August 29, 2008
The news that Popeyes is revamping its brand name has got me thinking, Popeyes Chicken, that is.
Popeyes Chicken and Biscuits is changing its name to Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen and will also unveil a new logo, tagline and ad campaign, but will continue on without a possessive apostrophe, which the founder once claimed he was "too poor" to afford.
The new name allows Popeyes to offer a broader menu than just chicken, to a slightly higher paying clientele. It also "reminds customers of the labor that goes into creating the brand's authentic taste."
Apparently, Popeyes was not originally named after the lovable cartoon sailor, but actually after Popeye Doyle, the drunken, brawling character Gene Hackman plays in the French Connection. It was only later that the company moved to successfully acquire rights to Popeye the Sailor. The problem is that both characters are becoming distant memories to the under thirty crowd and might in fact lead to the "P" in the middle of the new logo becoming all that remains of Popeyes original brand name.
That said, Popeye may actually be a name that has dubious value. Aside from the fact that it was the name of an ill fated missile, it also has some interesting literary allusions.
For one, John Ashberry's famous poem speaks of a Popeye who was "forced to leave the country."
But most notable, Popeye is the name of one of Faulkner's most notorious villains, a character inspired by Popeye Pumphrey, a real-life criminal during the 1920s in Memphis.
August 26, 2008
This year's Olympics was a competition between the Chinese and a few non-invited competitors who managed to steal the show a few times. I'm of course talking about the brutal brand naming competition that went on while the athletes did their thing.
This year we saw multi-national brand names face stiff competition from Chinese brand names nobody had heard of. The overall winner, according to the Huffington Post, was Coke and its "shuang qi lai - "refreshment rising" tagline. However, Adidas and its "Impossible Is Nothing" campaign was a also a success, while GE managed to communicate its new "green" image with some flair.
The point is that China wanted to use the Olympics to showcase the country along with the country's brand names. China has what is called "high product acceptance with low global brand recognition." However, the Huffington Post notes that some Chinese companies really did stand out during this year's Olympics: Lenovo moved into the premier brand space, as did "non-official" brand names, such as China' s Merchant bank which just happens to have the same tagline (he, or "harmony" ) as the theme of the opening ceremony.
Various athletric gear brand names also had their day in the sun: like Nike (whom we all know) and Li Ning and Anta (whom we do not). Li Ning is the name of the fellow who lit the torch during the opening ceremony, but is also conveniently the brand name of an athletic apparel company.
Guerilla brand name promotion was at an all time high this year. Case in point was Nike's capitalization on hurdler Liu Xiang's heartbreaking defeat. Nike quickly ran an ad that said "Love sport even when it breaks your heart."
Kinesio got some attention (they make the athletic tape that beach volleyball player Kerri Walsh uses), as did Facebook (who owes Phelps a thank you for mentioning how many friends he has).
Tim Delaney reckons that the average sponsorship costs around $100 million all included and that regular sponsorship still cannot be beat in developing markets, but in mature markets, where wise guys like Wasatch Beer can dub themselves "Unofficial Beer of the 2002 Winter Games" you may want to think twice before paying to be the official sponsor.
This might explain why 60% of Chinese people polled thought that Pepsi, not Coke (who paid $78 million for the privilege), was the official Olympic drink.
August 21, 2008
The cost of introducing new brand names into the market can be even more frightening than resurrecting the dead, and this has meant that some brands are walking among us that we once believed to be buried.
Eagle Snacks is one example. Surprisingly, 6 out of 10 adults remember the brand. It would cost between $300 and $500 million to get those types of numbers with a new snacks brand, so welcome back, Eagle Snacks.
But there also tends to be a new twist on the beloved brand names that keep resurfacing. Eagle Snacks has added brand extensions named Bursts and Poppers, while the Alka-Seltzer brand has been revived with its own extension called Wake-Up Call.
Even credit card branding has ghost brands that seem to come back as sub-brands or are kept alive, marketed to select groups.
Old car brands might be floating over to Europe and Asia, specifically Oldsmobile, Le Sabre, Park Avenue and Century.
In addition, Miller is reviving its "Great Taste, Less Filling" ads.
But the real brand naming comeback of the year is Hydrox cookies, which is a brand that simply will not die thanks to avid consumer activism.
More and more brand naming is getting into the hands of people who just will not let a good brand RIP.
August 20, 2008
Mountain Dew Voltage has won its DEWmocracy election, handily beating proposed brand names Mountain Dew Revolution and Mountain Dew Supernova.
The DEWmocracy initiative has been a major consumer-driven campaign that collected 350,000 votes (Voltage received 42% of them). Around 1.6 million people visited the site to help design the product, watch indy movies and play games, all of which ultimately made Voltage the "people's Dew" according to one Pepsi executive.
Voltage and other Mountain Dew brand extensions including Dew's Code Red, Live Wire and Baja Blast, as well as this extensive naming competition, are going to elevate the Mountain Dew brand, which is already known as the best drink to buy when studying late at night.
