quote:
I was thinking more web, not social media. That actually makes a big difference now that I think about it. I can see people assuming that not only is it unrelated, but possibly something spammy/phishy with Bourbon Street being the lead on an article about the Pelicans. In the end the content is still much more important than the name, but they are putting themselves at a disadvantage if a more basketball/pelicans obvious name was on the table. If the name doesn't matter, why go for clever over obvious?

A fair risk.

If something is retweeted, it's not really spam though, it it? If someone sent it out with an @whatever, then yeah.

As far as clever over obvious: What's is obviously Pelicans if you can't say Pelicans?

I don't think it's supposed to be clever, really. It's supposed to be memorable, flexible, and point to the city. Saying "New Orleans" points more clearly to the city, but makes the name sound more like many others. Costs, benefits, choices.

As far as the `pop' goes, I think you are right. It also doesn't upset people (other than their tastes). I gotta say, I don't get your flow comment. It is 4 syllables and I think it flows fine. People use those words in sentences together a good bit. It's quite memorable once you know what it's about, and most people get information about the content and the name around the same time or get the content first.

The `bar scenario' you lay out was specifically discussed. The hope was to get something that would have some nickname reference at least. In this case, maybe "shots" or "BS" (as noted). That can't be forced or it won't work.

In the end, it'll work if the work is done well.

If you ask yourself: what is the site bourbonstreetshots.com about, you would wait a little while before you came up with "New Orleans Pelicans." This, however, is not really how people get to sites.

Also, hornets247.com, pelicans247.com, and bourbonstshots.com all work if url length matters, but I think it doesn't in the world of bookmarks and search engines.

Again, just explaining, disclosing for those interested. Not `selling' the name or defending the name. I suppose I'm defending the process to some extent. I think it's an interesting problem.

LINK /

Here's an article with some info I gave Slam:

quote:
Among the many consequences of the name change, the challenge facing Hornets247.com should interest any web-savvy branding types. Launched by Irishman Niall Doherty (currently residing in Thailand), the True Hoop-affiliated site is now under the direction of Ryan Schwan, Joe Gerrity, Chris Trew and Jason Calmes. Earlier today, I asked Calmes what it all means.

“A rebrand of the New Orleans Hornets was a near-given once someone bought the franchise from the NBA, so this has been on our radar for years,” he says. Once Benson made his intentions clear, the site consulted with NBA execs about rebranding strategies. “The name has to be good, but it cannot be so good that someone else has it and wants $50,000 for it. This is a real example. So you really have to break ground to get the URL with complimentary twitter, etc. to have a coherent, professional brand for the world to see.” They plan to unveil a new name once the team’s rebranding is complete, and continue to work through archiving issues. “It’s been an interesting problem to solve,” says Calmes, “but it’ll be nice once this franchise is interesting because of the players on the court and not the hundred reasons for interest over the past three years.” Here’s the site’s excellent take on the end of an era.