Gone are the days of eWhatever, MyWackyProduct.com, and iYounameit. This is Web 2.0 baby, and your quintessential Web 1.0 brand isn't going to cut it. You've got to be hip, trendy, cutting-edge. In short, you've got to come up with a word that makes no sense to anybody, anywhere. Like Jookster, Meebo, or Squidoo.
Okay, so there are some Web 2.0 brands out there with more sensible names, but really, we all know the good domains have been gone for at least five or six years now. So what are you to do? You've got your great new Web 2.0 idea, a little angel investment in your pocket, but you need a name. Let's take a look at the Four Concentric Circles of a Web 2.0 Brand Name.
Circle One: The Literal Name
Imagine this: Actually name your product after what it does. What a novel idea. A few Web 2.0 brands have done just this, but its tough to pull off. Mainly because some squatter picked up your domain half a decade ago. But rising to the top of this category are a few highlights that more-or-less say what they do: DropSend (sends electronic files), CityFeeds (RSS feeds from your hometown), MapBuilder (Build your own Google map), TimeTracker, and Meetup.
Really, you have to give Meetup some props. They have a winner there. Honorary mention goes to 43things, but they lose points for having to throw an arbitrary number at the front of the name. All in all, this is a tough one to pull off, but if you do, millions of people will flock to your site simply because they could remember what the heck you do. Or something.
Circle Two: The Metaphor
In some ways, this is my personal favorite. Mystery and intrigue are always good, especially when you're throwing up a teaser page asking for email addresses. Some of the best examples here are obvious: Basecamp and Backpack, Mint, Digg, Flock, and Feedburner.
It's a simple concept: Take your idea and find real-world metaphor. We even did this with our own IconBuffet (all you can eat icons). It's a shame more folks don't give The Metaphor more consideration. It many ways, its hard to go wrong here. The deeper you dive into the these circles, the more difficult it becomes to salvage a good name.
Circle Three: The Pseudo Abstract
Circle Three is where you can win the naming lottery of life, or doom yourself to eternal mockery. If you came this far, chances are that you were looking for a domain name with less than eight letters. And if you didn't have an extra $20k laying around to snipe that domain from Pool.com, you could be in trouble.
If you plan well (or get lucky) you can walk away with something brilliant, like Odeo, Writely, del.icio.us, or Flickr. I mean really, Odeo is completely brilliant. Get it? Odeo? Audio? Okay, I'll stop. These are great names folks. Sadly, there are some that may have gone to far.
Furl and Spurl (rhymes with?), Num Sum (huh?), Plurn (what the?), Vimeo (I get it, but...), and the list goes on. The verdict is out still on Rollyo, Riffs, and reddit. I think these all have potential, but it will be the product itself that makes the name stick. Which raises an important point: The name sure isn't everything. You can have a great name and a crap product. Or, you can risk it all and dive with us to the final Concentric Circle of Web 2.0 Brand Names...
Circle Four: The Cab Calloway
So named for the Jazz great from a time gone by, these names might work well in a singalong, but are sure to be a one-way ticket to branding purgatory unless you have a really great product.
Our candidates include such scat as Meebo, Squidoo, Zimbra, and Trumba. And let's not forget Swicki, Django, Atiki, and Kiko. Or Mologogo, Trulia, Rojo, and Ojos.
But while these names may all seem random, there's a secret here: They all have high values in Scrabble. And you get bonus points for double-vowels, or multiple uses of the letter "O". This is primetime. The inner circle. Where your Web 2.0 brand will be proven, or will fall by the wayside. The Sock Monkey cannot save you here.
But remember, with great risk comes great reward. Just ask the fellows at Google, Yahoo, or Skype.
Sam says
Our soon to be released is dubbed NCLB QueryMaster. We already used the QueryMaster previously and just added the web 2.0 app to it. I think we're pretty firmly in circle 1.
Kirk D. says
I find it amazing that a service oriented company like Firewheel Design has apparently made it company policy to disparage other companies in a public forum like a blog. Although SONY might have had it coming, it still makes poor business sense to rip apart a company that may one day become a client.
I'm sure the folks in this post will be glad to know that no matter how much time or money was spent on their corporate branding, that in the end, at least they can take solice in their unusally high scrabble scores.
Jon says
Kirk, we can only hope the numnuts at Sony are reading this...
Besides, at some point, a person's got to decide, you know what, 'If this company does "_________________" (fill in the blank: "runs sweat shops in third world nations," "has discriminatory hiring practices," "likes to eff the consumer," then I'm fairly confident I don't want to be part of that organization.' Even Switchfoot, a Sony-signed band who are paid employees of Sony, denounced the rootkits on their website, apologized to their fans, and included instructions for a work-around. (Sony later made them take it down, further demonstrating why so many bands like Death Cab hold out as long as possible before selling out to a corporate, share-holder owned label, but that is another subject entirely.)