But this initiative is yet another indicator that some branding is going to depend more and more on social media than it has in the past.
August 19, 2008
There have been irritated grumblings in the blogosphere about the fact that Pontiac actually started with this name, and after 80,000 entries and 18,000 distinct names were submitted, decided to stick with it.
GM claims it "thought long and hard about El Camino," but also noticed a trend in the submissions towards simpler names.
I think that there are a few things that we can take away here.
First of all, truck naming is very difficult. 18,000 names are actually not that many, considering that many of them (like Truck Norris, for example) would be unusable in addition to the thousands of others that would already be taken.
Secondly, taking a name like El Camino out of mothballs might work from a nostalgic point of view but not from a sales perspective. Times have simply changed since the days of the Diablo, the Caballero and other Spanish inspired names.
August 15, 2008
People are turning to supermarket brands as times get tougher (as many as 60% of us), but that may be a good thing.
Store brands are no longer the boring stuff of yesteryear. Kroger's "Private Selection" and "Naturally Preferred" look enticing on the shelf, and Kroger, alongside Supervalu and Safeway, all seem to be creating a surge in their private label branding, and it doesn't hurt that their offerings are high quality.
Not only do store brands need the same finesse as regular brands, but as store brands get more popular, they may find themselves growing beyond their home stores.
Safeway's "O Organics" and "Eating Right" brands are really a case in point, and are taking on Whole Foods on its own turf. O for Organics is looking for $400 million in sales and isn't really all that cheap, it's just less expensive than its nearest competitor.
Consumer's rising comfort level with generic grocery naming is likely to spread to generic drugs as well. This means that private labels are going to have to up their game.
According to a WPP report, private label penetration is growing globally at 5% per year.
In Germany and the UK, private labels now count for almost 50% of all products sold, but the United States it's 17% and growing at 7% a year.
It seems to me that the opportunities for naming and branding are coming from both directions: generics will want to use really sophisticated naming practices to keep up the attack and their competitors are going to have to find distinctive brand names to stop the onslaught.
One look at "The Eating Right" and "O Organics" range of products demonstrates that store brands are doing their marketing homework. People don't just buy these because their cheap: they buy them because there is some really enticing brand names and brand quality.
August 14, 2008
However, one naming component will remain the same for Intel's new generation of chips. At least the newest versions will retain the "Core" brand name.
The problem here is that Intel spins off new versions of its products so quickly (there are already two different colored logos to differentiate the "regular" from the "Extreme Edition" models). It is this speed that has shifted consumer focus from its company naming to its product naming.
Yes, it is wise naming strategy to use the recognizable "Core" brand across the board, but I'm one of those people who still recall when it was a good thing that Intel was "Inside."
Intel has now left ten million computer salespeople out in the cold after admitting that they do not want there to be any meaning behind their product naming, leaving it up to the computer sales force to explain to confused customers fifty times a day that i7 means "nothing," its actually just the upgraded Core 2 Duo.
Since Intel isn't defining the meaning between i7, I will.
- Is it like the magnificent 7, but in this case it's the Intel magnificent 7?
- Was the development of this chip completed in July, the 7th month of the year?
- Did 7 engineers work on it for 7 years?
- Or does Intel have long-term plans of competing with Apple's iPhone? (just kidding of course).
- Or perhaps the lower case "i" was a typo. You may be aware that the distance between the pitchers mound and the batter in baseball is 60' 6''. It was supposed to be 60' 0'', but someone misread the plans.
August 8, 2008
The legendary Packard name is coming up for sale along with a nifty new prototype. Total cost will be $1.5 million including the ten-year-old car, which looks like "an unholy cross between a Jaguar S and a Morgan Aero 8."
The company did not depart gracefully in 1958 and the car is not what one might describe as beautiful. So, it is possible that a better option would be purchasing the Duesenberg brand name, which comes with plans for some nifty looking cars as well as the Estate golf cart, all of which would give you some Jay Gatsby, "roaring twenties" street cred.
It is interesting to note that the expression "it's a doozy" is based upon the Duesenberg brand name, but it seems that the intervening decades since Duesneberg's collapse in 1929 has made this expression rather negative; one only hears "it's a doozy" when talking about some horrible mistake.
August 7, 2008
One rarely sees a product where product naming is as crucial as it is with Spanx.
Spanx makes shapewear, which translates to pantyhouse, bras and girdles to the rest of us. Now, I know that no woman under the age of 80 wants to wear a girdle anymore, but shapewear, well, that's a different story!
And pantyhose? Forget it.
But a "Slim Cognito Mid-Thigh Body Suit" is a completely different matter . . .
This product includes something known as The Great Divide, which, well, let's just say it's flattering to a woman's posterior.
If that's not your thing, how about High Power control pants, favored by the likes of Madonna and Gwyneth. What modern woman doesn't want more power and control in her life?
