4 ms·

Just do the rebranding, it's better to do it on the long run. Yes, it's a huge amount of work, but it could be done in a finite amount of time. The two names ca

Just do the rebranding, it's better to do it on the long run. Yes, it's a huge amount of work, but it could be done in a finite amount of time. The two names can co-exist, like New name (formerly HxHxHx) Furthermore not all name updates are equally important, some can be done with a DB find and replace some is shit manual work, but you can hire for this job someone. Read about stories how companies did this before. Currently I can think of one case that's ongoing: Taxify -> Bolt. They still have the Taxify logo on their cabs in Hungary but the app updated to Bolt (taxify).

throwaway190620 7y ago
> The two names can co-exist That's what I'm wondering the most actually. I think the least intrusive way to do it is to introduce a literal clone of the product under a different name. Make it clear that it is the exact same things as the original. What I can't find is any examples of anyone doing this. Also, not sure how would the mighty Google react to these shenanigans and if their automata won't decided to delist both products just because it looks fishy.
- legitster 7y ago
  Yeah, I wouldn't recommend doing so without consulting with an SEO person. I don't think you will necessarily get dinged by Google, but a slow trickle towards a new page may kneecap both.
  - dheera 7y ago
    SEO is overrated in most cases these days. Nobody searches for stuff anymore. They find you mostly through social media, non-social media, and word of mouth.
    - legitster 7y ago
      Search is still hugely important. If you have a podcast ad or a tradeshow booth people don't remember you by your company name. They remember you as "that one company that does x". You need to make sure you show up as that company that does x, otherwise your competitors will eat up your marketing budget.
    - Veen 7y ago
      This is far from true. It depends on the business, but search is a massive source of traffic for all sorts of businesses.
    - afarrell 7y ago
      I definitely search for stuff. Not only that, but I search for things that I’d first heard through word-of-mouth.
pessimizer 7y ago
> They still have the Taxify logo on their cabs in Hungary but the app updated to Bolt (taxify). This might be a solution: wait for a fairly large UI overhaul or reskinning, announce that reskinning with the name that you want the product to have, then slap the new branding on the reskin while maintaining the company with the old application name (this is assuming the the company is named after the product.) That way, whether people use tho old name or the new name, they're talking about the application or the company that has a single application. You might even be able to gaslight many old customers into thinking that the product never had a name change, and that the split always existed.
- afarrell 7y ago
  > gaslight How do you gaslight someone you have only passing contact with? Its certainly possible to deceive them into believing a particular thing, but I think it would be impossible to make them feel that they are losing touch with their core ability to perceive reality unless they were already going through some difficult mental health struggles.
paxtonab 7y ago
A good example of this is "eShares" now known as Carta. Here is their rebranding announcement: https://carta.com/blog/eshares-is-now-carta/ https://carta.com/blog/eshares-is-now-carta/
- perryh2 7y ago
  This was interesting to read because they didn't mention that they failed to acquire eshares.com. https://morganlinton.com/after-raising-over-67m-eshares-fails-to-secure-the-com-and-rebrands-to-carta/ https://morganlinton.com/after-raising-over-67m-eshares-fail...
tompark 7y ago
It feels awkward while it's happening, and you keep referring to it by the old name, but later you get used to the new name. Like iPython notebook to Jupyter notebook. And Hudson to Jenkins. I remember at the time having a hard time remembering the new name, still referring to it as Hudson, but when writing this I actually had to search for the old name because I forgot it.
jballanc 7y ago
Everyone's missing the more obvious (recent) massive rebranding: Comcast to Xfinity.
- mataniko 7y ago
  Not really a rebrand or recent. Comcast is the company, Xfinity is a product line.
adrianmonk 7y ago
Not only can they co-exist, personally I think it's most effective and natural (at reaching people) if, as an intermediate step, you establish a "real" brand that includes both names. If you're renaming from "Foo" to "Bar", rather than jumping straight to "Bar (formerly Foo)", you establish a brand "FooBar", leave it that way a long time (years?), and really cement that in people's minds. Once everyone recognizes it as "FooBar", you can later drop half and people will still recognize "Bar". Also, if don't include both old and new monikers as first-class parts of the brand, then in communication people will sometimes drop "formerly Foo". For example, if it's a mobile app, is your app icon label going to be "Bar (formerly Foo)"? No, it's going to be "Bar". (But "FooBar" could be an app icon label.) So there will be contexts where people choose not to mention the old name, weakening the reinforcement of the connection to the old name.

