What's in a Name ?
Page 1
Page 2
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Not for the first time do we now draw the notice of our readers to the lack of originality that is displayed by many manufacturers in the naming of their products, but there is reason for this renewed attention. Only occasionally does it seem to be realized to what a remarkable extent the success or failure of an idea may be attributable to the possession or lack of a suitable name. Dramatists and publishers will go to endless trouble to discover a catchy tide for a play or a novel. Some amount of care, too, is generally displayed in the choice of a name for a new street, although the result is sometimes a barbarous one. The christening of a battleship or a liner is an occasion for considered decision. More often than not, however, if a proprietary article is to be put upon the market, it has to start its career handicapped with some inappropriate and pointless cognomen. A feeble or unsuitable name is as considerable a drawback to the ultimate success of a sparking plug as it is to a human being. Pitiful is the lot of the unfortunate infant upon whom misguided parents and forebears have bestowed such an incubus as Jeremiah Bloggs or Jubilee Gardenia Smallbones. As an instance of misguided ingenuity in this direction, we may well quote the father, of carburetter-inventing fame, who pleaded, unsuccessfully we are glad to record, for his infant daughter to be christened Petrolea ! It is not, however, at the sponsor, who has unwittingly displayed lack of originality in the selection of a trade name, that we would tilt on this occasion, but rather at the many who have acquired what may be called the alphabetical habit—at those who will persist in further confusing us with new " X.Y.L." carburetters, " K.J.W." tires and " N.B.G." chassis. This laboursaving (sic) procedure appears to be more prevalent in connection with the various branches of the motor industry than elsewhere, although other examples are not far to seek. We would, in all seriousness, protest against the further choice of lettered titles for specialities, whilst it is still just possible to memorize and to distinguish, for instance, the many types of ball bearings which are marketed under literal titles. Recently, we had occasion to review a large number of motor-vehicle components and to classify a variety of general supplies, and we were surprised to discover to what a degree this confusing practice had, of late years, extended. A rough addition yielded a total of well over 50 specialities of which the only means of identification consisted of groups of letters. That confusion is the result, is no occasion for wonder. We know, as a fact, of orders which have been misplaced owing to inability to memorize the intended nickname. Lamps, detachable rims, chassis, oils and greases, carburetters, magnetos, sparking plugs, tires, dynamos, goggles, baIl bearings, acetylene generators, and many other proprietary articles alike suffer from this want of individuality. Therefore, we plead that further confusion may be avoided at all costs. Let the next manufacturer who markets a magneto, for instance, avoid at all costs the commonplace title "A.B.C." or " Z.Y.X. ; "let him even call it the " Lightning" or the " Boomerang " or the " What-dyer-ken-it ;" at any rate, let it be something that we can remember and that we shall not unfortunately confuse with other competitive components. Imagine the care with which the title of this journal was chosen ; had we entitled it the " A.B.C. Gazette," we probably should not have been so ungrudgingly adjudged as the recognized authority!"
Pending Motorbus Promotion.
We are in a position to state that the necessary preliminaries to a big motorbus flotation for London are in a forward state. The promoters are closely associated with the Daimler interests in Coventry and the Midlands, and the intention is to employ petrol-electric vehicles. The authorized capital of the new company will probably be 21,000,000, and the prospectus may be put before the public early next month. It is proposed, ultimately, to bring a fleet of 1,500 motorbuses into service throughout the Metropolis.
The foregoing intimation demands, in natural sequence, our consideration of several cognate questions. Of these, probably, the most interesting are: (1) Is there an immediate or prospective demand for additional motorbuses to meet normal metropolitan requirements?
(2) Is there a commercially-sound opening for a new company upon the right lines ?
(3) To what extent will the position of London's premier organization of the kind, the enlarged London General, be, effected by such a development?
(1) There are, to-day, approximately 1,320 doubledeck motorbuses in active commission in London. This total compares with 1,050 a year ago, 940 at the end of April, 1909, and, respectively, at the corresponding period of each preceding year, back to 1905, totals of 1,029, 913, 415, and 62. London, now, has a total of only 875 horse omnibuses, inclusive of " pirates," in service, and to-day's numerical comparisons with those which obtained six years ago are : 74Tctrop11itan Polico Airs April, 1905, April, 1911.
