Names Are Positions
"Patagonia" evokes geography, adventure, and the wild. "Glossier" evokes surface, shine, and beauty. "Aesop" evokes philosophy, wisdom, and depth. Each of those names pre-loads a category of associations before a single product is seen. A brand name is not just a label - it is a position.
The Constraints a Name Creates
When you name a company 'Oatly,' you have committed to oat-based products. When you name it 'Innocent,' you have committed to a specific moral posture. Names are forward constraints - they narrow the space of decisions you can make later. That is not a problem; it is the point. The best names are precisely limiting.
The Tension Between Defensibility and Meaning
Meaningful names are hard to trademark. Abstract names are easy to trademark but empty of associations. The naming brief is always a negotiation between these two forces. The best solutions - Stripe, Arc, Oatly - find words that are both ownable and evocative. These are rare. Which is why naming is hard.
What Founders Get Wrong
Most founders name their company last, after the product, after the deck, after the funding round. By then, they are naming something that already exists. The name becomes a label, not a strategy. The better approach: name the company first. Let the name set the constraints. Let the constraints produce the brand.