5 ms·

It still escapes me why this recent trend of naming companies with the names of products "for brand recognition" (the other obvious example is 10gen to become M

It still escapes me why this recent trend of naming companies with the names of products "for brand recognition" (the other obvious example is 10gen to become MongoDB Inc.) It would be interesting to see other companies do that in the past: - "Microsoft is going to become Windows Inc" - "Apple Computers will be known from now on as iPod Ltd" - "The new name of the company will be Air Jordan & Co. Nike no more!"

_pmf_ 13y ago
> "Apple Computers will be known from now on as iPod Ltd" Or "Newton Handheld".
polskibus 13y ago
Bloomberg was once called "Innovative Market Systems". The customers called BBG terminal as Bloomberg from the start. Hence the renaming. (source: wikipedia).
aytekin 13y ago
Large companies have big pockets and lots of people so they split their resources on multiple products. Things are very different for small companies and startups. Losing focus for a small company is deadly. It is extremely hard to be the best in a single market, trying to do it in multiple markets is crazy. Best strategy for a startup is to find the best market they have a chance at dominating and focus all of their resources on it. Branding is just one of the resources you have. You want everyone to mention your product when they talk about you.
abalone 13y ago
You forgot about a product called the Apple II Computer by Apple Computer.
coob 13y ago
One way to see the renaming is that it's not for outsiders, it's for those that work there. There's nothing that could do the job of informing everyone in your company what the new direction is more effective thank this.
hrvbr 13y ago
Big companies do it too: EADS has become Airbus Group.
- camus2 13y ago
  Airbus existed before merging with other companies to create EADS.
mherdeg 13y ago
Like RIM and BlackBerry?
teh_klev 13y ago
I think it all depends. What 37signals have done makes sense because outside of the tech arena "37signals" is perhaps a confusing and difficult name/identity. I guess also because Basecamp has eventually become their flagship product they are primarily identified by it. You can trace this evolution in the blog post: "37signals was founded back in 1999 as a web design firm. With the release of Basecamp in 2004, we began our journey to become a software company. Once Basecamp revenue surpassed web design revenue in 2005, the transition was complete." "However, because we've released so many products over the years, we've become a bit scattered, a bit diluted." "So with that in mind, last August we conducted a thorough review of our products, our customer base, our passions, and our visions of the company for the next 20 years. When we put it all on the table, everything lined up and pointed at one clear conclusion. We all got excited. We knew it was right." "Moving forward, we will be a one product company. That product will be Basecamp. Our entire company will rally around Basecamp." "From now on, we are Basecamp. Basecamp the company, Basecamp the product. We're one and the same." This makes total sense. Even if in the future they launch another barnstorming product, if it's under the Basecamp brand/umbrella it will have a stronger brand identity than being launched as a 37signals product. The same works for 10gen's rename to MongoDB Inc (even if as a UK citizen I find "Mongo" to be a difficult name to sell due to certain negative connotations associated with "mong"). Take a look at Oracle's history [1]: "Ellison co-founded Oracle Corporation in 1977 with Bob Miner and Ed Oates under the name Software Development Laboratories (SDL). In 1979 SDL changed its name to Relational Software, Inc. (RSI).[8] In 1982, RSI renamed itself Oracle Systems Corporation [9] to align itself more closely with its flagship product Oracle Database. At this stage Bob Miner served as the company's senior programmer. In 1995, Oracle Systems Corporation changed its name to Oracle Corporation." Again, this makes total sense. Apple and Microsoft were lucky from the moment of their inception to incorporate with cleverly simple names. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation
- incongruity 13y ago
  Apple and Microsoft were lucky from the moment of their inception to incorporate with cleverly simple names. Hardly. Apple was originally called "Apple Computer" and, if you recall, they changed that in 2007 to be more general (http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/apple-drops-computer-from-name/ http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/apple-drops-computer-from...) unlike what 37Signals has done here. Moreover, "Microsoft" is hardly a clever or simple name -- it began as descriptive -- software for microcomputers -- but it's obscure enough in its construction and they've been willing to build strong sub-brands (e.g.: XBox) so its worked. The point is that neither reflect the strategy taken by 37Signals here -- one that I believe will cause them problems in the future. Who else has done what they've done? One name definitely comes to mind -- RIM becoming "Blackberry". I'm sure there are others, but saying more about RIM would just be cheap shots -- but suffice to say it didn't do them any favors.
fmavituna 13y ago
We recently changed our company name to Netsparker Ltd. after our flagship product. Because we have no intentions to build and sell 10 more products in the next decade. However companies such as Microsoft and Apple are in business of building products, not selling only one. Companies such as 37Signals are interested in building 1-3 products and never to become a huge corp with 1K people and 20 products.
rch 13y ago
It happens the other way too: http://quickleft.com/expansion http://quickleft.com/expansion The short version is that a product company (Sprint.ly) bought the RoR services company (QuickLeft) and yet took the service company's name. This will let the combined company build the main product more efficiently, but also build more products down the road (which would be awkward if they were called Sprint.ly).
gvb 13y ago
> - "Apple Computers will be known from now on as iPod Ltd" "It was incorporated as Apple Computer, Inc. on January 3, 1977, and was renamed as Apple Inc. on January 9, 2007 to reflect its shifted focus towards consumer electronics." Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.
- protomyth 13y ago
  They got rid of a word, and it proves jaimebuelta's point even more since they ditched the word that actually related to the product they sell.

