So it was with a little chuckle that I opened my first-ever email from GuitarSquid, “a website that pulls all of the guitar news you can stomach into one convenient and hilarious source.” Immediate reaction: guess someone couldn’t get their first-choice domain name (or first hundred).

But wait, they have an explanation for the name. Something about the squid’s ability to “reach and grab things from far and near with ease.” Sounds a bit retrofitted to moi, but you gotta appreciate that these squidly guitar folks don’t take themselves too seriously.

Plus, there’s the awesome GuitarSquid logo, which really reminds me of how I feel when I play guitar! It’s an all-thumbs, 3-4 arms, multi-tentacle kind of feeling. I’m not sure Eric Clapton or Jeff Beck will relate, but it sure works for me.

So, squid … squid … uh-huh, it’s growing on me. Why the messaging could really work for so many of our clients: the concepts of reach, multiplicity, uniqueness, depth, fluidity, speed! In fact, I’d try to launch a squid naming site, but I see that I’m too late.

My favorite of these is SquidSquid, wherein you find your giant squid name. For the record, mine is “ravenous maria the engulfer” though given my height, I think I’d go for Squirt.

Back in December, Racebook Marketing Concepts held a Brand Name Auction during which “150 Timeless Trademarks and Domains” were offered for sale. But the auction was more bust than boom: only about 50 people showed up, with a few more bidders participating online. The prices, too, were disappointing, with the highest bid coming in at $45,000 for Shearson, $23,500 for Meister Brau, and $30,000 for Handi-Wrap. Collier’s, a magazine brand with a long history, sold for $2000, to someone acting as a third-party representative for a publishing company, according to AdAge.

Part of the reason for the low turnout, and low returns, was likely confusion over just what one got for the winning bid. The folks who bought the iconic record label Victrola for $1000 got the rights to an intent-to-use trademark application for a wide variety of goods and services in Class 9, including CDs, televisions, computer hardward and software, calculators, printers, amps, speakers, and cell phones. The catch is that since the ITU was filed in 2006 and published for opposition in 2008, the new owners have very little time to verify actual use and submit a specimen of use. Many of the other brands sold were on the basis of ITUs, although a few, like Handi-Wrap for plastic wrap, were actual registered trademarks.

Now this kind of intellectual property dealing is familiar territory to trademark attorneys, but to the average marketing exec or start-up entrepreneur, it’s rough going. The distinction between trademark and brand is something that naming companies like my own, Catchword, have to explain to the majority of new clients. And a “brand name auction” certainly sound like you’d be getting more than just a trademark application; it could imply a logo, collateral, advertising, or even patents to a product. Perhaps it’s not deliberately misleading, but it’s certainly overpromising.

Frome a brand perspective, the important question is whether you can repurpose a brand name. This is a different matter than the revivial of a brand, as was the case with TaB. Coke never stopped making TaB, but the brand suffered a deep decline in popularity when Diet Coke was introduced. But some people remained fans, and the brand continues to be produced; it’s even gained something of a cult status with celebrities, and has a whole fansite devoted to its no-cal goodness (ILoveTaB.com). TaB never died. It just took a little breather.

But take one of the unsold brand names from the auction, Annie Hall. The trademark for this name is specifically for clothing, and the name itself is obviously derived from the 1977 Woody Allen movie. I’m not surprised it didn’t sell; speaking as a consumer, the last time I dressed like Annie Hall was in, oh, 1978. Annie Hall as a character is iconic because of the way she dressed. The influence of that style– vintage, layered menswear– has been strong and persistent, and women’s style is better for it. But the name, and the brand, say “1977″ and “slightly crazy” much louder than they say “fashionable”. Reviving the brand and trying to invest it with a modern feel seems implausible, if not impossible. Perhaps someone will buy it just to print t-shirts that say “Annie Hall” on them.

Other brands, like Shearson, will probably have an easier time. Allen Adamson feels that “the Shearson brand, unlike many others in the financial services category, didn’t disappear because people lost trust or confidence in its ability to deliver sound advice and solid service … Shearson had a good reputation, one of the few names in the industry that were never tarnished.” Repurposing Shearson into another financial services company will work because it never got a bad rep, and because people’s memories are hazy. They know the name Shearson was somehow associated with investing, but they will likely never remember its history or realize the name is being used by a totally different entity.

But what about brands that are more than just names? I’d certainly put Victrola into that category – it wasn’t just a record label, it was an actual product that still turns up in movies and television as shorthand for “old fashioned”. How likely is it that Victrola can be imbued with another meaning? Even the construction of the name is old-timey sounding, a contraction of Victor (the company that manufactured them) and pianola, another word for player piano. Perhaps it has a future with a company that produces steampunk DVD players that run on gears and cranks. Likewise, Infoseek (which went for $2000 as part of a package deal) has the stink of “failed Internet search engine” all over it. The descriptive two-word combo tech name is so very mid-90s and has no personality at all.

In the end, it seems to me that very few of the brands offered for sale were worth the money. They didn’t have a lot of brand awareness, the trademarks are pretty restrictive, and, frankly, the names just aren’t that good. The days of search engines called InfoSeek, shampoos called Short & Sassy, and movie chains called General Cinema are long past. The demand for new, interesting, and unique brand names has never been greater, and while recycling is no-brainer for paper and plastic, it’s a lot tougher to make it work for brand names. And don’t even think about trying to resurrect Edsel or Pinto!

Small wonder they needed three full page ads to introduce the name. If they only paid for one page, they’d have to shrink the font to fit, and no one would be able to read the name. Alas! This is a problem that money can fix. But, instead of paying for a better name (too risky?), they decided to pay for more ad pages. I pity the poor fools who work for this company. Can you imagine typing that … novella … of a brand name into every email address? Strong fingers.

No doubt this brand is destined for the land of initials. But for you morganstanleysmithbarney folks who might be reading, I have good news! It appears the MSSB.com is for sale. Might I suggest you grab it ASAP using your TARP funds. Ah … just what the world needs … MORE INITIALS! I just love alphabet soup.

Well, let’s all hope these guys are better at finance than they are at branding. Or maybe they found a new kind of naming consultant–one who gets paid by the letter. Now why didn’t I think of that?

And lest we forget … these guys have made this same mistake before. What ever happened to MorganStanleyDeanWitter? Still not in contention for the Longest Name title, but if we allow a little poetic license, we can really have some fun. How about morganstanleydeanwittersmithbarney (.com)? Now that would be a real champion. Some folks never learn.

To what end? Well for one thing, it is a more accurate description of their status. Originally, .com was supposed to reference business who emphasized commerce. Since GM looses thousands of dollars on every car it sells, and AIG’s collapse has wreaked havoc on everyone’s ability to conduct commerce, it seems only logical to strip those kinds of companies of any reference to commerce or commercial activity.

Actually, since it seems these companies are now IN THE BUSINESS OF ASKING FOR HANDOUTS. Maybe .gov is too kind. Maybe these folks should have to switch to .org domains. I wonder if GM could apply for non-profit status. Now there’s a thought.

Or, since these guys all need to go back to school to learn how to manage a business, perhaps .edu is more in order? “GM.edu: where you can learn how to turn around more than your car.”

So many options — all more logical than allowing them to continue the charade of a sponsoring a .com site.

So 1999.