GGP at One Year Old: A Great Start to an Exciting Project

As we speed headlong toward the beginning of the 4^th quarter of January 2015, I realize that the 21^st of this month signals the one-year anniversary since we launched Geyer Global Partners to help European companies to develop and implement strategies for market entry and growth in North America.  It has been a great first year, and it has laid the groundwork for exciting opportunities and growth in our second year.

First and foremost, I have had the chance to meet and consult with a number of fascinating people from a number of incredible companies all over Europe.  From new startup ventures, to financial services consultancies, to midsized specialty manufacturing concerns, to large technology companies, I have not only been able to share my own experience and insights with some truly brilliant innovators and leaders, but also to develop new skills and insights through them.  I would like to thank all those who have taken the time to speak with me, and who have given me the opportunity to serve.

Second, I have had the chance to attend some very interesting events to see products and services that are at every stage of development – from basic idea through prototype to finished deliverable.  From small meet ups in offices in cities like Berlin and Hamburg, to large-scale conventions in cities like Hannover, I have enjoyed seeing European invention and innovation being brought to market. 

Third, I have been invited to share ideas in more academic settings, training the entrepreneurs and leaders of the next generation.  Having written course material for an MBA program specializing in renewable energy technologies, and being on a talent-rich mentor panel for the newly established Academy for CorporateEntrepreneurship, I have been able to work first-hand with the people and the technologies that will lead economic growth in Europe throughout the 21^st Century.

Finally, and most importantly for the future success of Geyer Global Partners, I have developed very fruitful relationships with new partners who provide complementary services to European companies seeking market entry solutions in the United States.  Together we are working on a large and exciting project, to be announced in the upcoming weeks, which will provide tremendous strategic and practical value to all of our clients.  Stay tuned here for our formal announcement.  But suffice to say, I am incredibly excited about the impact that this project will have for our clients and for the future growth of Geyer Global Partners.

Thank you to everybody who has helped make the first year of Geyer Global Partners so exciting and successful.  I look forward in our second year to seeing all of you again, and to meeting many new people to discuss your ideas and plans for expansion into North America.  I remain as convinced as ever that there is great opportunity for growth in North America for European companies that are willing to make the move to Go Global.

Observations on Observations about North America, Part 2: Time and Distance

by Peter R. Geyer, Managing Principal, Geyer Global Partners

When I attend meetings that discuss the risks and opportunities for European companies expanding into the United States and Canada, the sheer size of the North American continent versus the size of the European continent is always mentioned.  Often meeting attendees will be shown an interesting overlay map like the one here, at which point they will either audibly gasp – mainly, I suspect, because that is what they think this is the reaction expected of them – or they will nod knowingly, as they remember back to that interminable drive from Orlando to Miami the last time they were on vacation in the United States.  To give some context of my own to this conversation about size, I will give some points of comparison: the distance between Washington, DC and New York City is roughly the same distance as between Berlin and Prague; the distance between Miami, Florida and Boston, Massachusetts is roughly the same distance as between Rome and Edinburgh; and the distance between New York City and Los Angeles, California is roughly the same distance as between Moscow and Lisbon.

Overlay Map of North America and Europe[1]

 

But these conversations about the size of North America never actually discuss what this distance really means in a practical context; about how distance translates into time; and as any business school graduate will tell you, about how time translates into money.

As we can see from the map above, the United States and Canada are vast countries.  At a combined 19.8 million square kilometers, the United States and Canada have a land mass 94% larger than the European land mass.  When we take population into account, the United States and Canada have a combined population of 351.3 million compared to Europe’s combined population of 739.2 million.  That translates into a population density in the United States of only 34.4 people per square kilometer – only 47% the population density of Europe.  Looking only at averages, this means that a business needs to cover 2.1x as much territory to reach the same number of potential customers.

