Day 4 of 2020’s Golf Product Buzzwords; The Most Intriguing Name
Golfers have come to expect that each new driver must include at least 3 “named” technologies, and I use “technologies” loosely. Whether the technology significantly changes the actual performance of the product is immaterial, the key is whether the consumer will believe it improves the performance.
Obviously there are many factors that influence whether the consumer will “buy into” the technology, or simply brush it off as marketing BS. The name of the technology is one of the key influencers of the “buy in,” as is the use of actual R&D staff in explaining and promoting the technology (but that is a subject for a marketing blog; some do it much better than others).
As explained in yesterday’s post, some names actually turn off consumers.
Still other names, and acronyms – as is often the case for technologies, are so bland and generic that they are effectively wasted letters. For example, just a few months ago Sumitomo Rubber Industries (think Srixon or Cleveland Golf) filed a trademark application for “BUILT FOR DISTANCE.” Really, that’s the best you could come up with? Isn’t every club these days “built for distance”? As a consumer I think the tagline is so stupid that it actually does more harm than good.
Horrible names don’t discriminate. In the golf industry I give most companies the benefit of the doubt and blame bad names on short product launch cycles and not allocating enough time to come up with a good name. For instance back in May Karsten filed a trademark application seeking to protection the term FACEWRAP. I have no idea what the FACEWRAP technology is, but I can almost guarantee it will be better than the name (although that is a pretty low hurdle).
Then some names just make you scratch your head, as is the case of a trademark application filed in July by the Ben Hogan Golf Equipment Company. They seek to protect the term SPEED SLOT, which to most consumers scream “me too, me too, but a decade late and too lazy to come up with an original name so let’s combine Velocity Slot with Speed Pocket… no one will notice.” Another case of a name that surely doesn’t help the brand, and most likely does more harm than good.
Fortunately, every now and then you come across a name for a new technology that is intriguing enough that it leaves you wondering what it could be. Optimists will be envisioning a great new technology, while pessimists will be envisioning an over-hyped technology that can’t live up to the name like perhaps a new badge for a cavity back iron. Either way, the name got you thinking, which is far better than the names discussed above. So, what is it?
Drum roll please…. How about a REBOUND FRAME technology in your clubs? I have no idea what it is, but for some reason I want it (which means I will likely be disappointed when I find out what it is).
This bit of competitive intelligence brought to you by the trademark office and the following trademark application:
Word Mark REBOUND FRAME
Goods and Services IC 028. G & S: Golf club heads; Golf clubs
Who do you think is the club maker planning to use the REBOUND FRAME mark in association with their clubs? Let me know in the comments. The answer is either HERE or HERE.
It is interesting how the same company can be associated with both a good and a bad example in this post. However, the same company has sought protection for the TURBO product name, so they may have just got lucky with the REBOUND FRAME name.
David Dawsey – Identifying the Most Interesting Product Names
PS – If you like what we are doing, please considering helping us out and make your online gear purchases here. Every little purchase helps us keep the site up and running! Thanks.
