Twitter
TechWatching
LikedThis
RodEdwards.ca
HDDb.netGaboogie & the truth about Web 2.0 names
Gaboogie sounds like a great service. Web centric conference call organizing, mobile features, etc. I’d love to recommend its use here in my blue chip day job world.
Unfortunately, many of my peers and superiors are even further out-of-the-valley than I am, and I just can’t see the service being taken seriously with a name like “Gaboogie.” Cute names do not convey enterprise-strength credibility, reliability, etc. to a group that deals with IBM, EDS, Microsoft, and Sun on a daily basis.
Call it ridiculous or superficial if you want, but names communicate. Given that the conference calling target market is principally businesses, why not have a brand that speaks to them? Gaboogie sounds like something for kids. In the case of Yuuguu, which suffers from a similar naming problem, I suggested a brand split - a professional version with a professional sounding name, and a tweens version with the cute/funky name. Same thing could apply to Gaboogie - split it in two with proper branding around each, and I bet you’ll get better adoption of each. The marginal cost of creating a second branded version of your creation is (generally) extremely low as well, especially when taken relative to the potential benefits.
This discussion also calls into question the whole concept of market segmentation. I know that in the era of $12,000 throw-it-at-the-wall and see-what-sticks projects “segmentation” isn’t really cool - but its useful. Even if you’re doing a Kawasaki-esque “no business plan” launch, at least take the time to decide who you want your target demographic to be, and let that knowledge inform your design & brand decisions - and avoid the perceived disconnect between brand and product that Gaboogie has.
A comment from Gaboogie received via email…
Hi Rod,
Saw your piece on Gaboogie this morning and thought I should respond…
I think you’re right that our name will come completely out of left field for the typical corporate guy, but I’m not so sure that’s a problem. We only launched just under a month ago and we’ve had very positive feedback, including comments from people in the most conservative companies and industries (law firms, commercial real estate organizations, accountants) that they like the name, and many of these people are using the service, including for calls with their clients. Business people are after all just people, and things that are distinctive and even a little silly can and do have appeal.
Keep in mind, too, that our target is not in the beginning the large enterprise. It’s more the SME space. We do have some things up our sleeve re. leveraging the core technology and interface for enterprise clients and resellers, which would be close to your suggestion about splitting the brand in two.
That said, it’s definitely a fine line and I think a lot of stuff that’s going on in the web 2.0 space is mixing up what’s right for consumer-oriented social networking concepts with the very different world of B2B. We made the decision to go for a love it / hate it distinctive name as a way of breaking through the clutter of dozens of traditional conference calling providers. Time will tell whether or not we made the right call…
In the meantime, I’d love to walk you through our service, and of course have an opportunity to pitch your employer on being a customer of ours!
Cheers,
Dan
–
Daniel Gibbons
Co-Founder
Gaboogie
And my response via email…
Dan - thank-you for the email; can I add it to that post as a comment? I agree with what you’re saying - there’s a lot to be said for a name that’s attention grabbing, as opposed to something like “ConfCall 2.1 Enterprise Edition Online” or whathaveyou.
And of course, I appreciate your SME targeting as well, as opposed to the blue chip crowd.
Ultimately, I was just sharing a particularly Canadian brand of conservatism; among many industries here, change & irreverent names are still risk factors to be managed, not innovations to be embraced.
Finally - yes, it would be great to get a tour of Gaboogie; that being said, I’m heavily backlogged in all aspects of my life, so I’ll drop you a line in a few weeks if that would be OK!
Best regards,
Rod / TechFold
Choosing a company name starts being such fun and soon degenerates into a very frustrating process. This is what I reckoned are the Some pitfalls of chosing a company name.
Kawasaki-esque? Don’t you mean Kamikaze-esque?
Choosing a company name is actually a long and frustrating process.
I tend to agree that a very ‘cute’ sounding name may not be taken seriously in a SME environment. This is not to say that the name should be mundane and boring like “ConfCall 2.1 Enterprise Edition Online” (as is mentioned in a previous comment), but companies targeting business should strive to strike a middle ground between being too cutesie and downright boring.
[...] 1. Audio Conference Just GaBoogie 2. Gaboogie - conference calling calls you 3.Gaboogie will conference you in 4. Gaboogie Teleconference 1/2 5. Gaboogie & the truth about Web 2.0 names [...]
Hey Senaka - agreed! I suppose that’s why there’s an entire, high-priced consulting industry around logo and name selection that still manages to miss the mark (see the London Olympics logo - an 800k mistake).
[...] the whole discussion struck a nerve for me - see “Gaboogie and the truth about Web 2.0 names” for reference. Its really hard to balance attention-getting, descriptiveness, and market [...]