This week was a fairly obvious double play on the issue of names, boiling down to a client’s unwillingness to change her product’s name in the face of damning public scrutiny and Don’s giant fake name secret finally starting to come out.
The product name in question is Caldecott Farms, manufacturers of fine dog food that happens to be made from horse meat. They weren’t the only ones turning horses into dog food but were singled out in an expose, running the name Caldecott Farms forever.
Focus groups show the dog food to be well-liked by dogs but their owners can’t get past the name that’s been “poisoned” as Don puts it. The solution is simple enough: Change the company name. But Annabelle, Caldecott Farms’ owner, can’t even think of such a thing since the name was coined by her father – and thereby sentences the company to death by declining sales.
Then we have the opposite situation in Don, who was all too eager to lose his given name in favor of an alias. Not thinking it through (because he didn’t have the time), he’s now stuck being someone he’s not and alienating himself from everyone because of the secret he has to carry.
Names are a huge part of brands, both business and personal, and should be regarded as critical and elementary to the branding process. Does Donald Draper sound more suave and debonair than Dick Whitman? Decidedly, and this may have been a contributing factor to Don’s post-name change career in advertising.
Aside from the moral lessons here, it’s clear that name changes can be good and bad. The things to remember when considering them are 1) Don’t be emotional; “but Dad named the company” is not a good reason to keep the name, and 2) Consider them carefully, because they’re a big deal and not easily undone.