dinner, networking, presentation, and parking for $55 (non-members.) Directions and registration are here. Add $10 for Wednesday registrations and $10 more for on-site. IABC members get in at a discount.

If you're an IABC DC member I encourage you to comment here and let folks know what to expect for the non-speaking part of the evening.

Hope to see DC some of you area locals at the Tivoli Restaurant in Rosslyn, Virginia.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Apple Inc. and The Beatles’ Apple Corps Ltd. Enter into New Agreement

CUPERTINO, California and LONDON—Apple® Inc. and The Beatles’ company Apple Corps Ltd. are pleased to announce the parties have entered into a new agreement concerning the use of the name “Apple” and apple logos which replaces their 1991 Agreement. Under this new agreement, Apple Inc. will own all of the trademarks related to “Apple” and will license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps for their continued use. In addition, the ongoing trademark lawsuit between the companies will end, with each party bearing its own legal costs, and Apple Inc. will continue using its name and logos on iTunes®. The terms of settlement are confidential.

Commenting on the settlement, Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO said, “We love the Beatles, and it has been painful being at odds with them over these trademarks. It feels great to resolve this in a positive manner, and in a way that should remove the potential of further disagreements in the future.”

Commenting on the settlement on behalf of the shareholders of Apple Corps, Neil Aspinall, manager of Apple Corps said, “It is great to put this dispute behind us and move on. The years ahead are going to be very exciting times for us. We wish Apple Inc. every success and look forward to many years of peaceful co-operation with them.”

Kergy Inc., a green energy company focused on the production of the cellulosic ethanol, today announced that is has changed its name o Range Fuels, Inc. CEO Mitch Mandich said, "Because we are located along the Rockies, we're inspired everyday as we look at the mountain ranges and plains in front of us. Our New name will constantly remind us of our mission to protect the planet as we innovate and deploy our technology."

 

 

 

 

You may think that I'm gonna write on the topic of what it is like to be a Thingnamer. But you'd be wrong.

Nancy Friedman over at Away With Words said a whole lot today about what it takes to be a namer.

Of particular interest are the items she points out as keys to successful naming. They include word lust, perfect pitch, a specialty, nuts and bolts, brand smarts, story savvy, and persistence.

My favorite (and one that I often find missing in names developed by internal teams) is...

Story savvy. Creating a great name is one thing; selling it to the client is another. Persuasive naming requires storytelling skills. How does the name express the company's personality? What does the name say about the product's benefits? Where does the name come from, what does it mean, what can it stand for over time?

Well worth a read if you're interested in a career in naming.

Also of note: We're going to try an experiment for a few months by starting up a discussion board here at Thingnamer. There's currently no forum for experts to interact. Yes - there are MarketingProfs and Wordlab - but they're more focused on the exchange of information between experts and novices rather than encouraging interaction between the experts themselves.

I've of course assumed that Thingnamers actually want to interact with each other... I'm actively looking for guidance as to what types of topics and boards you'd like to see. Just tell me here. (We're not known for our technical skills, so if you ask us to add nifty graphic effects, change the colors, or do anything that takes skill in things other than, well, naming... it'll probably take us a while.)

But we're gonna give it our best effort...

Tate Linden 703-778-9925

Can you find success by copying a name or category prefix from a big Web 2.0 site or company? I wanted to find out.

Here's what I did. (Warning: This may get a little boring/technical/nonsensical. Go to "Findings" below the table if you're not interested in my process.)

1. I found a list of the top (approximately) 1000 Web 2.0 sites and companies compiled by Seth Godin. The list is ranked by Alexa - as good a source as any for my gauge of success.
2. I scanned the list for prefixes, words, numbers, and letters that were at the start of the website name. (This didn't have to be an actual word - it could be a single letter that is meant to be sounded alone like in ebusiness, or numbers, like "321contact.)" This was not a scientific process. I used a spreadsheet and sorted by alpha to locate groupings.
3. For each common prefix I counted up the number of "hits" there were in the top 1000 and the top 100 (the latter number being a somewhat arbitrary measure of success.)
4. I measured the ratio of companies with each prefix in the top 10% to the companies in the top 1000.
5. I then subtracted out the "initial mover" that brought about the trend in usage (if one existed in the top 100) - assuming that if there is at least one in the top 100 that they are the attracting factor for the term. (I know it isn't really true in all cases, but I gotta start somewhere.)
6. I measured the ratio of copycat prefix users to see how effective the names have been at drawing traffic.
7. I completely ignored everything about the companies, websites, users, and any external factors that might be influencing one website to draw more traffic than the others with the same name prefix.

