Archive for the ‘News’ Category
When Acronyms Go Bad…or Just Sloppy Naming Work?
Name developers occasionally are asked to develop acronyms for clients. Sometimes acronyms are terrific short cuts that resonate. Who hasn’t heard of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving)?
Sometimes acronyms are trouble. The CNN article has numerous examples of “bad luck” with unfortunate acronyms (e.g., when your acronym develops a bad meaning). Perhaps some of these acronyms are a result of bad luck…but I believe most of these cases are unfortunate examples of naming sloppiness and bad branding!
http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/08/17/mf.naughty.initials/index.html
Is The Urban Dictionary A Bible For Branding?
The Urban Dictionary is a web-based dictionary of slang words and phrases. Anyone can submit to the Urban Dictionary, but submissions are reviewed by volunteer editors and are rated by site visitors. Some people in the naming business think the Urban Dictionary is the new “Bible for Branding.” I politely disagree.
Last year a new vodka launched, and there was considerable controversy over its name, RangTang (http://adage.com/adages/post?article_id=142601). Apparently in the Urban Dictionary, rangtang has a slang meaning that is sexual in nature.
When the Sci Fi Channel changed its name to SyFy, some Urban Dictionary fans noted that syfy is slang for syphilis.
I just want to point out that the Urban Dictionary notes that “apple” is “A pejorative term used by Native Americans towards other Native Americans accused of "acting white"” as in “red on the outside, white on the inside.” Does this mean that Steve Jobs will be changing the name of the iconic Apple brand? I doubt it. Depending upon the Urban Dictionary citation you want to believe, Yahoo is a successful website, an expression of joy or an ignorant rural person.
Like most things in life, there is not one simple answer. Do I consult the Urban Dictionary from time to time? Yes. Would it prevent me from recommending a name to a client? It hasn’t yet. In the few instances where a name had slang associated with it, I chose to ignore it. After all, anyone can submit to the Urban Dictionary. And furthermore, some companies appreciate the free PR (some comments in the Ad Age article note this).
Shakespeare’s Hamlet said, “…there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.” Shakespeare would not have been a big fan of the Urban Dictionary! I don’t consider it the new “Bible of Branding.”
Another Reason To Hire A Naming Professional
In the UK, Directgov, the sector of the government in charge of educating the public about the government, recently launched a site to explain Britain’s government to small children. It's called "Buster's World," and it features a cute dog named Buster who leads the site's patrons through a plethora of games, videos, and cartoons with the goal of giving children a basic understanding of how the British government works. Unfortunately, when the words "Buster's World" are entered into a search engine, the top result is not a friendly dog educating you about the government, but rather a gay porn fetish site having something to do with balloons (…?). Needless to say, Directgov is in the process of renaming their website.
Hiring a professional naming service such as NameFlash would have nipped this problem in the bud. We check trademarks, domain names and common law usage of the names we recommend, and very simply, this name would not have gotten through our screening process. Few non-professional namers conduct this type of screening and the result can be a disaster that leads to bad PR and the added cost of changing the name and all the materials associated with the name. In this case Directgov had an interesting idea, but clearly dropped the ball in screening, which is a terrible shame, as Buster the dog really is quite cute!
Can Your Brand Pass The “10 Second” Test?
Can Your Brand Pass The "10 Second" Test?
Aflac, the company that uses the duck as its advertising icon, has started a new "You Don't Know Quack" campaign.
Their new campaign challenges NASCAR driver Carl Edwards to explain in 10 seconds how Aflac policies help protect people. Carl's response, obviously scripted, was "If you are sick or hurt, Aflac pays you cash – fast – to help pay for things major medical insurance won't cover – things like car payments, mortgage and more."
Genius!
When I worked in Brand Management, I always tried to reduce the brand's selling proposition to the "elevator speech." In other words, if you only had the length of time involved in an elevator ride to sell your brand, what would you say?
Aflac, with tremendously high name recognition and a unique advertising icon, has used the "elevator speech" technique in its latest commercial. While I am sure the advertising agency creative team hated the idea, it is one of the clearest expositions of a selling message you will find in advertising these days.
Brilliant! Kudos to Aflac!
Why aren't more people doing this?
Here is the press release for the Aflac campaign:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/10-seconds-to-define-aflac-84216102.html
Do Google Codenames Make You Hungry?
Google is using names of sweets for its codenames for Android Operating System versions. Listed alphabetically the names thus far are: 1.5 (Cupcake), 1.6 (Donut), 2.0/2.1 (Éclair) and now, 2.X –to be named Froyo (which means Frozen Yogurt).
Am I the only one who finds this amusing? Some bloggers are actually attacking Google, saying that their codenames are sending the message that "sweets are good for you." Give me a break!
I once used the names of the Seven Dwarfs as codenames for the new products of a cold remedy product. Most of them were logical, such as Sleepy for the non-drowsy variant and Doc was the multi-symptom product. But the President of the company got mad when I named his pet project Dopey (it was a really stupid idea after all).
A few weeks later an internal memorandum was issued on the development of codenames and the requirement for top management approval. So much for creativity in codenames!
You Should Always Check International Communication of Your Name, or Risk This!
The photo below pretty much says it all.
Assitalia is one of the biggest insurance companies in Italy. I am sure the company developed its name without thinking about international considerations. In Italy, the name is probably fine. But if they ever wanted to expand to an English speaking country…well, let’s just say there might be a problem.
Most companies for which I develop names for insist that I do some sort of name verification to ensure that the names I develop have no problematic connotations in the major foreign languages. Clearly, Assitalia never thought of that!
Naming The Store Brand
Every Sunday I go through the circulars in the paper looking for new products. I usually spend a lot of time with the ads from the national drug store chains (Walgreens, CVS, and Rite Aid). Recently, I observed that each chain seems to have a radically different philosophy on store brand naming. And while this observation isn’t earth shattering, it exposes the marketing strategies (or lack thereof) of each chain.
