When Does a Product Need a New Name?

November 24, 2025

Product naming can be a critical ingredient of the success of the product itself. The name keys into all of the marketing programs. It’s determinative of the overall “stickiness” of when you think of a certain category, or the top-of-mind awareness. Getting it right can be the difference between whether that product sinks or swims.

In our world, usually that naming convention conversation is tied to a brand, as opposed to an individual product. If you were to ask the average triathlete, for instance, what bike they ride, they’re probably responding with the manufacturer as opposed to a specific model. (And as of right now, most of you are responding with Canyon, Cervelo, Trek, or Quintana Roo as your answer). Same with the wheels on that bike; you’re probably not telling people which model of DT Swiss wheels you’re using.

Shoes, though, are another matter. Shoe models take on a bit of life on their own. The classic example of this is the evergreen Nike Pegasus. The original generation of the shoe came out in 1983, and it has served the same purpose in Nike’s product line: it’s Nike’s meat and potatoes mileage shoe for those looking for a neutral, well-cushioned trainer. Sometimes the technology in the shoe changes a bit, but in the realm of Nike shoes, it’s much the same thing.

And then there’s HOKA.

They broke just about every brand rule by changing their name a few years ago, dropping the One One that had been with them from launch. They’re just HOKA. And yes, it’s all caps. They’ve never been one to entirely do things by the typical run brand playbook. Who would have thought making a shoe with that much foam could still be stable and light? Yet here we are, with HOKA pushing Brooks for the top spot in run specialty doors, with ASICS not far behind.

So perhaps it shouldn’t be too much of a surprise to discover that HOKA also likes to play fast and loose with the model names of their shoes. Take, for example, the X versions of some of their shoes, which denote whether there’s a plate in them. In certain cases, like the Mach and Mach X. You’d probably think that the two of them would be quite similar, given the name. Yet they’re entirely different in how they fit and feel. They just share a name.

But those are also shoes that are relatively new to HOKA’s product line; you could be forgiven for understanding that they aren’t necessarily related. Then there are shoes that have been here for a decade or more now, like the Bondi and the Clifton. It’s the latter that I’ve been putting some miles in lately, and it’s making me ask the question that is the title of this article:

When does a product need a new name? Slowswitch