Man: “How was I supposed to know that?”
Woman: “You should just KNOW!”

This refrain repeats in household arguments frequently. I feel qualified in making this observation, as I’m the woman in my household, and have had to bite my lip several times to circumvent this particular script. Typically, I’m not a fan of making generalizations about the genders, but this one I have actually witnessed with countless couples, multiple times. What is it about what women presume they communicate that men just totally miss?

Believe it or not, this has some interesting implications for brand naming. Every time we think of a name or try and articulate a brand, we’re trying to tell a complex story in just one or two words. Oftentimes, the most-liked names are those that convey multiple meanings, whether they be double-entendres (i.e. BitterEnd Beer) or names that just resonate with people on different levels (i.e. “Brita” Water sounds like crisp water to some, has a deep mythological meaning regarding inner purification to others (check out the description on their website), sounds more sweet and nurturing to still others, etc.). So, all this thought and context that we put into these names and enrich these brands with, does it work? Read the rest »

Why does every brand seek the role of the “popular kid?” Is it because the popular brands attract the most interest and consumers? Like the popular clique in high school, they drive the gossip and news that everyone actually wants to discuss.

However, this seems counter to general brand strategy – much less good parenting. Good names are sticky and standout. They might make people laugh, think differently about a service or product, and generally be memorable. They aren’t always pretty. They are oftentimes quirky, eccentric, and creative. Therefore, why do many brand strategies focus on the popular kid idea?

David Cameron recently wrote about the difference between a name and a brand (Branding Isn’t As Important As ‘Experts’ Say?). He described a name as generally empty-bucket – there are good attributes it can have, but the best name in the world won’t make a poor brand or product successful. A brand is kind of Read the rest »

Many regional organizations adopt a new name when expanding their scope nationally. Their local identity may limit their ability to move beyond their successful but well-established geographic focus. Or their existing name may present other challenges when trying to build strong, national recognition.

The National Center for Conservation Science and Policy (NCCSP) faced this type of challenge. As a non-profit organization out of Ashland, Oregon, it already had a presence in natural resource policy making in Washington, D.C., but was known primarily for its northwest focus. Its “alphabet-soup” NCCSP moniker also didn’t help in a city where faceless acronyms were the norm. NCCSP needed a strong, distinctive identity that would help them command attention as they spanned the nation and ultimately the globe. Read the rest »

Some branding pundits argue that “masterbranding” is where it is at today.  That is, instead of developing new names for your major new offerings, just extend your existing brand name and leverage all of those brand building dollars that you have invested over the years.

While the masterbrand strategy has increased in popularity, it is certainly not a cure-all and often creates more problems than it solves.  Why you ask?  Because it ignores one of the fundamental laws of brand naming: “the strength of your brand name is inversely proportional to its scope.” Or said another way, the wider variety of  stuff you plaster your brand name on, the more you dilute it, the less control you have over it and the less clarity and focus it has in the marketplace.

But instead of taking you through examples of masterbrand strategies that are ridiculous (and there are countless examples), let’s talk about a company that got it right with a rifle-shot, focused brand name. Read the rest »

I was reading the New Yorker and came across an intriguing article about a fashion blogger prodigy, Tavi. She’s a fourteen-year-old girl who lives in the suburbs of Chicago and has quickly risen to become one of the fashion-elite – all based on the fresh content, creative humor, and eerily encyclopedic knowledge of fashion history intertwined on her blog, Style Rookie. By the way, her blog consistently gets 50,000 page views per day. Do I have your attention now?

She gave a speech at Idea City (the Canadian equivalent of the annual TED Conference held in the U.S.’s Silicon Valley) titled “How We Can Apply What We Learned from the Teen Girls of the ‘90s (More Specifically, Those Who Read/Interned at/Worked for Sassy Magazine) to Create a Good Magazine for Teen Girls Today, Also, This Is a Really Long Title.” The speech received a standing ovation. All I’ve got to say is it’s a good thing no marketer got a hold of that title.

Being relatively apathetic towards fashion, I don’t understand the implication of 90% of that title. However, the comedy behind “…Also, This Is a Really Long Title” is priceless. It provides context. It gives me an emotion I can recognize. It taps into the right side of my brain.

Sometimes we need more. Read the rest »

Another car brand makes a linguistic faux pas? It seems too extraordinary to be true, and yet Audi has just released its newest electric car called “e-tron.” Inconveniently, étron means “excrement” in French.

Whether or not Chevy’s car name “No Va” was really what led to its abysmal sales in both Mexico and Spain, it’s easy to argue that a name, literally translated, that means “no go” is a no-no for a car. Now Audi is dishing us up “excrement?”

Doing due diligence before running with a name in international markets seems like a no-brainer to me. Maybe it’s the fact that I do international trademark screenings on a regular basis that makes this point particularly salient, but it just seems too obvious that names with negative translations should be properly vetted before appearing on an international stage. Read the rest »

Ibuprofen or Advil? CVS-brand toilet paper or Cottonelle? How do you know when you’re just paying for the name versus a better product?

According to an article on CBS News, Generic and Store Brands vs. Brand Names, generic products do sometimes offer the same bang for the buck as their branded counterparts. That being said, sometimes they don’t.

As a brand naming firm, we’re especially sensitive to this issue. Concerned customers may shy away from names that seem to overpromise yet possibly inspire their market. They don’t want to be disappointed by paying too much for just a name. Sometimes I wonder – as a NameStorming team member doing my personal shopping is it taboo to buy generic products?

Read the rest »

(A NameStormers’ Viewpoint – August, 2010)

Popular commercial brands generate a “positive emotional reaction from the human brain,” according to a study by the Radiological Society of North America. Does that mean consumers are inclined to just purchase those brands that we have all heard of before, for better or for worse?

This study links positive emotions to the purchase of well-known brand names while linking negative emotions to those brands that are lesser-known. Apparently, well-known brands are easier to process and activate a part of the brain associated with rewards. Conversely, lesser-known brands demand more from parts of the brain associated with memory and elicit stronger negative emotions. Maybe this means our brains view less clear, more convoluted names and messages negatively?

According to the study, the type of response depended entirely on how strong (or familiar) the brand was, regardless of what product or service was being tested.

Read the rest »

Talon is  the new name for Minn Kota’s fresh-to-market, shallow water anchor. We think Talon works well for a variety of reasons.

First, if you’ve ever been to a pet store, had a bird as a pet, or been freakishly attacked by one, you know that most have sharp talons that are so strong they can use them to hang upside down from tree limbs or grab hold of their next meal while flying through the air. Since the product is an anchor, this name insinuates that not only is the anchor strong but it’s dexterous – it will find something to cling to and hold tightly.

Second, it’s short (2 syllables, 5 letters, so it will really pop off of the anchor itself as well as off of any advertising), sounds strong, and is easy to say and spell.

Read the rest »

Society celebrates, envies, and covets creative people. So many individuals wish they were more creative – but then shy away from risky ideas. How can we both desire to be more creative and then run from the creative process?

In the case of naming, sometimes creativity can cause you to fall flat on your face. Many creative ideas are extremely polarizing. For example, take 2 minutes to try naming a new kitchen ladle. Admittedly, names like “Super Scooper” or “Easy Lift” are either too cheesy or too vague, boring, or unrelated. But what about names like “PickMeUp,” “Souper Scooper,” or “Heavy Lifter?” They may not all work, but they’re definitely more creative and interesting than the humdrum alternatives.

Creativity requires a perspective of comfort towards the unknown. Read the rest »