How to call a company?
After a bottle of Bacardi Black rum, a dispute broke out between three people about how best to name an information technology company. Immediately I warn you that none of us have any knowledge either in PR or in marketing. The following text is an ideological excerpt with my amendments.
One person practically did not participate in the dispute, he took the position “suggest a name better, then we will think.”
Another made several assumptions:
I can not blame him for some contradictory thoughts, because in my opinion, this was the moment when he first tried to summarize his knowledge in this direction.
')
My reasoning was as follows:
upd The question is which of us is more right? For example, cellular retailers "Svyaznoy" and "Euronetwork", the first name, logo, etc. was created by a team of marketers, the second was coined on the knee, the logo was drawn by Chichvarkin's friend.
upd2 Analyzing comments, I understand that I did not correctly name the post and poorly stated the essence of my idea. It lies in the fact that when creating a brand, its name has almost no effect. The deliberately bad names like “Vlyulyandiya”, when the wrong association occurs immediately, are excluded. Naming agencies are complete nonsense. And the correct promotion of the brand through thoughtful PR.
One person practically did not participate in the dispute, he took the position “suggest a name better, then we will think.”
Another made several assumptions:
- The name should elevate the firm;
- Long names are bad (for example, the proposed compound word is 11 letters);
- Reflection in the name of the functions that the company performs;
- The name should be bright;
- The name should be thought up by people with a head, who washed the work, which, when making names for companies, so that it [the name of the company] was pleasant to the ear and was not funny. For example, it was assumed that these people came up with the word Pentium, but for the Russian market they miscalculated because there is an abbreviation "Stump", that "not comme il faut" according to this person;
- Further suggested that the name of the company is the correct set of sounds.
I can not blame him for some contradictory thoughts, because in my opinion, this was the moment when he first tried to summarize his knowledge in this direction.
')
My reasoning was as follows:
- Elevation, meaning and length in reasonable frames absolutely does not give anything, since there are many fairly well-known companies with inconspicuous names like Google, EuroSet, TurboMilk, Microsoft, etc. For example, the name KakHealth, which is all ofMyHereTodayCollected ..ru super stupid and super long;
- Originality will be a nice addition because it will relieve the company of dullness, bad names ending in “service” or “studio” and names like “Katyusha”, “Alina”, etc., a good name TurboMilk;
- And the development of a brand by an outside firm is nothing more than a dishonest way to make money on people with bad imagination.
upd The question is which of us is more right? For example, cellular retailers "Svyaznoy" and "Euronetwork", the first name, logo, etc. was created by a team of marketers, the second was coined on the knee, the logo was drawn by Chichvarkin's friend.
upd2 Analyzing comments, I understand that I did not correctly name the post and poorly stated the essence of my idea. It lies in the fact that when creating a brand, its name has almost no effect. The deliberately bad names like “Vlyulyandiya”, when the wrong association occurs immediately, are excluded. Naming agencies are complete nonsense. And the correct promotion of the brand through thoughtful PR.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/43941/
All Articles