_pmf_ 13y ago

> "Apple Computers will be known from now on as iPod Ltd" Or "Newton Handheld".

polskibus 13y ago

Bloomberg was once called "Innovative Market Systems". The customers called BBG terminal as Bloomberg from the start. Hence the renaming. (source: wikipedia).

aytekin 13y ago

Large companies have big pockets and lots of people so they split their resources on multiple products. Things are very different for small companies and startups. Losing focus for a small company is deadly. It is extremely hard to be the best in a single market, trying to do it in multiple markets is crazy. Best strategy for a startup is to find the best market they have a chance at dominating and focus all of their resources on it. Branding is just one of the resources you have. You want everyone to mention your product when they talk about you.

abalone 13y ago

You forgot about a product called the Apple II Computer by Apple Computer.

coob 13y ago

One way to see the renaming is that it's not for outsiders, it's for those that work there. There's nothing that could do the job of informing everyone in your company what the new direction is more effective thank this.

hrvbr 13y ago

Big companies do it too: EADS has become Airbus Group.

camus2 13y ago
Airbus existed before merging with other companies to create EADS.

mherdeg 13y ago

Like RIM and BlackBerry?

teh_klev 13y ago

I think it all depends. What 37signals have done makes sense because outside of the tech arena "37signals" is perhaps a confusing and difficult name/identity. I guess also because Basecamp has eventually become their flagship product they are primarily identified by it. You can trace this evolution in the blog post: "37signals was founded back in 1999 as a web design firm. With the release of Basecamp in 2004, we began our journey to become a software company. Once Basecamp revenue surpassed web design revenue in 2005, the transition was complete." "However, because we've released so many products over the years, we've become a bit scattered, a bit diluted." "So with that in mind, last August we conducted a thorough review of our products, our customer base, our passions, and our visions of the company for the next 20 years. When we put it all on the table, everything lined up and pointed at one clear conclusion. We all got excited. We knew it was right." "Moving forward, we will be a one product company. That product will be Basecamp. Our entire company will rally around Basecamp." "From now on, we are Basecamp. Basecamp the company, Basecamp the product. We're one and the same." This makes total sense. Even if in the future they launch another barnstorming product, if it's under the Basecamp brand/umbrella it will have a stronger brand identity than being launched as a 37signals product. The same works for 10gen's rename to MongoDB Inc (even if as a UK citizen I find "Mongo" to be a difficult name to sell due to certain negative connotations associated with "mong"). Take a look at Oracle's history [1]: "Ellison co-founded Oracle Corporation in 1977 with Bob Miner and Ed Oates under the name Software Development Laboratories (SDL). In 1979 SDL changed its name to Relational Software, Inc. (RSI).[8] In 1982, RSI renamed itself Oracle Systems Corporation [9] to align itself more closely with its flagship product Oracle Database. At this stage Bob Miner served as the company's senior programmer. In 1995, Oracle Systems Corporation changed its name to Oracle Corporation." Again, this makes total sense. Apple and Microsoft were lucky from the moment of their inception to incorporate with cleverly simple names. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Corporation

incongruity 13y ago
Apple and Microsoft were lucky from the moment of their inception to incorporate with cleverly simple names. Hardly. Apple was originally called "Apple Computer" and, if you recall, they changed that in 2007 to be more general (http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/apple-drops-computer-from-name/ http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/apple-drops-computer-from...) unlike what 37Signals has done here. Moreover, "Microsoft" is hardly a clever or simple name -- it began as descriptive -- software for microcomputers -- but it's obscure enough in its construction and they've been willing to build strong sub-brands (e.g.: XBox) so its worked. The point is that neither reflect the strategy taken by 37Signals here -- one that I believe will cause them problems in the future. Who else has done what they've done? One name definitely comes to mind -- RIM becoming "Blackberry". I'm sure there are others, but saying more about RIM would just be cheap shots -- but suffice to say it didn't do them any favors.

fmavituna 13y ago

We recently changed our company name to Netsparker Ltd. after our flagship product. Because we have no intentions to build and sell 10 more products in the next decade. However companies such as Microsoft and Apple are in business of building products, not selling only one. Companies such as 37Signals are interested in building 1-3 products and never to become a huge corp with 1K people and 20 products.

rch 13y ago

It happens the other way too: http://quickleft.com/expansion http://quickleft.com/expansion The short version is that a product company (Sprint.ly) bought the RoR services company (QuickLeft) and yet took the service company's name. This will let the combined company build the main product more efficiently, but also build more products down the road (which would be awkward if they were called Sprint.ly).

gvb 13y ago

> - "Apple Computers will be known from now on as iPod Ltd" "It was incorporated as Apple Computer, Inc. on January 3, 1977, and was renamed as Apple Inc. on January 9, 2007 to reflect its shifted focus towards consumer electronics." Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.

protomyth 13y ago
They got rid of a word, and it proves jaimebuelta's point even more since they ditched the word that actually related to the product they sell.