Business Naming Basics

Company names reduced to nicknames: that’s a naming trend I’d like to see stopped in its tracks.

I’ve ranted about this before, particularly about the now-absorbed Washington Mutual calling itself “Wa Mu”. Terrible idea. I don’t think their shortening of the business name caused their financial problems, but in hind site, it did demonstrate a lack of management constraint and focus. Anyway…

The newest demonstration of nicknaming just breaks my heart. The guilty party? The venerable National Geographic.

Now first let me acknowledge the name is not “large enough” for its charter, and never has been. But over time most constituents have come to know and accept the brand and what the name stands for without questioning “National” or “Geographic” as being inadequate, largely because they consistently maintained the society’s identity.

Everyone knows that year after year, month after month the magazine, with its National Geographic yellow and dramatic cover photograph, was (and still is) a great getaway and information source about our planet and its amazing diversity. With the introduction of the TV channel and a select catalog of travel/adventure products, National Geographic has admirably kept pace, and even more importantly, led the environmental movement.

Because of its associations and focus, the brand stands alone no matter what the name says in a literal “translation”. National Geographic is about great photos and writing, about the dangers to our planet, about exotic cultures, about adventure, and about innovative efforts to fund additional exploration and research. Yes, National Geographic is national treasure – no, make that a global treasure with a limiting name.

Never-the-less National Geographic STANDS FOR SOMETHING.

But now, probably influenced by the texting trend, they have seen fit to use a nickname on their National Geographic Channel website. It’s just terrible.

It’s Nat Geo.

Shame on you, National Geographic Society. Shame on you for violating your brand, for diluting your name, for alienating a core segment of your constituency.

Oh, and to make matters worse, on the National Geographic home page, they refer to themselves as “NG” upon occasion. NG? I know that as an abbreviation for “no good”!

Their tagline/mission statement is “Inspiring People to Care About the Planet”. National Geographic is inspiring, Nat Geo or NG not so much.

Perhaps it’s just my age that brings about a prejudice against the “newest thing”, but I’m pretty sure it’s not good branding.

I invite your take on this subject in the comments box further down this page.

Related business naming posts:

1. Business Naming Terminology Helps Identify Name Effectiveness Like almost anything else, corporate names can be classified by type or category. Why would you want to do this?...
2. Geographic Business Naming: Some Pros And Cons Using place names as business names can be advantageous in some instances and almost suicidal in others. This business naming...
3. Descriptive Business Names are Dead-end Names There’s a great danger that you will outgrow a descriptive name. The problem is that entrepreneurs don’t see business naming...
4. Naming Idea – Define the Brand Personality Before Naming Your Business Before generating name ideas, I recommend a couple of activities. One is to create a "brand story". The other is...

Tags: Naming Issues // Add Comment »