throwaway190620 7y ago

> The two names can co-exist That's what I'm wondering the most actually. I think the least intrusive way to do it is to introduce a literal clone of the product under a different name. Make it clear that it is the exact same things as the original. What I can't find is any examples of anyone doing this. Also, not sure how would the mighty Google react to these shenanigans and if their automata won't decided to delist both products just because it looks fishy.

legitster 7y ago
Yeah, I wouldn't recommend doing so without consulting with an SEO person. I don't think you will necessarily get dinged by Google, but a slow trickle towards a new page may kneecap both.
- dheera 7y ago
  SEO is overrated in most cases these days. Nobody searches for stuff anymore. They find you mostly through social media, non-social media, and word of mouth.
  - legitster 7y ago
    Search is still hugely important. If you have a podcast ad or a tradeshow booth people don't remember you by your company name. They remember you as "that one company that does x". You need to make sure you show up as that company that does x, otherwise your competitors will eat up your marketing budget.
  - Veen 7y ago
    This is far from true. It depends on the business, but search is a massive source of traffic for all sorts of businesses.
  - afarrell 7y ago
    I definitely search for stuff. Not only that, but I search for things that I’d first heard through word-of-mouth.

pessimizer 7y ago

> They still have the Taxify logo on their cabs in Hungary but the app updated to Bolt (taxify). This might be a solution: wait for a fairly large UI overhaul or reskinning, announce that reskinning with the name that you want the product to have, then slap the new branding on the reskin while maintaining the company with the old application name (this is assuming the the company is named after the product.) That way, whether people use tho old name or the new name, they're talking about the application or the company that has a single application. You might even be able to gaslight many old customers into thinking that the product never had a name change, and that the split always existed.

afarrell 7y ago
> gaslight How do you gaslight someone you have only passing contact with? Its certainly possible to deceive them into believing a particular thing, but I think it would be impossible to make them feel that they are losing touch with their core ability to perceive reality unless they were already going through some difficult mental health struggles.

paxtonab 7y ago

A good example of this is "eShares" now known as Carta. Here is their rebranding announcement: https://carta.com/blog/eshares-is-now-carta/ https://carta.com/blog/eshares-is-now-carta/

perryh2 7y ago
This was interesting to read because they didn't mention that they failed to acquire eshares.com. https://morganlinton.com/after-raising-over-67m-eshares-fails-to-secure-the-com-and-rebrands-to-carta/ https://morganlinton.com/after-raising-over-67m-eshares-fail...

tompark 7y ago

It feels awkward while it's happening, and you keep referring to it by the old name, but later you get used to the new name. Like iPython notebook to Jupyter notebook. And Hudson to Jenkins. I remember at the time having a hard time remembering the new name, still referring to it as Hudson, but when writing this I actually had to search for the old name because I forgot it.

jballanc 7y ago

Everyone's missing the more obvious (recent) massive rebranding: Comcast to Xfinity.

mataniko 7y ago
Not really a rebrand or recent. Comcast is the company, Xfinity is a product line.

adrianmonk 7y ago

Not only can they co-exist, personally I think it's most effective and natural (at reaching people) if, as an intermediate step, you establish a "real" brand that includes both names. If you're renaming from "Foo" to "Bar", rather than jumping straight to "Bar (formerly Foo)", you establish a brand "FooBar", leave it that way a long time (years?), and really cement that in people's minds. Once everyone recognizes it as "FooBar", you can later drop half and people will still recognize "Bar". Also, if don't include both old and new monikers as first-class parts of the brand, then in communication people will sometimes drop "formerly Foo". For example, if it's a mobile app, is your app icon label going to be "Bar (formerly Foo)"? No, it's going to be "Bar". (But "FooBar" could be an app icon label.) So there will be contexts where people choose not to mention the old name, weakening the reinforcement of the connection to the old name.