Horse Omnibuses Fi,r120 875 Motor Omnibuses 1,320 Total miles per Say 240,000 193,000 This brief summary brings out the fact that some 47,000 fewer omnibus-miles are now run per day than was the case. in 1905, but the intervening extensions
of tramway and tube facilities must not be overlooked. That intense competition has, we believe, exhausted its full and worst influences upon motorbus enterprise. For example, going back so far as the beginning of the year 1907, we find that the Bakerloo, the Central London, the City and South London, the Great Northern and City, the Piccadilly and the Waterloo and City railways, as well as the L.C.C. tramcars, were all in developed and keen rivalry with omnibus passenger transport. The Hampstead tube was not opened until July, 1907. We quote representative traffic returns, to illustrate subsequent developments: A study of these data must be held to support the contention that there is paying scope for additional motorbuses in the Metropolis : the revenue of most of the tubes is virtually stationary ; the shallow railways have gainedin part due to fare revisions ; the L.C.C. tramcars are experiencing a relative set-back. The new factor is this: the public is evincing a preference for open-air travel, now that it realizes the smallness of the risk that any motorbus will break down. That accession of public esteem is an invaluable asset, for motorbus proprietors, who, by its lack, have been forced to mark time, during the past four years, fully as much as by reason of' police stringency and altered regulations. Aided though they are by an admirablyconceived, strenuously-executed and well-maintained publicity campaign, the underground systems are not forging ahead in the way their managements had expected. The above table, in fact, tends to prove that the tubes are now faced with the problem of holding the passengers who have hitherto been cajoled and persuaded into their depths. There is, we detect, an undoubted popular revulsion of feeling in favour of a return to journeying above ground, and that inclination will grow into a fixed custom with tens of thousands of regular travellers, if it be promptly encouraged and fostered, by the provision of more and more motorbuses, and by the carefully-devised establishment of new services. Thousands of people now use the tubes, unwillingly, because all the motorbuses are full. We hold that there is real occasion for the early introduction of additional motorbuses in Londonwith, obviously, the opening of many new routes.
(2) Any new company, if formed and capitalized with no burdensome charges, would enter a branch of the carrying industry in which practice has become settled, and in which the necessary experience, to insure the avoidance of crippling errors, has been gamed. Its directors could not safely reckon upon the construction, working and maintenance of their motorbuses more economically than is done by existing companies at present. We name the Central, the London General, and the Metropolitan companies as three instances. Notwithstanding assertions and report,s to the contrary, we are satisfied that the largest of these, the London General, whose shops at Walthamstow have turned out no fewer than 279 Btype chassis since the 1st October last, is a wonderfully-organized concern, whose costs are under exact control, and whose manufacturing and running departments reflect in the highest degree the abilities of
the company's chief engineer, and i his n the company's chief engineer, and i his n well-chose assistants. That. powerful corporation, n fact, now possesses the advantage of unequalled traffic experience coupled with standardized and systematized run ning-shed methods. We do not, of course, suggest that the company would-to use an old phrase-" run itself," for there is an immensity of detail and routine work, and there must be good men at the top. Our point is, that the accomplished results on the engineering side will be very hard to beat, both now and in the future_ The soundness of the case for a new company will, therefore, hinge in considerable measure upon: (a) experienced direetion and administration; (b) absence of unduly-high preliminary expenses or capital outlay ; (c) mechanical or other advantages in the vehicles qua traffic conditions. Several London motorbus companies, within the past six years, were heralded by protestations of "no dead capital" or of "unique vehicles," and they subsequently failed egregiously to substantiate the claims and professions of those connected with them ; hence, we are obliged to await details, in the present instance, before we can feel assured that the improved conditions of the moment will this time suffice to confer success upon any new undertaking. The soundness of the opening for such a company is, as we shall proceed to show, materially discounted by the inevitable reaction, now engendered, in L.G.O.C. shares, and by that company's likely counter-moves in relation to the contemplated new "invader." (3) The London General, it is clear, will extend the
mailed fist to any fresh arrival, and there will be another term of warfare on the streets. That may not be good for the older company, but it will be equally had for the dividend prospects of the new one. A foretaste of the anticipated fight is given by the relapse in prices of L.G.O.C. stock, since rumours about. the new promotion began to get about. Further, the directors of the L.G.O.C. have another 250 motorbuses coming through, and these should all be in serNice before a new company can make any impression. Thus, so far as regards the year 1911, the L.G.O.C. will reap the undisturbed benefit of its being but one remove from a monopolist, and we are unable to see how its excess of income over expenditure can fall below £400,000 for the year. Subsequently, if the threatened considerable opposition takes definite shape, the future will largely become a matter of management, and little else. The new company, with petrol-electric vehicles, will possess the advantage of better acceleration in traffic, and it should have a much-smaller capital per working unit ; it will also introduce disturbing elements, on the staff and labour sides, for the old company. We should say that the effect on the L.G.O.C. will be to postpone the first 15per-cent. distribution upon the ordinary stock to art indefinite future date, but we see no reason why each
concern, though engaged in the most-severe competition, should not pay its way. New drivers can be trained readily, and they can easily pass the police. There is no questioning the fact that the contem plated issue has been cleverly timed. We have entertained a feeling of curiosity, for the past three months, as to who would accept the call to take advantage of the unique situation that was proffered as a consequence of the remarkable and progressive recovery of the L.G.O.C. since the early days of last year. The respondent appears to be-Daimler.