Here's the resulting table:



Findings:

1. About 19.5% of the top 1000 Web 2.0 sites fell into a recognizable prefix/first-word usage group.
2. 20% of the top 100 websites were a part of the prefix groupings
3. The corresponding success rate (for being in the top 10%) for all companies in the prefix groupings was a approximately 10.26%, meaning that those companies not in the prefix groupings had a success rate of just below 10%.
4. But when the First Movers are subtracted and we analyze only the copycats the success rate is reduced to 4.1%, implying that non copycat names have an approximately 11.4% chance to succeed. This is an increase of over 180% achieved just by not following the prefix groupings of other top 1000 sites.
5. The best success rates for pattern matching names are for beginning with the word "news", any grouping of numbers, or a variant of the word "You" (as in you or your). And even these success rates aren't exactly awe inspiring.
6. Personalization is well represented in the top 100 (just factoring in the prefixes - there's probably more that hide the personalization elsewhere in the name) There are multiple examples of each (I, My, You) prefix in the top 100. And yes, not every "I" refers to personalization - but I'm going to stick by my story.
7. Success rates for companies that have first mover status for names and have attracted copycats in the top 1000 is 40.00%. (This is mitigated by the fact that we assume the top-ranked name is always the first mover - something that is not always true.)

Conclusions:

• Generally speaking, copycat naming does not work.
• The impressive success rate for first movers with copycats likely isn't a causal relationship (e.g., naming with a new prefix won't get you a 40% chance of being in the top 100) but it certainly makes the case that starting trends is more likely to get you attention than following them.
• More research in this area would be absolutely fascinating for me - I'll be looking to write a deeper study for publication in the near term.

What do you think? Are the outcomes as you thought they would be? Is my logic horribly flawed?

Will you read my amazingly dry research report when I have the time to publish?

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Imagine looking at a plate filled with bananas, oranges, and apples. Now imagine adding something to that plate.

Got your thing? Good.

When I ask others (mostly marketers and designers) how they would approach naming they typically hit the competitive research angle as their primary inspiration. And this research does help - but not for the reasons that most people think. Competitive research for inspirational purposes leads to names similar to what already exists in the market. Or at least that's what it most naturally leads to.

Back to the thing you were going to add...

Most of you probably picked a fruit. Perhaps a few of you picked a vegetable. Maybe even a couple got really creative and suggested a blender or fruitflies. Or perhaps even an object that has nothing to do with anything here.

But I'm guessing that all of you named an object and none of you added things like:

• Quantum Physics
• The National Debt
• That To-do list my wife gave me this morning
• The entire cast of My Three Sons (living or dead.)

I'm not saying that any of the things that you (likely) didn't add are good. But the fact is that you didn't add them. They aren't in the universe you considered. This is why relying on your competitor's names can be a dangerious trap.

By limiting yourself to what you can see in your immediate industry (and can easily relate to what you do) you limit your options for how you describe your business. You're either naming to be like or unlike your peers.

So how can you avoid this trap? Well - I don't actually have that answer for you. But I do have it for me.

I do this by forcing my mind to jump the tracks. That may mean trolling YouTube for a video that shows something funny or creative. It might be sitting down with a thesaurus and randomly linking words until I am presented with an entirely new concept. Or it may be just releasing my mind to the wondrous possibilities presented by attention deficit disorder. My associate (Dana) has become adept at telling when this last method is used by me.

She calls it "seeing butterflies." I'm not entirely flattered... but it works.

Today's jumping the tracks episode was brought to you by YouTube.

