IPHONES, IPAINS & IPROBLEMS
The appendage of the letter "i" to a word as an aim to create an icon is silly - momentary, short-term fame and glory may be possible, but to create a long lasting, global, iconic mark is very doubtful. What makes an icon is also the exclusive longevity of its unique name, and for that reason, you have examples of Rolex and not iWatch, Panasonic and not iTV.
Terms like, interactive-
portable- device were behind creating the name iPod, and has now become
responsible for the race for the letter "i" to be ingrained in just
about every product category, from: iCell, iCar, iBank to iBrick and
just about every word including iCopy. Feeble minds somehow gravitate
towards the copying process and feel secure by joining the
happy-go-lucky bandwagon, rather than taking an original approach.
Therefore
branding agencies feel very comfortable upon announcing names like
iLock, iGrass, or iTravel, to captive focus group audiences, names
where the co-dependant participants jump in joy in approval with these
so-called brilliant name ideas - most of these naming attempts do not
see the light of the next season.
Most will remember
the other recent short-lived craze of adding the letter "e" to convey
electronic was a huge fad, pursued originally by the electronic wizards
and later adopted by the real copycats like eSteel and eLumber or
eCement, mostly now in the eCemetry. Millions of dollars were wasted by
each such copycat as they played to these expensive loony e-tunes.
There
is nothing wrong in being wildly original, gutsy and or at times silly,
provided you have a long term strategy of protecting your intellectual
property assets. There are Yahoo, Google and many other unusual, light
hearted names over something overly rigid and trying to be unique at
any cost like, EXZIXIVENT Systems.
Regardless and at
any cost, those corporations actively engaged in playing competitive
war games in the marketplace and advancing their flotillas of name
brand ships must have these new name identities of their advancing
brands under the cover of solid intellectual property and a
well-planned strategy, and not accidental naming. In a time where a few
dollars research on Google will tell you who owns what trademark, and
how many others are using a similar name - it is still amazing that
billion dollar companies with millions in promotional campaigns would
get caught up in these i-stupid games.
Apple Computer
is still recovering from battle fatigue from their long and bitter
dispute with The Beatles over ownership of 'Apple Records', and after
paying huge undisclosed settlements over the use of similar names in
music has now gotten into other i-soups. The entire Silicon Valley has
a long history of naming fiascoes as the same brilliant engineers and
hi-tech wizards have very often missed out on matters of iconization.
We have now entered into a time where cyber-branding shrinks the globe
by the seconds and only professionally structured corporate image and
name identities have a chance to play out the real marketing and
branding games.
Just Prove It
If you
have a super brand, then let the whole world see it, if you have
absolute 100% ownership of that brand, prove it. Proving an absolute
ownership only takes a search on Google, demonstrating how unique and
one-of-a-kind a name brand is. Today, around the world, 95% of brands
do not have full ownership. They may have logos, unique designs,
colorful executions, banners and billboards, but as long as there are
far too many identical and similar names all over the marketplace, the
issue of 100% ownership stays behind. Global icons like Sony, Rolex, or
PlayStation are 100% owned, and all over the world there is absolutely
no confusion about this whatsoever. Therefore without iron-clad
ownership of the name identity, the organisation is left holding logos
and billboards and this makes the entire advertising and marketing
process nothing but an uphill losing battle.
Quick Test: A 5-Star Standard of Naming Critical for 100% ownership.
Your
name will earn a single star for your name being very simple, one more
for being very unique, add one more for being highly related and
pertinent to the type and style of business, plus add one more for
having a globally-protected trademark system in place and lastly, add
one more star for your name having an identical matching dotcom, for
cyber branding and to have a universal ride on the global e-commerce
highway.
Now that you have 5 Stars, you can enjoy a
great image and name identity profile, as you have the freedom to take
your brand into foreign countries without fears and worries, and you
have a long term brand equity already building and growing your persona
- you are on the right track towards having a great icon.
With
4 Stars, obviously something is lacking, therefore the cost of pushing
the message is high and progress is slow. With 3 Stars, the limitations
can be very obvious, the struggle keeps the brand spinning and most
efforts are being wasted. 2 Stars, the brand is seriously damaged and
all the effort of advertising are futile, in addition to a disconnected
relationship with the customer and consequent marketing confusion.
Regional or global expansion is a serious hurdle. With 1 Star, the
brand is dying, and will not survive. With 0 Stars; there is no point
in continuing.
Today, there are only less than 1% of 5
Star Brands, while the rest would hardly earn 1-2, indicating the
current state of branding and the lack of iconisation, while big
corporations all over the world are convinced that they have the best
name brands. Most have a tendency to deny these key branding issues,
while ad agencies continue to iSpend with seemingly endless iBudgets,
resulting in an iProblem. The key question of branding is having a
clear 100% Brand Ownership.
Conclusion
There
are some very serious and very bright projects out there, under the
guidance of bright teams working behind, but there is a serious
disconnection when it comes to long-term and long lasting naming
architecture and branding strategies. What is most critically lacking
are the pillars of branding for iconisation, leading to 100% OWNERSHIP.
About Naseem Javed
Naseem Javed is recognised as a world authority on Corporate Image
and Global Cyber-Branding. Author of "Naming for Power", he introduced
The Laws of Corporate Naming in the 80's and also founded ABC Namebank International,
a consultancy established in Toronto and New York a quarter century
ago. Currently, Naseem is on a lecture tour in Asia and can be reached
at .