For example, check out the allergy section. The big brand names like Benadryl®, Claritin® and Zyrtec® all have store brand/private label competition. Walgreens naming protocol for its store brand is pretty straightforward and seems to be designed to help a consumer find the Walgreens knockoff of the branded product. You can buy Wal-dryl, Wal-itin, and Wal-zyr, and the packaging is color coded to make it easier. This is a very consistent strategy that is designed to make life easier for the consumer and also designed to build the “Wal-“ prefix as a brand.
At CVS, you have to be a well-informed consumer or a doctor to get it right because CVS attempts to align symptoms with branding. For example, the CVS version of Benadryl is called Allergy, while the CVS version of Claritin is called Non-Drowsy Allergy Relief (non-drowsy being a key benefit of the active ingredient in Claritin), and the Zyrtec knockoff product is called Indoor/Outdoor Allergy Relief (Zyrtec is the only brand with indoor/outdoor allergy claims).
At Rite Aid, you almost have to be a pharmacist to get the right brand. The first branded product to go generic was Benadryl and Rite Aid called the knockoff Rite Aid Allergy Medication. When the next generation allergy drugs went generic, Rite Aid had to improvise and so now you need to know the active ingredient to get the right brand (Rite Aid Loratidine and Rite Aid Cetirizine for Claritin and Zyrtec respectively).
How about gastrointestinal products? Looking at four big brands, Zantac®, Metamucil®, Pepto-Bismol®, and MiraLAX®, and their knockoff brands at the drug chains show inconsistency at all three chains:
Branded: Zantac; Metamucil; Pepto-Bismol; MiraLAX
Walgreens: Wal-Zan; Wal-Mucil; Soothe; SmoothLAX
CVS: Acid Reducer; Natural Fiber Laxative; Stomach Relief; PureLAX
Rite Aid: Acid Reducer; Natural Fiber; Pink Bismuth; Laxative
So what is going on here? Walgreens, which appeared to be building the “Wal-“ prefix as its store brand champion, seems to have abandoned that philosophy in some parts of the store. CVS, which had been focusing on product benefits, gets dragged down into generic category descriptors in gastrointestinals. And Rite Aid is all over the place.
Doesn’t anyone worry about having a consistent branding strategy for the store brand? It sure would make life easier for us confused consumers! Hey Walgreens, CVS and Rite Aid…if you need some naming help, I’m available!
- Mark Prus (mark.prus (at) nameflash (dot) info), NameFlashSM (www (dot) nameflash (dot)info)
To Google® Or Not To Google®
Full disclosure…I own Google stock. I like their products and their potential. However, I am more than a bit concerned about how they use their names and trademarks.
Microsoft® names its products in a traditional fashion. Microsoft is the company; names like Windows, Silverlight, Bing are clearly the products. A very logical naming architecture that makes it clear where the company ends and the product begins.
Google is a company and a trademark for several goods and services. The Google trademark is perhaps best know for “Search engine services” (International Class 042) but Google can also be “Dissemination of advertising for others via the Internet” (IC 035) or “Telecommunication services” (IC 038) or “Financial services” (IC 036) or any of a number of different product or service ideas that carry the name Google.
Add other words to Google and you get more products and services…things like Google Checkout; Google Talk; Google Wave; the list goes on and on. And a trip through Google Labs made me wonder if there really is an overriding naming architecture for the Google Brand.
I think the heart of the issue is Google’s youth…let’s not forget that their IPO was only 5 years ago (August 19, 2004 if you are planning a celebration). Google appears to follow a primary rule of the Internet as stated on the Google website: “At Google, we believe in launching early and often.” Obviously the “put something out there and see if it works” strategy has been working for them. But to apply a similar philosophy to names is potentially a recipe for disaster.
Look at Microsoft and the fiasco known as Vista. The product was launched as Windows Vista, and quickly unraveled to the point where Microsoft had to get Windows 7 out the door quickly as a replacement. What failure did consumers have in their minds? Vista. Vista was known as a dog to be avoided at all costs. Not “Microsoft” or even “Microsoft Vista”. Vista.
What if Google had launched Vista? OK, it probably never would have happened but work with me here. Following their most obvious naming architecture, they probably would have called it Google Vista. And as it failed, the black eye would have extended to the Google Brand, which might have resulted in a lower Google stock price in the short term until people had a better experience with the Google name. Microsoft had collateral damage with Vista…Google Vista would have hit an artery.
The recent announcement that Google was going to begin advertising its Google Apps as a better alternative to Microsoft Office pushed me over the edge. In this blog there were several recent postings about “Verbing” brand names and the risks that are inherent in that effort. Google has “benefitted” by “Verbing” over the years in search (“Let’s Google It”). With their new ad campaign, Google found a way to weaken the trademarks of its company and products all in one swoop by telling people what “Going Google” means.
As a marketer, I love the idea of “Going Google” as much as I love owning “Let’s Google It.” However, I fear that from a naming and trademark perspective, this is not going to make any of the Google trademarks stronger and in fact runs the risk of weakening them. When you add in the blatant implication of monopoly (I suppose when you “Go Google” there is no turning back), I am worried even more. Remember, the Department of Justice investigated Google as a potential monopoly earlier this year.
I am not trying to bring down the Empire…far from it (again, remember I am a shareholder). But I would love to understand what Google is trying to do with its many names and trademarks. Is there a plan? Or is the Google Brand a victim of the “launch early and often” practice? That has clearly worked to date in building a big business. Is it Best Practice in naming? Will it continue to work in the future?
- Mark Prus (mark.prus@nameflash.info), NameFlashSM (www.nameflash.info)