Picture the following items (listed in random order):

• A foodprocessor
• Toothbrushes
• A shelf full of books
• A lamp
• A squeaky chew toy
• A cupboard full of glasses
• An electric eggbeater
• A metal tomato slicer
• A toilet bowl brush
• A bunch of lipsticks in varying colors
• A pair of ladies bedroom slippers
• A set of pet food dishes (with food and water in them)

Can you find the thing in common?

I'm guessing that you can't. (Yes, they're household object. No, that isn't the "in common" aspect worth notiing.) To find the answer just sit back, turn on your computer's volume, and enjoy ten minutes of inspiration. (It takes a minute or so to develop, but it is worth it!) And no, I still haven't figured out how to link up YouTube and Wordpress. It'll happen eventually, though.

Pure competitive research doesn't lead to great names - but competitive research turned on its ear, its head, or some other body part... that can lead to greatness. Find a way to get outside of the problem. Find a way to redefine the goal. Find a way to see the competitive names as a chance to ignore them, repurpose them, or make them pointless.

Find a way to turn your metaphorical blender into something musical. Do whatever works... but make sure you do find your way out. (It might not result in a great name - but it'll at least get your name a chance to get noticed.)

Tate Linden Managing Principal Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

I think we can all agree that branding is supposed to set companies apart - or rather set a specific company (the one being branded) apart from all others that it might typically compete with.

What would happen if every company in the world branded itself?

Is it possible for hundreds of millions of companies to truly be unique in their markets?

I believe what makes branding work is that the number of companies that invest in their brands is actually quite low. I've not seen any statistics, but certainly among small businesses branding is so rare as to be almost non-existent. And in mid- to large- companies I'd wager we're looking at less than 10%.

To my way of thinking, the lack of buy-in from the majority of companies makes the money spent by the companies that do brand go much further. It is easier to be unique when no one else is making an effort to do so.

But what happens when everyone is branded? Honestly I'd like to know. Has anyone envisioned a world in which every single company has carved out a niche for themselves?

Personally I think that in a world of branded products a generic solution becomes desirable. We're already seeing some of this in the young adult markets. A few thoughts from other experts on the topic:

• Way back in 2000 there was already a backlash against the .com brand concept. Internet News (.com) covered it. Granted, this is only the most basic kind of branding - associating yourself with other like brands rather than setting yourself apart from them.
• Adculture seems to think that the young educated folks are misguided in their hatred of brands, and that brands will become more (not less) prominent as consumers realize that their are products that directly fit the voids in their lives.
• Multichannel Merchant points to branding as no longer a novel way to differentiate, but as a strategic tool that can be leveraged by savvy companies. The article calls out the Sears Big Book (and its demise) as proof that non-branded stuff can't survive even when there's a backlash against brands.
• Finally, Neurocyber cites anti-globalization as one of the key drivers against branding.

I think that there's validity in the argument provided by many educated affluent young adults - that global brands are in some way a little bit overly produced or manufactured. Once an organization gets huge there's so much variability and inconsistency (in staff, work product, direction) that a single identity can't really encompass it. Any solid brand is a gross simplification.

I guess this is why I am so constantly surprised that the smaller companies aren't branding. Small companies can genuinely build their brands and immediately see the effects. So long as most small companies aren't doing this (let's say it's an example of the 80/20 rule) this should work.

I'll refine my question(s)...

Do any of you think that there's a set percentage or ratio at which branding will cease to work for anyone? Is it 20%? Is it 80%? Is it when an unbranded company becomes unique by its very lack of brand?



Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

I read a short blurb on page M6 of the 1/28/07 Washington Post (Registration Required) that I just wanted to quickly address.

If you're a pop star and have your own line of name brand clothing you probably should wear your own brand instead of everyone else's. Jessica Simpson appears to have missed this lesson. A quote from the Post indicates:

Her shoe line, launched in 2005, is popular with shoppers looking for trendy styles, but the singer and actress has reportedly ruffled feathers for failing to embrace one of celebrity fashion's most basic commandments: Thou shalt wear thine own brand's clothes. "A PR disaster," says Claire Brooks, president of brand consulting company ModelPeople Inc.

I agree with Ms. Brooks. But this is more than a PR disaster, it devastates the brand and makes what might have been a strong personal name brand into a weak one.