...and fellas, if you ever start doing work for Sony, I'm going to stop downloading your free icons, so there!
=^)
Josh Williams says
Kirk, please understand that we're not disparaging or ripping apart anybody. In the end, I believe a brand must be judged by its product. Many of the above referenced sites have wonderful products (and many were also examples of what I would consider a great product name). Seriously, many of the names mentioned above are flat out brilliant. That said, it's hard not to look out at the Web 2.0 landscape and chuckle at the variety of names. This is not disparaging. This is being honest about the way things are.
John Marstall says
no matter how much time or money was spent on their corporate branding
That's often the problem right there.
Mike Rundle says
Josh, what a great post. I always wanted to write up a big entry about all the new "web 2.0" company names but never got around to it. Yours is much better than what I was planning though :)
If I could go back a year or two and change the 9rules name, I'm not sure I would have. Companies who stick a word like "RSS" or "blog" or "media" in their name might be limiting themselves a bit too much — what happens if their business plan changes in a year or two? I'm glad that 9rules is a little nebulous because then we can just make up the symbolism depending on how we use it ;)
Greg says
Mike you should go back and change the name to 11rules because it goes 1 higher.
Dave Simon says
I think it's probably more logical to steer yourself away from names that say something about what you do, only because that something may change. :)
For some things, it's perfect - Writeboards, for example. Because it's use isn't going to change.
Names like Google, Yahoo, Odeo, Flickr, etc. were open enough at the start that the company defined what that "new" word meant. The brand was created from scratch using a word that sounded familiar.
That's kind of what I aimed for with Oddlaa. Not that I ever expect it to become something along the lines of any of those. But it's an easy to remember, easy to spell, 6 letter domain. A word with no meaning, that I could define myself.
France says
Just be glad SONY didn't stick to their original company name: Tokyo Tsoshiu Kogyo Kabushika Kaika.
hedgehog says
Mike you should go back and change the name to 11rules because it goes 1 higher.
actually it goes two higher ;]
a greater shame that smelltheglove.com is already snatched up really. except if that's in circle one, i'm worried.
Josh Williams says
Dave, your point is well taken. In some ways I wonder if our own Blinksale name is too limiting at times. But really, there are always ways to get around a limiting name.
Dave Simon says
I don't think Blinksale is too limiting, Josh, after all, Blinksale is a product that does one thing, really, and does it well. And it increases the speed at which sales - or at least inovices - can be made.
Unless you have plans on something more for Blinksale than invoicing...
Otis Gospodnetic says
He he he, this is funny stuff, I like it. Which circle should I put my Simpy in? Second or third? And keep in mind Simpy name is pre-Web.20 name (3.5 years old)!
Rojo Ojos says
"Rojo" And "Ojos" are jibberish. Their spanish.
rojo = red
ojos = eyes
beto says
And please, please... don't forget the obligatory "Beta" plastered on your logo. Nevermind that your web service/app has been running for years, it will still be a "beta" on all counts. Plus, "beta" is simply the new definition of cool, or something like that. Just ask the guys at Gmail.
tripeak says
Good post.
Django Reinhardt says
Django isn't gibberish, either, it's the first name of legendary gypsy jazz guitarist Django Reinhardt.
Josh Williams says
Django... My point exactly. And how many other Web 2.0 names have their roots in Jazz? This is not a bad thing, mind you... Just an interesting observation.
Jason McKeeman says
tNook... I'd say Circle 3, but the camelCase is definitely old school. Web 2.0 points should be awarded for the alpha-going-on-beta release.
Check out the Museum of Modern Betas and The Web 2.0 Validator
Sawyer says
Exciting post :)
The successful domain is easy to pronounce and remember. I got a very good domain, just few months ago : www.frexy.com , frexy = fresh and sexy :D. Is it a nice domain for my design agency right :)
Anita says
I'm wondering what are the eal privileges being a top Web 2.0 site? Is this the real thing or just a bloated fiction? Their rank is based on very controversial points.
Josh Williams says
Yes, this is all a joke.
craig hewett says
I have recently launched an Asia Pacific travel search engine which is inspired by Web 2.0 for travel. I have been racking my brains trying to come up with a brand name which is short and catchy. I found your article : Four Concentric Circles of a Web 2.0 Name , very true and I am afraid to say that my brand name Bezurk.com falls into Circle Four: The Cab Calloway. I would love to get some feedback and advice on what I should do at coming up with a brand name for my search engine. I am open to suggestions
craig hewett says
I have recently launched an Asia Pacific travel search engine which is inspired by Web 2.0 for travel. I have been racking my brains trying to come up with a brand name which is short and catchy. I found your article : Four Concentric Circles of a Web 2.0 Name , very true and I am afraid to say that my brand name Bezurk.com falls into Circle Four: The Cab Calloway. I would love to get some feedback and advice on what I should do at coming up with a brand name for my search engine. I am open to suggestions