While I think this may be true at first, if they gain any critical mass, the "Bank" in BankSimple would become redundant and wasteful.
I think it is good and forward looking to rebrand it Simple before launch so that becomes synonymous with banking. Imagine if Google was instead called GoogleSearch? Google became synonymous for Search and therefore the Search portion of their name is superfluous.
I for one applaud this move and think the branding is nice, clean, and, of course, simple ;)
Like how the "bank" in "Bank of America" is redundant and wasteful?
To clarify, I don't really care either way- I'm sure they had other reasons for dropping the "Bank" from their name, especially since they're not really a bank.
But I was replying to tdoggette not vaporstun, who was making (I think) the opposite point.
So my response was to point out that actually the banks we think of as not having "bank" in the name do, and it hasn't stopped us from referring to them without it. So if they stuck with Bank Simple, it would help people initially understand what they do, then once (if) they become a household name, people could refer to them as "Simple".
Of course, this is all ignoring the whole legislation stuff.
Many banks in the UK are referred to, and understood, in everyday language without the "bank": Barclays, Halifax, Natwest, Santander, Lloyds to name a few.
I think an important difference is that those are relatively unique words, unlike Simple, which is common and ambiguous.
Telling someone that you have your money in a simple account doesn't convey as much meaning as telling someone you have your money in a Barclay's account.
That's true in the Bay Area at least, but not necessarily everywhere. Back when I was their customer I recall visiting NYC, and asking several random strangers if they knew where I could find a "B of A", and none of them knew what I was talking about, until I clarified, "Bank of America".
I'm a New Yorker and I know what you mean by "B of A," as do many of the people I know. I think we're both dealing with small anecdotal data sets here, though.
I disagree. Even Citibank doesn't use the "bank" part on their main website, instead going by just Citi: http://citi.com
There are also many other large banks that omit "Bank" from their name such as Wells Fargo.
Keep in mind this is not a traditional bank, so following the rules of traditional banks would be inappropriate. They are better off following the rules of progressive startups which have been using simplicity in their names quite successfully as of late (e.g. Square).
As for Bank of America, you couldn't remove the Bank from Bank of America or it'd just be America which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I don't think Bank of America, aside from controlling most of the banks in this country, is an objectively great brand. Rather, I thought it always tried to piggyback and sound like a federal entity which it's not and always found its name disingenuous.
I think it is good and forward looking to rebrand it Simple before launch so that becomes synonymous with banking. Imagine if Google was instead called GoogleSearch? Google became synonymous for Search and therefore the Search portion of their name is superfluous.
I for one applaud this move and think the branding is nice, clean, and, of course, simple ;)