In my experience, marketers don't frequently start their own companies, which is a pity, because most startups from the get-go make these three basic branding errors that hobble their growth:

1. A head-scratcher brand name

brand name that needs to be explained is a liability rather than an asset. Ideally, a brand name should create a positive emotion that ties into the product or service. The classic example here is Apple Computer. (It's a computer, but it's small, tasty, and easy to use.)

One of the worst brand names I've encountered is Deuce Productions. The term "productions" could mean anything, and the word deuce refers to a playing card with two pips. Turns out, it was an events production company run by a pair of twins. Even when explained, it's a head-scratcher.

If I were rebranding them and they really thought (for some reason) that being twins was a competitive advantage (I'm not at all sure about this), I'd advise them to go with something that actually has a positive and meaningful twist, like "Twice-as-Good Events."

2. Launching with multiple brand names

Over the weekend, a friend asked me to look at his branding plan, which included a corporate brand, a product brand, and a personal brand, all of which were different from each other.

It's very difficult to establish a single brand in the minds and memories of investors and customers. Three brands? Not gonna happen. I told him to focus on one brand and dump the other two.

I learned this one the hard way. When I first launched myself as a writer/speaker/consultant, I tried to promote "Geoffrey James" and "The Institute for Business Wisdom." I quickly learned that two brands was one too many and rebranded as Geoffrey James LLC.

Startups should ideally launch with a corporate brand that's also its product brand. Once again, the classic example is Apple Computer, whose first product was ... you guessed it ... the Apple computer. 

3. Adding new brands rather than extending existing brands

Many companies seem to think that the more brands the better. (I think this belief might be a leftover from the "Heinz 57" days.) The worst example of this was General Motors, which was a brand-name salad until the company wised up and dumped half of them. 

When expanding your product set, it makes far more sense to extend your existing brand than to launch a new brand name. That way, you take advantage of whatever momentum your current brand has acquired. Again, the classic example is Apple, with the Apple I, Apple II, Apple III, and then Macintosh (still building on the small, tasty, easy meme).

Let's apply this principle to a real-life startup.

I recently purchased a full-body motion-capture suit (for doing SFX like Gollum) called Perception Neuron PRO from a company named Noitom. Just to be clear, I have no relationship with this company; I just happened to buy one of its products.

Both Perception Neuron and Noitom are head-scratcher brand names, but they're also disjoint. Noitom recently launched a new product called the Hi5 VR Glove. That's a decent brand name (if you know what "VR" means), but it has no obvious connection with the original two brands.

A better approach would have been to start with a corporate and product brand name like Hi5 MOCAP and a first product named the Hi5 MOCAP Suit. That would then be followed by the Hi5 MOCAP Glove, etc. 

This simplified brand scheme would have made the company and its products more memorable, easier to promote, and easier to combine and package.