naming things, people, brands, is sometimes an act that requires a great effort because of the importance given to this part of the identity of things, people or brands.
illustration: luis echánove
a couple expecting a baby spends long hours deciding why one name will be better than another, which one will combine better with the surnames, will be more easily pronounced, will be better remembered, etc. many variables to consider and that sometimes, once all the filters are overcome, are worthless because the chosen name reminds us of someone we prefer to forget. with trademarks the same thing happens but more variables are added, such as that the name does not already belong to another brand or that it is likely to become an internet domain.
However, all this theory falls apart when we think of highly successful brands with a name like schweppes (let's see how many consumers of this brand know how to spell and pronounce its name of seven consonants and two vowels correctly). the same could be applied to häagen-dazs or other brands with names that have nothing to do with their activity(apple, orange, mercedes), with very long names(price waterhouse coopers) or generic names like general motors or general electric.
although the name is a very important part of the brand, it should not be overvalued, because at the end of the day, the name will be full of content that will make it possible for a landline brand to be called retevisión or a luxury brand like bulgari not to sound vulgar. it is true that providing a name with coherent content usually requires a large financial investment, but there are times when circumstances make it essential.
in conclusion, let's give naming the importance it deserves within branding. let's be honest and say that as long as it does not evoke feelings of rejection and you are willing to work and invest to create strong emotional links between the brand and its audiences, call it x.
