I disagree, and further, I think it's dismissive to think the naming was done by a bunch of programmers. It's not an easy decision to choose a more obvious des

I disagree, and further, I think it's dismissive to think the naming was done by a bunch of programmers. It's not an easy decision to choose a more obvious descriptive name, rather than a less obvious mysterious one. Clearly, if it's descriptive, people know what you do, but on the downside it weakens the brand. A company like this is taking an old-school service, and wrapping it beautiful branding and a more hassle free sign-up service. The actual product they deliver (moving services) is almost secondary to this. So the entire company's competitive advantage is based on their brand and reputation... that's okay, many companies do this. For a company where branding is not the only competitive advantage, it's not a bad idea to be a bit more descriptive (e.g., General Motors, Showtime). But for companies where branding is their entire company, it does make sense to be a bit less descriptive and focus on building a strong brand identity.