The power of using a recognizable personal name for consumer goods seems to me to be that it connects the consumer to the named person. If a consumer learns that the named person doesn't actually use the product then the link between product and person is more tenuous - and this weakening has the potential to devalue both the product and the personality attached to it.

Imagine if Trump didn't ever stay in his own hotels or if George Foreman had silly Austrialians in sweaters demonstrating his products. What would that say about their products?

Maybe Jessica is just adding to her well-groomed ditzy blonde image.

Think of the products you use that are named after a well known figure. How many of those products aren't used by their namesake (or their living relatives?) If you can't think of any just consider the name-brand folks below:

• George Foreman
• Donna Karan
• Martha Stewart
• Ford
• Tommy Hilfiger
• Michael Jordan

I'm no fashion maven, but it seems that the most succesful designers live and breathe their own stuff. If they didn't then they'd be encouraging the use of competitive products.

Anyone out there able to tell me what's up with Ms. Simpson? Perhaps this is a case of having sold her name to a company that just sticks her name on the product and doesn't allow her any influence? (I've heard many horror stories about this - especially amongst sports stars - and they all end badly.)

(I probably should revisit this topic and look at the difference between designers and the name on the label. They are two distinct groups and I shouldn't have just lumped 'em together.)

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

I must admit that this tracking is a little work-intensive. Rather than a weekly post I'm going to do it when something noteworthy happens. This noteworthiness has been achieved with a few new entrants to the field, and a move amongst the top blogs.

1. Qwerky has passed Snark Hunting to move into the 4th spot.
2. Cultural Branding, The Name Inspector, and Brandaclaus have either recently started up or recently be found by us. While none are in the top ten I wouldn't be surprised to see them there soon.
3. I dumped the domain name blogs. No one liked having 'em here and they were less applicable than I initially thought.
4. We're short-cutting to the top-ten tracking list (from our list of 13 earlier this month.) It's been a few weeks, and we'd have been there about now if I'd been keeping up the list weekly... and since I'm runnin' the list I get to say what's what.
5. Expect another post on this topic in late February.

THREE MONTH ALEXA RANKING AVERAGES (1/26/2007):

Rank Site AlexaRank 1 Wordlab: 75,677 2 Thingnamer: 120,743 3 Igor: 153,270 4 Strategic Name Development: 230,242 5 Qwerky: 242,165 6 Snark Hunting: 282,925 7 Away With Words: 779,591 8 Good Characters: 860,975 10 Popwink: 912,266

Not making the top ten this time, but still well worth a look are: Markeys (Dutch), Beep.Name, Brandnama, Name Ideas, Product Names, Pastelot (French), and the new finds - Brandaclaus, The Name Inspector, and Cultural Branding.

And more... the following Schrödinger’s Blogs that aren't really worth reading right now, but may pick up again in the future: Catch-Word, Rich With Meaning , Motorbrand, and Ton Of Bricks/A Hundred Monkeys.

If you know of a blog that primarily covers issues pertaining to organizational or product naming let us know. We'll add it to the list.

Happy surfing!

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

No, it wasn't me. It was Ed Saenz of Gravity Branding - creator of the WiFi name.

The link to the video is here (because I don't know how to post it to my own site. If someone helps me out I'll fix it.)

While the entire interview is worth listening to (for over 48 minutes!), I found Ed Saenz to be particularly insightful when discussing a hypothetical naming process for Seagate.

Here's a rough outline of how he attacks the problem:

He asks or determines...

• What is the unmet need or market opportunity
• What are the features
• Who is the user
• What are their problems (one on ones - no focus groups)
• What features of the product do they like
• Why should they want to buy the product
• Why should they care?
• What is the brand essence? (He calls it the brand fulcrum)
• What is the brand personality?

It's branding 101 - but in application rather than theory. Stokefire's own process has many of the same steps - and adds in a whole segment built around the evaluation of the names strengths and weaknesses - but I'm assuming that Gravity has steps that Ed didn't disclose. Never a good idea to give away the entire recipe for the secret sauce.

He also said something that I think a lot of engineers should take to heart. Paraphrased: Don't build a better mousetrap just because you can. Make sure that people want the improvement and that there are enough mice to trap before you start designing.

