Can Oakland International Airport's problems be fixed with a name change?

I'm skeptical that idea will fly.

Oakland Airport, via Airportix

Earlier this week, Bay Area news outlets reported that Oakland International Airport (OAK) was considering a name change. Inbound air travelers, it seems, aren’t aware that Oakland is right across the bay from San Francisco (whose airport, by the way, is farther from downtown San Francisco than Oakland’s is).

How was the airport going about this rebranding exploration? Not by asking out-of-towners about their airport choices and opinions about OAK. Instead, the Port of Oakland, which manages the airport, surveyed 700 Oakland residents.

“The survey doesn’t list potential new names, and it doesn’t ask residents for name ideas,” The Oaklandside reported on August 8. “Instead, it asks how comfortable people would feel about a name change that reflects the airport’s service area, which is defined as the ‘San Francisco East Bay Region.’”

I wasn’t among the 700 survey recipients, but I could have told the Port officials how the response was likely to skew: uncomfortable. Very, very uncomfortable.

That’s what happens when you ask people—the wrong people, in this case—how they “feel” about a name change. They don’t care what the new name will be. They know they’ll hate it.

The antipathy is especially strong when a name change threatens local pride. For all its faults, the city of Oakland, where I have lived for more than 30 years, elicits a fierce sense of attachment. Civic pride has taken a beating lately, as three professional sports teams—the Raiders, the Warriors, and now the A’s—have left the Town, as locals like to call it. For many Oaklanders, changing the airport’s name would add insult to exodus.

I name—and re-name—brands for a living. But I’d want to know more about the airport’s challenges before I launched into name development:

• Is there a parallel survey of inbound air travelers to the Bay Area? I'd want to know more about those “majorities of international and U.S. passengers” who “are unfamiliar with Oakland’s or our airport’s proximity to the San Francisco Bay,” as port official Matt Davis put it. Is the Oakland name unfamiliar to them? Are they unacquainted with Bay Area geography? Does “Oakland” evoke negative associations? Depending on the answers, a name change may or may not be a feasible solution.

• Are fewer travelers using OAK for travel outside California because of the shrinking availability of direct flights? (Exception: Southwest’s many flights to and from Hawaii.) I used to have several options for nonstop flights from Oakland to the New York City area; now I have none. Would a name change bring back those nonstop flights? Or will I have to keep schlepping to SFO, a long BART ride away from my home?

• What’s being done to make the airport itself more attractive and welcoming? I remember the first time I flew into Portland (Oregon) and was greeted by calming live piano music. What a relief from the hassles of air travel! San Francisco’s airport has (or had) a “recomposure zone”; Milwaukee’s delights travelers with its “recombobulation area.” Humor and empathy go a long way toward enhancing a brand.

• Has a PR campaign been developed? Whether or not the name is changed, a good PR and advertising story is essential. In fact, a good PR campaign may be preferable—and cheaper—than a name change. Even a good tagline (does OAK have one?) can boost awareness. As Oakland Vice Mayor Rebecca Kaplan put it in a recent tweet, “If the point is to do a better job of promoting Oakland airport, that could be solved by actual[ly] promoting the Oakland airport, which has a lot of great things to say about it, like the best weather, easy in and out, and easiest access to the whole northern California mega region.”

That’s the ticket, and the branding challenge: How to position Oakland, and OAK, as a desirable destination and not just a jumping-off point? Maybe a name change will do the trick. But it should be a last resort, not the first leg of the journey.