March 15, 2010
Is the Maalox Naming and Branding Debacle FDA's Fault?
The FDA is getting serious about misleading labels, branding and naming.
They are looking at claims like "low fat," "high fiber," and "cholesterol-free" and responding to customer requests for actual warnings on packaging if a food is "high calorie" or "low in nutrients". This came to a head last year when the FDA found that the voluntary "Smart Choices" program was seeing boxes of Froot Loops getting labeled as a healthy option.
This is already having an effect on drug safety where dozens of medications are getting zapped with labeling changes or changes to information about their their boxed warnings, contraindications, precautions and adverse reactions.
This is all pretty routine news until you consider that last month Maalox was hit by news of "serious" adverse reactions from consumers thanks to poor naming and branding of one of their products.
Their "Total Relief" product looks just like their "Advanced" antacid, but it is in fact much different and the danger to consumers has attracted the notice of lawyers. Notably, "Total Relief" contains aspirin-like ingredient called bismuth subsalicylate, which normal Maalox does not.
People associate Maalox with aspirin-free antacid, and Maalox is benefiting from this to sell this fairly different line extension. This so-called "brand name creep" into a new medicine territory offers real danger to consumers.
It is proof of labeling's impact. Now, Novartis, which owns Maalox, has to remove the Maalox name from the product. They also have to "change the product label design, conduct an educational campaign, and actively monitor and report adverse events associated with the use of Maalox-brand products." The new product, with the new name, will come out in September.
Ouch.
Bnet says Novartis is not exactly at fault here. According to blogger Jim Edwards, "The government agency has a longstanding - and completely insane - policy of allowing two different drugs to be given the same brand name, or two identical drugs to be given different brand names." Hmmm.
Technorati Tags: Maalox, FDA, Total Relief, Maalox Advanced, Novartis
Posted by William Lozito at 8:40 AM| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
March 10, 2010
The Unfortunate Saga of Risqué Domain Naming and Branding Continues with the Sale of Sex.com
The domain name Sex.com is up for grabs.
That's right, potentially the most expensive domain name in history is in foreclosure and will be sold at auction, with bids starting at a cool $1 million. It was sold for $14 million in 2006, which was a record then until Insure.Com went for $16 million.
I have previously written about how the domain name Sex.com has been poorly managed, and even swindled from previous owners. Now, the story seems to have continued its downward spiral.
It will be sold "as is" in the equivalent of a foreclosure sale and should generate a lot of interest, as it can apparently generate $15,000 of revenue a day if managed correct.
Sex.com is one of the top five most profitable domain names on the web today, the others being Fund.com, Porn.com, Poker.com and Business.com.
The Sex.com domain name has been mismanaged, of course, and is surrounded by clouds of legal skullduggery. It is claimed that one of the previous owners had the name stolen from him, and commenced a ten-year manhunt to find the culprit.
DOM Partners, a New Jersey lender is foreclosing the domain and will auction it on March 18, at the New York law firm, Windels Marx Lane & Mittendorf.
Ecoconsultancy has a great post up entitled "Six things you can learn from Sex.com's failure," and number one is: A great domain only goes so far.
I have to agree.
It takes more than a name to make a product or a domain name shine. However, we at Strategic Name Development can say, a great name never hurts.
Technorati Tags: Sex.com, Domain Name, Auction, Ecoconsultancy, Foreclosure,
Posted by William Lozito at 9:34 AM| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
March 8, 2010
Obama Naming and Branding Losing Luster
All politics aside, the Obama brand name is not helping some businesses.
An article out today looks at the dozen or so Michigan businesses that have used the name to sell everything from pharmaceuticals to realty to auto body repair. And, funnily enough, the President hasn't clamped down on these small business owners, in fact, one of them actually got a friendly call from the White House. Nonetheless, consumers aren't buying it.
The building of the Obama brand, of course, is not new. There are plenty of political analyses out there describing how he used branding to create an excellent image for himself.
However, the appeal of the name seems to flow out of politics, as evidenced by the apparent Israeli love for it.
But now the brand doesn't sell, and that includes political t-shirts with his likeness and name on them. The Obama store in Union Station has been closed.
Naomi Klein, author of No Logo, a book speaking to the evils of branding, wrote last year about how the Obama brand is just another example of how corporate branding has taken over American politics. If that's the case (and I am unsure if it is), then the brand itself is liable to face the same challenges of any other in the marketplace.
I'm not sure what it means when a pharmacy named after Obama decides to change its name to a far more generic Community Health Pharmacy, but I am thinking that the President's brand name equity may be in trouble.
Technorati Tags: Barack Obama, No Logo, Brand Equity, Branding, Names
Posted by William Lozito at 8:56 AM| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
February 17, 2010
Is Walmart Killing Branding and Naming?
This year may mark a milestone in branding and naming, one that has as much resonance as Marlboro Friday.
Walmart is unceremoniously clearing brands off the shelves that do not sell well and replacing them with their own private label versions.
This seems to be a backlash against "product overload" - a phenomenon where there is just too much choice for cash strapped consumers looking for deals. This is great for private label brands, but not great news for already struggling brand names.
Or for marketers in general.
Too much choice, it seems, can be paralyzing. Or, as some new studies show, "choice may be what consumers want, but not what consumers need."
The point is, this move might "make brand names irrelevant," simply because Walmart is so big, many other retailers might follow suit.
Choice, and product loyatly, seemingly are also luxuries. This has led one blogger to wonder out loud if "name brands are going away."
The problem has also had bloggers in the auto world saying much the same thing, there are just too many great choices for the average consumer. Is less better?
One thing is for sure: the brand message might start to be simplified. I think that the idea of building a brand though numerous line extensions might be slowly getting replaced by a deeper, truer, more simplified brand message.
