what’s in a (brand) name?

like many posts wasting away in as “drafts” - this one occurred to be walking down Fifth Ave on the way to work one cold morning, and began to coalesce over a lunch conversation with a good friend considering launching her own new brand/company. as i’m now between brands (next gig, starting 6/25), felt like as good a time to flesh this one further out and push it live. so on we go...

the most successful brands / companies (not necessarily one in the same the same) are the ones that do the thing well (and make $) in the era they were in, and continue to innovate. few of succeed beyond their founding era. for every one you've heard of below), there are tons that did not make it.

but in terms of what they call themselves - their "brand name" - across broad eras (with some overlapping),the motif is always oscillating/evolving between “what we do” and “who we are." oh, and by the way, this is all conjecture and anecdotal, i actually don’t know what i’m actually talking about, so consider all these silly thoughts with a grain of salt. it's not that there are not exceptions to these examples (that's another counter-post by someone else), but my observation is that the brands that made it beyond their founding era adhered to the brand-naming trend of the time (as mapped out below). so here we go... 

originally, brand names were more in the "what we do” camp - most literally

• American Express (1850): originally a courier service!
• Standard Oil (1870)
• Nintendo (1889): 任天堂 in Kanji means ‘the temple of free hanafuda’ (hanafuda = Japanese flower cards, which is what they originally made.
• General Electric (1892)
• General Motors (1908)
• IBM: International Business Machiness (1911)
• BMW: Bayerische Motoren Werke (1917): not British, despite what Will may tell you.
• VolksWagen (1937): literally “people’s wagon”

soon, people started incorporating their names to add some credibility. “who we are” in the most literal sense.

• Procter & Gamble (1837): Co-founded by William Procter & James Gamble, brothers-in-law
• Levi Strauss & Co. (1853): Co-founded by, Levi Strauss
• Macy’s (1858): founded by Rowland Hussey Macy
• The Campbell Soup Company (1869): founded by Joseph Albert Campbell
• Gillette (1901): founded by King Gillette
• JoS. A. Bank Clothiers (1905): co-founded by Joseph Bank
• Kellogg Company (1906): founded by Will Keith Kellogg
• Danone (1919): named for founder Isaac Carasso’s son Daniel
• The Walt Disney Company (1923)
• Mattel (1945): co-founded by Harold "Matt" Matson

then, brands started to go back to “what they do", albeit more product-specific

• Radio Shack (1921)
• DC / Detective Comics (1934)
• Hewlett-Packard (1939)
• Circuit City (1949)
• Toys R Us (1957)
• Advanced Idea Mechanics (1966)
• MasterCard (1966)
• Advanced Micro Device (1969)
• Tailored Brands / Men’s Wearhouse (1973)
• Office Depot (1986)

then things slowly started to start getting abstract about "what we do" ...moving back to "who we are" with smart use of metaphorisms (not to be confused with metamorphisms)

• Ivory (1879) - P&G’s first real “brand” (ok, this one is from a much earlier era, but was one of the first, so give credit where it’s due)
• Marvel (1939)
• Visa (1958)
• Pampers (1961)
• Subway (1965)
• HBO / Home Box Office (1972)
• Microsoft (1975): 
• Apple Computers (1976): Steve used to work on a commune/CSA (seriously)
• Staples (1986)
• Netflix (1997)
• Google (1998)
• Facebook (2004)

so where are we now? today's "new" brands use real words that evoke something else indirectly. sure many of them are/have been disrupter brands (many new entrants flush with VC cash): 

• Patagonia (1973)
• Image Comics (1992)
• Vertigo Comics (1993)
• Tesla (2003): while named after the man (1856-1943), he’s obviously not the co-founder, but his technology inspires the company’s approach 
• Yelp (2004)
• Chobani (2005) - derived from the Persian “چوپان“ meaning “shepherd"
• Uber (2009)
• Quip (2012)
• Lyft (2012)
• Casper (2014)
• Parachute (2014)

=

and sure, along the way there are of course the brands that mash-up words in a sometimes punny way. i’ve worked with more than a few of them, so you know their names (Pingage/Ahalogy, RevTrax, TVision, etc). all great companies (with some cool co-founders), and while some of these names make you think, others make you cringe. but the Ad/MarTech landscape is filled with more companies that fit the above "real-ish" words that evoke something (Moat, Percolate, Braze, etc.)

and sure there are even a few brands that are exceptions in our modern era, taking a page from their long-past predecessors: Dollar Shave Club, Warby Parker (a completely made up name, that guy doesn’t exist...he's derived from 2 Jack Kerouac journal entry characters!)

so what? does any of this matter?

well, if you’re creating a new brand (i’m not), i think it does. 

either be hip to the era you’re in, and go with the flow, otherwise your brand might create subconscious friction in the hearts of minds of your future customers. while this is not necessarily a bad thing, but know that your brand has an immeasurably high bar to be the exception to the “brand name trend” of the time. 

but more importantly, your product shouldn’t suck (i’m talking to you V-Tech).

so there’s that.