When product names go bad

Sarah Jessica Parker doesn’t seem to have done much since Sex and the City (this isn’t a typical start to a blog posting, I know, but bear with me for a minute).

However, she has launched a couple of perfumes. The first was called ‘Lovely‘. As product names go, this is like launching a car called the Toyota Fast, or flogging bottled water called Damp. I think there’s a slight possibility it’s some sort of parody, but even if it is, that’s just the sort of contrived nonsense only a perfume manufacturer could come up with.

It doesn’t get any better. The second fragrance is called ‘Covet‘. Covet? You’d never buy a mobile phone called the Nokia You Really Want This. And neither should you buy this perfume. If they can’t be bothered thinking up a good name, do you think they took much time worrying about the smell?

If I’m honest, I’m not sure what conclusions to draw from this. I really just wanted to point out a truly dire piece of naming. Lovely? It isn’t. Covet? I don’t. Sarah Jessica Parker should probably stick to acting.

One response to “When product names go bad”

  1. Martin says:

    ‘Lovely’? You are right: terrible name. Surely that has to win awards for sheer blandness. It is evocative of – well – precisely nothing, really.

    On a loosely related subject, since seeing “I’m Alan Partridge” all those years ago, I find it impossible to read the name on pretty much any can of male deodorant without it sounding like a poor impersonation of the man himself.

    That hypothetical bottled water you were on about: how about naming it ‘Moist’?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *