Naming briefs #14
A royal do-over, plus two names that don't care if you call them "negative."
Welcome back to Naming Briefs, in which I, name developer/brand consultant Nancy Friedman, scrutinize and analyze interesting or new-to-me corporate or product names. This is the fourteenth installment of Naming Briefs; here’s Naming Briefs #13, which will lead you to previous installments. Here’s some background on the series.
If you’re new to Fritinancy, or getting reacquainted, here’s a quick FAQ:
I’m a professional name developer. I create names and taglines and other elements of verbal branding for companies and organizations. I’ve also been a journalist (mostly feature stories as opposed to breaking news), an editor, a speechwriter, and a copywriter.
This newsletter is mostly about names, brands, and the language of commerce.
My perch on Clarity.fm, where I dispense feedback on your name-development process. I don’t create names there, I just pass judgment. Nicely.
More (free!) naming advice on my old blog (all the way back to 2006).
“Fritinancy” is my nom d’internet. It’s an old word that means “the chirping of crickets.”
If you’ve received this newsletter in your inbox, I recommend clicking on the headline to view it in your browser. Also useful: the Substack app.
Once you’ve escaped email, click the little heart symbol to let me know you liked what you read. It’s meaningful to me, costs you nothing, and apparently it appeases the algorithm deities, too.
Please don’t hit “reply” to the emailed newsletter. It’s a long story. Just don’t do it please and thank you.
If you want to be my pen pal, the address is nancyf@wordworking.com. Or leave a comment here!
Now let’s critique some brand names!
As Ever.
Back in March 2024 I wrote about American Riviera Orchard, a new “lifestyle brand” being cultivated by Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex. I quoted branding experts who called the brand name “memorable in its terribleness” and “the opposite of a catchy name.”
Since then, things have been suspiciously quiet on the American Riviera Orchard front. The other shoe dropped earlier this week, when Markle announced on her Instagram that she’d changed the brand name to AS EVER. “‘As ever’ means ‘as it’s always been’ or some even say ‘in the same way as always,’” she explained, pointlessly, adding that “this new chapter is an extension of what has always been my love language.”1 The original name, she said, “limited me to things that were just manufactured and grown in this area” of Santa Barbara.” She signed the post, “As ever, Meghan.”
That was, shall we say, disingenuous. In fact, as The Telegraph reported, “American Riviera Orchard” had run into multiple trademark conflicts. (The database shows a series of applications and extensions.)
And whaddya know, AS EVER is just as problematic. From the Bay Area’s Mercury News:
It turns out that there’s a small but beloved New York City-based clothing brand called As Ever, and its owner, Mark Kolski, took to Instagram Wednesday to thank “old friends” and long-time customers for their “outpouring of support and concern regarding recent events around our namesake brand.”
“We are aware. We are not affiliated,” Kolski said on his @asevernyc Instagram account, referring to Meghan’s social media announcement about her new As Ever brand.
(Kolski’s As Ever brand may allude to his wife’s name, Astrid, although that’s just a conjecture.)
What’s more, the Spanish municipality of Porreres, on the island of Mallorca, is accusing Markle of copying the town’s palm-tree-and-hummingbirds coat of arms.
Let’s imagine for a moment, though, that the Sussexes manage to buy their way out of this legal morass. What is there to say about the AS EVER name itself?
AS EVER is less terrible than American Riviera Orchard — it’s undeniably shorter — but it’s unmemorable in its own bland fashion. It appeals to none of the senses and evokes no benefit. It’s more appropriate for the fifth installment of a romance-novel series than for a multi-category “lifestyle brand.” The temptation to read the name, and especially the URL, as A SEVER, is strong, as is the urge — which I will resist — to add an S to AS.2
The name is also weakly derivative. There was a time when EVER brand names were a hot trend: I wrote about them in 2014 (Evernote, Everspin, Everlane) and again in 2019 (Eversight, Everlife, Ever.ai). That time has long passed, and Markle’s attempt to ride its coattails appears oblivious or desperate.
Meanwhile, Markle is returning to television March 4 in a Netflix series, “With Love, Meghan,” in which “Meghan shares personal tips and tricks, embracing playfulness over perfection, and highlights how easy it can be to create beauty, even in the unexpected.” (Royals! They’re just like us!) Will she be plugging AS EVER? Tune in later to see whether this brand story ends in Happily Ever After or a shrugging whatever . . . or in Never Land.
Snag.
Name the benefit, we naming consultants often tell our clients. But what if you take the opposite tack and name the downside? It’s not without risks, but sometimes a negative name can work: See, for example, the many brands that incorporate DEAD or DEATH in their names. And I submit that it works for SNAG, a hosiery brand based in the U.K. and selling worldwide.
A “snag” is a catch or tear, especially in fabric. It’s what you don’t want in a pair of tights, which are famously prone to runs (“ladders” in the U.K.) and other failings. A snag is also an impediment or obstacle (a meaning that originated as an American colloquialism).
But snag can also mean “to pick up,” as in “I snagged a bargain.” Although SNAG doesn’t reveal the story behind its name, I have a hunch that this second, mostly positive sense is sharing the spotlight with the “tear” sense. At least one line of web copy says “Snag ’em while they’re hot!”
SNAG is short, fun, quirky, and a good fit for a playful brand that sells tights and other garments in a wide range of sizes — 1 to 34 — and colors. The company prides itself on being “ethical,” but the name doesn’t belabor the point. And check out the brand extension: The company’s “not-blog” is called SNOG, British slang for “kiss.”
Cute wordmark, too.
When everyone else zigs, you zag. Or SNAG.
(Hat tip to Wardrobe Oxygen, whence I snagged a mention of Snag tights.)
Parch.
If you’re parched, you’re thirsty: Since the 14th century parch has meant “to roast or dry” (its origin is unknown; possibly related to perish or to Latin persiccare, to dry thoroughly). That makes PARCH a counterintuitive choice for a beverage brand whose products aim to quench. Another negative name, like SNAG!
But as with SNAG, there’s a sneaky subtext to PARCH, which launched in 2024 in Tucson, Arizona: All of its products are nonalcoholic, thus ideal for someone pursuing a “dry” lifestyle. (“Dry” was originally American slang, circa 1889, for a prohibitionist.)
Unexpected? You bet. Distinctive? Absolutely. Memorable? I vote yes.
(Hat tip to Emily Claire Baird, who commented on an Oldster Magazine newsletter with a recommendation for PARCH.)
At which point, as Dorothy Parker once wrote, Tonstant Weader fwowed up.
I will, however, direct you to asseverate, “to affirm or declare positively or earnestly.”
A Parker quote always gets my vote.
Meghan doing her best to continue the long tradition of proving that the royals are boring af