Source: iStock | Franck-Boston
Are Unconventional Brand Spellings Memorable or Annoying?
A university study finds consumers respond less positively to new products when their brand names use unconventional spellings of real words, like “Klear” instead of “Clear.”
Researchers at Ohio State University and the University of Notre Dame found across a number of studies that participants thought unconventional spelling was a marketing tactic designed to make the brand seem “cool or trendy” and felt the brand seemed less sincere.
“It may be that using these unconventional spellings was better accepted years ago when it was still more of a novelty,” said co-author Rebecca Reczek, a marketing professor at Ohio State, in a press release. “But now consumers just see it as a gimmick. New brands would be better off not going that route.”
The study concluded that established brands with unconventionally spelled names – like Krazy Glue or Krispy Kreme – probably won’t suffer from a backfire effect.
Lyft, Tumblr, Flickr, Reddit and Netflix are some examples of 21st century brands with misspelled names although examples can be found farther back in retail history. Some classic brands with misspelled names include Kool-Aid, Dunkin’, Trix, Rice Krispies, Froot Loops, Lite Brite, Play-Doh and Slip ‘N Slide.
Among other famous brands with quirky spellings, Toys “Я” Us came up with a backwards “R” because founder Charles Lazarus wanted to “to give the impression that a child wrote it,” according to a company history.
Chick-fil-A “is a play on the chicken fillet,’ and that capital “A” is on purpose: it represents the ‘grade A’ top quality chicken used in the now-famous sandwich,” according to Chick-fil-A’s history.
In a blog entry, Steve Harvey, co-founder of Fabrik Brands, the London-based branding agency, said using a misspelled brand name can be memorable because it’s unusual and also can show off a brand’s personality. He also noted that it’s hard to come up with a well-known, correctly spelled brand that hasn’t already been adopted by another company.
On the downside, a misspelled name may cause confusion and make it harder for customers to search for the company online. “Plus, there’s always the risk your name won’t make the impression you hoped for,” he said.
Discussion Questions
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: Do you see more pros than cons to using misspelled or quirky brand names? What’s your overall advice on coming up with brand names?
Poll
Loading …BrainTrust
John Lietsch
Chief Operating Officer, Bloo Kanoo
Neil Saunders
Managing Director, GlobalData
Every brand wants to be remembered and differentiated from its competitors. Creative spelling and brand names are a great way to do that, which is exactly why this strategy has been around for 100 years.
I agree with the marketing professor from Ohio State. Way too many company names, especially during the dot.com era on up to more recent examples have used these unconventional names to be irreverent and cool and it does not seem very cool anymore. Enough already!
Is this really a thing? Or maybe generational? Because the only time I care how a brand name is spelled is when I am trying to find it online, and then google always finds it for me anyway. This survey is another fine example of how universities waste time and money.
I can’t believe it took years for consumers to see it as a gimmick. Of course it’s a gimmick; it’s marketing. The key is for brands that successfully pull it off, the misspelled name becomes a known word, an accepted association to something that provides value or satisfies a need. It becomes no different than a logo, like the Nike swoosh, or abbreviations like REI (Recreational Equipment Inc.). Ultimately, the focus should always be on providing a great product. After all, what’s in a name?
There is ‘clever’ and then there is’ too cute.’ Too cute is usually stupid but ‘clever’ sticks.
Most of the time, they lean more towards too cute… and annoying…
What about klever ?? 🙂
Definitely. Very good!
Do consumers really look this deeply into things? Do people really trust Netflix less because it’s not called Netflicks? I honestly doubt it. Indeed, the latter looks weird now that Netflix has become such an embedded part of consumer culture. There may be some truth in all of this, but it’s likely linked to other factors including the quality of the proposition and the strength of the brand. Quite frankly, I think some of these university/academic studies try to be too clever for their own good!
In many cases, I find them both memorable and annoying.
But there are sometimes other motivations for these brand spellings. Shorter words may rank better in search results, for example, so removing vowels can help. Or, the desired brand is trademarked, but a misspelling is available.
I do worry a bit on behalf of the companies building brands around domain name suffixes, like “.io”.
Standing out from the crowd does require creativity. However, some of the oddball names are simply annoying while others work quite well. If a company makes their brand name too quirky I believe consumers will not be amused and will quickly dismiss it.
You are selling a product, not providing an update to the Oxford English Dictionary! And even if this did not work (spoiler alert-I think it does) we are kind of “stuck” with it due to all of the “names already taken” syndrome in our market.
I do find it ironic that the university that spent three years in a legal dispute with Marc Jacobs to trademark the word “THE” is now calling such marketing tactics “gimmicks”. Perhaps time would have been better spent finding a decent kicker 🙂
Thank you RW for having the courage to finally address this issue (OK, OK I know: you try filing three discussions every day)
It’s a non issue; at least as long as the quirkiness fits the image (I don’t think a private bank would do well sending out notes about “our great ratez”) Anyway, it’s an age old practice – far older than most realize, I believe – so there must be some attraction in it.
It’s a fine line that marketeers have to walk between clever and annoying. I always focus on making sure that the offer is differentiated and consumers have a compelling reason buy.
Odd spellings for brands are used sometimes to get around trademarks already being used by other products. Some instances are better than others. For example, substituting “K” for “C” isn’t terrible. However, substituting one vowel for another is always terrible because it simply looks like a spelling error, especially when the vowel isn’t the first letter in the word.
When brands use odd spellings with an intent to be cool, cute, or sexy, it will backfire more times than not because many consumers resent the joke, and almost all consumers perceive the brand to be less efficacious.
As a marketing professional of four decades, I’m a great believer in brand names that clearly define what the brand is, or what it does.
Don’t riddle the consumer because they don’t have the time or the patience to figure out what a vague or silly noun means, or some letters of initials that mean something to the creator but to no one else.
Naming brands is not complicated yet most entrepreneurs make it a complex issue for the potential consumer. Db
Brands want to be remembered by customers and gain a share of mind for future consideration I think that just having a misspelling may not always be the best way to create memorable brands. For example, the Purple brand. Purple is a name of a mattress company but if you dig into the name, it has a back story because the name is based on their proprietary gel layer that is purple in color. If companies can come up with a brand that has some meaning behind it and not just a simple misspelling, it may have more longevity in the long run and be more interesting to your devoted brand fans.
I get why using a unique, incorrect or other twist on a brand name might be memorable. That’s why people do it. But with all of the shortcuts people take in writing today, do we need one more place that showcases InkorrektSpellz?
History is littered with unconventional brand names. Some are pretty cool and some not so much. I’ve always thought Uber was genius, then I look at G for Gatorade and, well, seems a bit underwhelming. The finer point is how a company invests to grow and nurture the brand with its target audience. Brands need to be treated as living, breathing entities, always striving to deliver on their brand promise every single day.