http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2013/09/corporate-names
Marketing gurus once aspired to promote a brand as solid, reliable, serious. Yet the present downturn has made “legacy” names less popular than ever. They have lost their credit (in both senses of the word). Post-recession sensitivities have changed what consumers like products to be called, and what they want them to be associated with.
“Brands used to be authoritative—they spoke at people,” says Paola Norambuena, Executive Director of Verbal Identity for Interbrand North America, a branding consultancy. “Now brands are co-created, they need to be participatory and engaging, and consumers want to be a part of that dialogue.” Trust has migrated away from the men in dark suits, and towards the open-collared, tie-loosened alternative (Northern Rock branches now boast the Virgin brand).
Names with a whiff of the establishment seem old hat. Chris West, founder of Verbal Identity, specialists in linguistic branding, says that “they appear to be hankering after a debased culture of corporate magnificence”. Consumers think of them as pompous, self-serving, impersonal. The advantage of calling your business Wonga and GiffGaff lies in the rejection of superfluous formality. We perceive them as younger, more in-touch, less “corporate”. As Mr West concludes, “they sound like words we might hear at the pub”.
