Model Management: Company name games

Old economy companies British Steel and The Post Office have done it, and new economy companies such as internet games retailer Gameplay, and business-to-business marketplace Mondus have done it too. Trading network Just2Clicks is the latest company to do it. What have all these firms got in common?

They have all undergone name changes. British Steel rebranded as Corus, The Post Office as Consignia, and Gameplay and Mondus have dropped the '.com' from their corporate branding. Just2Clicks, the most recent web company to undergo this name transformation has gone one stage further - as of next month, it will be known simply as J2C.

For The Post Office (or should that be Consignia?), the name change was prompted because top management felt the original brand no longer adequately describes what it does, as it attempts to become a leading player in the worldwide logistics business.

Gameplay created its new identity because it believed the '.com' was no longer appropriate as it repositioned itself as a business trading not only through the internet, but other channels as well, such as mail order, telephone sales, interactive television and mobile phones.

For Mondus, the name change was an attempt to get recognition for the company's view that it is a business with an international dimension, but with a local focus. As CEO Rouzbeh Pirouz said: "Mondus has built a sustainable business with tremendous potential across all of Europe - an association with '.com' does not reflect our European focus." Curiouser and curiouser.

Just2Clicks has not given a reason for its name change, but coincidentally, it comes at a time when the company is experiencing a slow down in growth, as its B2B marketplace business model has not taken off as quickly as it hoped. Since it floated last year, the company has lost 78 per cent of its value amid poor sales figures. Although the company still has £45.2m left from the £50m raised in its flotation, it is looking to change its business model, as it considers other options.

For old economy companies, choosing abstract names that seem to bear no relation to the companies' core business is becoming increasingly common: witness Andersen Consulting's change to Accenture, and British Steel's change to Corus.

When they started up, some dot-coms chose outlandish names that had little to do with what they offer, such as the internet banks Cahoot, Egg and Smile. They were bold from the outset, and good luck to them.

But the decision to drop the '.com' by some web companies looks like a less than courageous attempt to shake off the cynicism and disillusionment that has plagued internet businesses in recent months. For them, '.com' is perceived as a stigma and a hindrance to their business.

Should companies really feel constrained by what their name suggests? Dropping the '.com' or choosing a completely new name will certainly not change a company's performance, but merely give it another mask to hide behind.