Spanx also offers "super slimming smoothing power" and assures buyers by saying "don't worry, we've got your butt covered."
This company, which is something of a start up miracle, doesn't even sell bras, they sell the "Bra-llelujah 'All-Hosiery' comfort bra."
Yes, the name is saucy and the product is pure retro, but it is a textbook case (possibly the textbook case) of how reframing a "dead" product with good naming can create a new market.
Hosiery and girdle makers everywhere take note, Spanx just spanked you.
August 6, 2008
Trademark law exists to prevent others from doing business under your registered name, but before you can challenge them in court, you have to be able to catch them. And while people are far less anonymous than they believe on the Net, it can still take time to track infringers down.
First we had cybersquatting: the greedy and foresighted would buy domain names like CocaCola.com long before the company that had trademarked that name even thought of going online, then charged the company an exorbitant amount to buy the domain from them.
And then there was phishing, the act of luring consumers to sites that look like eBay, PayPal, or their bank, and asking for all their login information, including to Social Security number and mother's maiden name.
Now, with new social networks and Web 2.0 services springing up every day, there are more and more places that a company either needs to be or to monitor in order to protect itself from "brandjacking."
The latest victim of this form of brand impersonation is ExxonMobil. Due to the high-profile coverage of Comcast's presence on the microblogging platform Twitter, the creation of a Twitter account with the handle "ExxonMobilCorp" was more plausible than it would have been six months ago, even if some of the 140-character messages sent by "Janet" seemed off key.
If you've taken the trouble to trademark a company name or product name and build up a brand, then it's worth making sure that you're the one to put that name on the social media map and register as a user with the social networks.
Even if you never use the account, at least no one else will be able to abuse your good name.
August 5, 2008
These green receipts allow customers to come back to the store after 2 PM to get a $2 (half price) grande cold drink.
What interests me is the fact that a deft, elegant marketing move like this allows Starbucks to offer value to customers without using that particular word; or the words sale, cheap, or half-price."
With Treat Receipts, Starbucks is not giving out cheap cold java, they are rewarding loyal customers with a treat, and that small difference reframes the offering beautifully.
However, I do not think this will be a game changer for the struggling giant, although it is a great way to preserve the brand's equity in the face of mounting financial pressures.
As Starbucks continues its fight to stay afloat amidst the slowing economy, its main naming and branding challenge for the next year or so becomes getting rid of its image as a daily indulgence. I've read many articles making the point that you can save enough money to put the kids through school, pay off the mortgage or even settle the credit card debt simply by skipping Starbucks and making your own coffee.
I cannot speak to the validity of these claims, but the Treat Receipt offers loyal customers more value without trying to reposition Starbucks' brand name as a budget or low cost option.
Now that's a real treat.
August 4, 2008
The rivalry between Pepsi and Coke is set to get bitter as Pepsi prepares to beat Coke to the punch with a brand new all-natural, zero-calorie sweetener called Purevia that it is launching in its SoBe life drinks in Latin America.
Coke, until recently, called the Cargill inspired product by its "trade name" Rebiana.
Stevia based sweeteners are derived from a Latin American plant in the chrysanthemum family which has been used in cultures for centuries.
However, the FDA will not allow stevia to be used as a sweetener in its traditional form, hence the race between the two cola giants to create a stevia based sweetener that can be sold as a tabletop sweetener and used in a handful of products.
So, for the record, we have stevia, which is a "dietary supplement" according to the FDA, but is not an additive. Truvia and Purevia are chemical derivatives of stevia and are additives that have not yet been approved by the FDA, but should be soon.
Now, a new drink called--wait for it--Zevia has beaten them both in the stevia stakes, telling the world that it is "the first stevia based product to offer a truly all natural alternative to artificially sweetened diet sodas." To add insult to injury, one Zevia executive has said that he is concerned that "Truvia and Purevia have strikingly similar names to Zevia which may result in consumer confusion."
So, we have a brand name called Zevia using stevia to conquer Purevia and Truvia, both created by different companies that used stevia (although one company sometimes called its additive Rebiana).
One of these is a dietary supplement, one is an additive, both can be canned and sold. Nothing that is in Zevia can be used as a tabletop sweetener, however, Purevia and Truvia get that privilege. The stevia that is in Zevia, however, can be used anytime you wish, so long as you don't think of it as a sweetner (although it is indeed sweet).
So consider yourself warned: finding stevia in the USA will be hard (thanks to the FDA), but Zevia, Truvia and Purevia are easy to find.
From a name development standpoint, this is one can happen to a client, a naming company, or us when the same morpheme root (via) is used to create a brand name. It is unusual, but it does happen. It will be interesting to see how this shakes out with trademark law considerations.
I'm sensing that there will be tremendous amount of consumer confusion here.
Posted by William Lozito at 9:07 AM
Posted to Beverages | Brand Naming | Branding | Company Naming | Food | Industry | Naming | Naming Rights | Product Naming | Retail | Trademarking
Comments (0) | TrackBack