Maybe this year, less will be more.
Technorati Tags: Walmart, Brand, simple, shelves, Naming, Retail, Marlboro Friday
Posted by William Lozito at 8:39 AM| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
February 12, 2010
Comcast® to Xfinity™, Lipstick on a Pig?
Comcast, the brand name that we have come to love to hate, is changing its name to Xfinity today.
For good reason... Poor service. Poor value. Poor channel lineup. Poor customer service.
The company recently announced a name change to Xfinity for its phone, television, and Internet services and the reaction has been almost universally negative.
Is Xfinity a porn site? Is it a condom brand? Is it the name of an energy drink? Is it the amount of time Comcast customers are put on hold? Is it the the number of Xcuses for poor service?
The Internet chatter piqued our curiosity enough to survey 511 consumers nationally to quantify the negative reaction to the Xfinity name.
Guess what? 70% of consumers did not think Xfinity was the name for a cable/Internet service:
- 38% thought it was a gaming console
- 16% thought it was a porn site
- 16% thought it was a condom brand
- 31% strongly agree/agree with the statement "Brand names that start with 'X' are so 1990's."
We agree. This name change comes across as nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig.
If fact, our Chief Linguistics Officer, Diane Prange, was so perplexed by the Xfinity name that she decided to drop a rhyme about it. Check out the video below:
However, new names are a funny thing. Over time they become accepted.
For instance, a few years ago there was a senator from Illinois with a very unusual name, Barack Obama. Many of us thought, what an "odd" name.
Today, we would venture to say that Barack Obama is as familiar to our ears as Steve Jobs, and even easier to pronounce.
Therefore, we think it would be helpful to look on the positive side of names that start with 'X.'
After all, 'X' is perceived as unusual, most likely because it appears in less than 3% of all English words. Additionally:
- It's the symbol for a kiss.
- It's the name of the 13th generation to be born since the American Constitution.
- 'X' is mysterious and unknown.
- 'X' piques our curiosity.
- Exclusive
- Masculine
- Innovative
- International and fascinating
The letter 'X' aside, the 'finity' word root has many positive connotations as well. It evokes definity, divinity, infinity, and the holy trinity (of phone, internet and television).
So why doesn't the resulting name resonate better with the target market? Perhaps it's because a brand is only as good as the promise it keeps.
Until then... no brand name change and no amount of money spent on advertising will change consumers' perceptions of Comcast until the brand experience changes.
Comcast should have first fixed its poor service, poor value, poor channel lineup and poor customer service before changing its name to Xfinity.
Apparently Comcast management is aware that they will need more than a name change to alter consumer perceptions. The company has registered xfinitysucks.com, xfinitysucks.org, xfinitysucks.net, etc.
The positive associations of the letter 'X' aside, the Xfinity name will only suck less if it Xceeds consumers' Xpectations by delivering on its brand promise.
Xfinity, Comcast, Name Change, Comcast Name Change, Xfinity Brand Name, TV Service, TV Service
Posted by William Lozito at 8:15 AM| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
February 8, 2010
Heinz Dips and Squeezes its Naming and Branding On User Friendly Packets
Ketchup packets have announced their first revamp in 42 years with the new Heinz "Dip and Squeeze."
They are engineered to allow users to either squeeze out three times more ketchup on their fries, or else dip them. One blog points out that when Heinz put out the first ketchup packet in 1968, the "hate began immediately," with people kvetching that "You need like seven of them just to get something done" and "They're a pain to open. They're hard to open and they squirt everywhere."
This is a huge day for anyone who has struggled with these things at least one of our staff admits to biting them open. But, more than that, it also is yet another innovation from Heinz that incorporates a packaging breakthrough into the naming. It was prompted by an apparent upswing in people needing to get quick access to ketchup while driving.
The target market here is fast food chains, and the roll out is relatively slow, but I am sure this will catch on. Heinz sells 11 million traditional packets a year and will keep on doing so, regardless of the new Dip and Squeezes.
I await these with great anticipation.
Technorati Tags: Heinz, Ketchup, Naming, Dip, Squeeze
Posted by William Lozito at 9:02 AM| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
February 4, 2010
Is Comcast's Xfinity Brand Name Xcellent or Xcrement?
Since the news of Comcast's name change to Xfinity broke, Twitter's been all a 'tweet' with opinions on the new name.
Unfortunately for Comcast, many of these virtual birds weren't singing a happy song about the naming switch.
In order to quantify those negative Xfinity tweets, we quickly surveyed a 511 U.S. consumers, at 95% confidence. In plain English this means the data are projectable nationally.
Although 30% of respondents did associate the Xfinity name with an Internet/Cable Service, significantly more consumers, 38%, thought the name was better suited for a Gaming Console.
Moreover, and the most troublesome for Comcast, is the potential association with either a Porn Site, 16%, or Condoms, 16%.
Many consumers think brand names that start with 'X' are dated.
For instance,
significantly more consumers, 31%, strongly agree / agree with the statement "Brand names that start with 'X' are so 1990's," in comparison to 20% that strongly disagree / disagree.
Finally, if Comcast was hoping the name change would break them from their notorious mold of spotty customer service and expensive bills in the eyes of their customers, they'd be disappointed to learn that a majority of respondents, 56%, strongly agreed / agreed with the statement, "Comcast's name change does not affect my perceptions of its service."
While Comcast can be commended on an Xcellent effort, its renamed value may appear to be worth little more than... well, you know.
Or in other words, this is an example of putting lipstick on a pig.
Technorati Tags: Xfinity, Comcast Name Change, Xfinity Brand Name, Rebranding, Comcast
Posted by William Lozito at 2:51 PM| Comments (0)
| TrackBack