In business a corporate name is normally a single word. Two words names are problematic and three words are even more complicated. Four words?—Why not kill the business first? Also, if there are hundreds of others using the same identical name, though in dozens of different types of businesses, that poor name is shouting in vain and that overly strained voice is simply being lost in the crowd.
Here is the acid test, enter a corporate or a product name in "quotes" on Google search engine and if it comes up with around hundred or more other companies using the same identical name, then surely this name is hurting and advertising campaign is only being wasted. If there are more than one thousand other companies using the same identical name, then it will explain the shortage of sales, the lack of traffic to sites etc. Remember only a good name makes a cash register ring.
This is the reason, why a corporate brand name is the single most important issue of corporate communications today. Equally, a domain name, the twin of a corporate name, still as to most CEOs, it is the most misunderstood term of corporate communications. Even now, domain name issues are often left to webmasters, ISPs and, sometimes to lawyers. It has yet to earn the respect as the single most important issue of e-Commerce and also to earn the respect as a real and a true passkey for global access for the web. Only 3.7% corporations around the world have exactly identical dotcom domain names, the rest have extra luggage and words and slashes added in the URL making it difficult to type and easily forgettable.
While Domain Naming is seriously under-priced, the current dogfights between registrars and the hopeless name branding by corporate identity firms and Ad Agencies, have only confused the corporations and brought embarrassing branding campaigns crashing down.
Many thousands of such projects failed during the last boom from 'Kozmo' to 'Gazoontite' and 'Boo.com' to 'MarchFirst'. This last name, incidentally, had nothing to do with the month of the Julian calendar and the business did not start on March 1st, rather February 17. Of course, 'AprilFirst' was taken by some other fool. But, somehow, most people just couldn't hear the steps or see them march. Marching into a brick wall that is. This big bang branding failed and MarchFirst went into bankruptcy. When name is meant to play tricks on the gentle minds of the net-savvy customers, watch out for the revenge. It will be very costly.
Here is the acid test, enter a corporate or a product name in "quotes" on Google search engine and if it comes up with around hundred or more other companies using the same identical name, then surely this name is hurting and advertising campaign is only being wasted. If there are more than one thousand other companies using the same identical name, then it will explain the shortage of sales, the lack of traffic to sites etc. Remember only a good name makes a cash register ring.
This is the reason, why a corporate brand name is the single most important issue of corporate communications today. Equally, a domain name, the twin of a corporate name, still as to most CEOs, it is the most misunderstood term of corporate communications. Even now, domain name issues are often left to webmasters, ISPs and, sometimes to lawyers. It has yet to earn the respect as the single most important issue of e-Commerce and also to earn the respect as a real and a true passkey for global access for the web. Only 3.7% corporations around the world have exactly identical dotcom domain names, the rest have extra luggage and words and slashes added in the URL making it difficult to type and easily forgettable.
While Domain Naming is seriously under-priced, the current dogfights between registrars and the hopeless name branding by corporate identity firms and Ad Agencies, have only confused the corporations and brought embarrassing branding campaigns crashing down.
Many thousands of such projects failed during the last boom from 'Kozmo' to 'Gazoontite' and 'Boo.com' to 'MarchFirst'. This last name, incidentally, had nothing to do with the month of the Julian calendar and the business did not start on March 1st, rather February 17. Of course, 'AprilFirst' was taken by some other fool. But, somehow, most people just couldn't hear the steps or see them march. Marching into a brick wall that is. This big bang branding failed and MarchFirst went into bankruptcy. When name is meant to play tricks on the gentle minds of the net-savvy customers, watch out for the revenge. It will be very costly.
No comments:
Post a Comment