While the interview gets off track a few times (Scoble seems like a kid in a candy store with his amazement and comments pulling away from the main thread of the conversation) it is generally informative. I'd love to have a ten minute version that edited out some of the meandering bits that led nowhere. (If someone builds one I'll happily link to it.)

It is rare that someone is this open with their thoughts and methods on naming and branding. Especially when what they have to say is actually interesting instead of a badly disguised sales pitch. (In this case it is quite well disguised.)

Worth a listen - keep it in the background while reading email.

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Instinctually I would call them "kind, smart, nice, attractive, brave, generous..." and any other praising word I could think of.

That doesn't work in politics, though. In politics people who give lots of money want to be recognized as a member of a money-giving group. This sort of throws a wrench in the whole throw a bunch of sincere compliments at 'em strategy of mine, since lord knows I can't recite any string of praiseworthy qualities other than the Boy Scout Law - and that I often get mixed up, too.

George Bush's fundraising team used the term Ranger to signify those that bring in at least $200K, and Pioneer was chosen as the name for $100K supporters.

A few weeks back Giuliani's campaign strategy book was leaked to the press, and in it the titles for contributors were listed. These were:

• $1 million - Team Captains
• $200K - MVPs
• $100K - All Stars
• $50K - Sluggers
• $2K - Benchwarmer

Okay... so the last one isn't real. Oddly, campaigns don't have names for people who just give their personal maximum.

With Giuliani's widely known affinity for the Yankees this classification system seems appropriate - even if it doesnt really link in with national pride the way the Bush program did. People in the Giuliani system will know they are appreciated by the man himself, since the classifications are in his native tongue.

Terry McAuliffe was on The Daily Show last night and was asked by Jon Stewart what Hillary Clinton was going to call her major donors. His ad-lib response was "Hil-raisers" - a term that Stewart derided wholeheartedly. Gotta agree there - "Hil-raisers" is horrible.

McAuliffe's second response - "Mavericks" seems at least a little better. One could imagine Hillary actually using the word and referring to her supporters as being mavericks. And then there's the tie in with sports again... Rangers (as in Texas) and Mavericks (as in Dallas.) I'm sure it is accidental, but it's a nice way of moving in on Republican territory.

I think the problem with Mavericks is that the other categories will be difficult to make appealing. What would you use? Stallions? Mares? Additionally, the term Maverick is derived from Samuel A. Maverick - a man that let his livestock run wild and unbranded. Sort of strange to brand one's followers as a group of unbranded people... Shades of the Generation-X folks that all wore flannel shirts to show how different they were. (I still have one in my closet. A shirt, not a Gen-Xer.)

My advice: Ditch mavericks. Go for something that emphasizes Hillary's strong points. Is she really seen as a Maverick? I'm not sure that's the right angle. Why not latch onto the centrist identity and go after the patriotism concept? Hillary is not an outsider. She's lived a life of public service - so she should latch onto it. Who doesn't want to be labeled as a "Patriot?" There are are so many rich historical figures, battles, and other events that she can squeeze for source material...

I'm still not sure I've hit the target, though. Hillary could use a good personal branding session. The outputs from that endeavor would serve as great source material for the fundraising strata.

Anyone have any serious (or perhaps not so serious) suggestions for classifications?

(And if Hillary's staff is reading this... Operators are standing by.)

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925

Megaglobe: A New Name in Search Engines. A powerful new search engine to be launched soon called megaglobe.com.

Megaglobe will protect advertisers from fraudulent clicks with a revolutionary new technology called ‘Pay Per Valid Click’.

Megaglobe is said to be the world’s first truly international and multicultural search engine. With over 300 domain names representing every single country in the world.

The companies patented algorithm works by allocating each search result a ranking - known as a Megarank – based on analysis of the quantity and quality of pages which link to the search result. The algorithm then creates a structure of importance to the sites based on their relevancy.

Putting two and two together, Megarank and the domain names representing every country in the world, makes it clear how they came up with the name Megaglobe.

Will people get it though? Will Megaglobe be as fun to use, or talk, as a Google or Yahoo!?

The Megaglobe name seems to fall flat even though the idea soars.