But averages only take you so far.  While Canada has the lowest population density of any country in the world (3.4 per sq. km.), 80% of that population lives within 150 kilometers of the border with the United States.  80% of the Canadian population also lives in urban – rather than rural – communities, with 1/3 of the total Canadian population living in the cities of Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver.  While the United States population is slightly more evenly distributed, it is still heavily concentrated in the northeastern states around the Washington, DC/Philadelphia/New York/Boston corridor, in the upper-midwestern “rust belt” states around Chicago/Detroit/Cleveland, and in individual cities in the west and southeast such as Los Angeles/San Diego, Seattle/Portland, Dallas/Houston, and Atlanta/Tampa/Orlando/Miami.  Many western states, such as New Mexico, Wyoming, Montana, and the Dakotas have substantially lower population densities, ranging from 6.3 down to 2.1 people per square kilometer.  

Population Density Map of North America[2]

Unfortunately, when considering population distribution within regions, it is also misleading to only look at the population within the actual boundaries of major cities.  With the flight of the middle class from large cities over the past several decades for a variety of economic and social reasons, the populations of many large cities have shrunk, while the populations of their surrounding suburbs have grown exponentially.  For example, the population within the city limits of Washington, DC is only a little over 632,000 – ranking it the 24^th largest city in the United States.  However, when its substantial suburban population is considered, Washington, DC’s population jumps to 2.4 million – ranking it the 8^th largest region in the United States.  A similar story is told by Detroit, whose shrinking population within the city limits (701,000) ranks it the 18^th largest city in the United States, a status which is offset by its large suburban population (an additional 1.1 million people), which bumps Detroit’s rank up to 11^th.  

With a large population spread unevenly over an ever larger area, the trick for any business is not necessarily reaching every customer in every remote corner of Canada and the United States, but is instead reaching within – and perhaps more importantly, between – sometimes widely scattered population centers. With this in mind, perhaps a useful way to visualize time and distance in North America is to look at the distances and amounts of time it takes to transit both goods and people between major population centers.  

First, we will look at air transportation times.  The times estimated are strictly based on the time between gate departure in the city of origin and gate arrival in the destination city on a non-stop commercial flight.  It does not take into account the time it takes to travel to and from airports, nor does it take into account the sometimes significant amounts of time required to pass through ticketing and security screening.  Of course, when traveling to smaller cities, multiple connecting flights are often required, which can add exponentially to time in transit.

Air Travel Times via Commercial Carriers Between Major Cities[3]

	New York, NY	Washington, DC	Atlanta, GA	Chicago, IL	Dallas, TX	Phoenix, AZ	Los Angeles, CA	San Francisco, CA	Seattle, WA	Montreal, QC	Toronto, ON
New York, NY	0 Hours	1.5 Hours	2.5 Hours	2.67 Hours	4.0 Hours	5.5 Hours	6.0 Hours	6.5 Hours	6.25 Hours	1.5 Hours	1.67 Hours
Washington, DC	1.5 Hours	0 Hours	1.75 Hours	1.8 Hours	3.2 Hours	5.1 Hours	5.75 Hours	5.8 Hours	5.67 Hours	1.75 Hours	1.4 Hours
Atlanta, GA	2.5 Hours	1.75 Hours	0 Hours	2.0 Hours	2.33 Hours	4.0 Hours	4.8 Hours	5.33 Hours	5.25 Hours	2.6 Hours	2.1 Hours
Chicago, IL	2.67 Hours	1.8 Hours	2.0 Hours	0 Hours	2.33 Hours	3.75 Hours	4.33 Hours	4.5 Hours	4.4 Hours	2.0 Hours	1.5 Hours
Dallas, TX	4.0 Hours	3.2 Hours	2.33 Hours	2.33 Hours	0 Hours	2.5 Hours	3.33 Hours	3.8 Hours	4.15 Hours	3.6 Hours	3.0 Hours
Phoenix, AZ	5.5 Hours	5.1 Hours	4.0 Hours	3.75 Hours	2.5 Hours	0 Hours	1.3 Hours	2.1 Hours	2.8 Hours	N/A	N/A
Los Angeles, CA	6.0 Hours	5.75 Hours	4.8 Hours	4.33 Hours	3.33 Hours	1.3 Hours	0 Hours	1.33 Hours	2.5 Hours	5.3 Hours	4.67 Hours
San Francisco, CA	6.5 Hours	5.8 Hours	5.33 Hours	4.5 Hours	3.8 Hours	2.1 Hours	1.33 Hours	0 Hours	2.0 Hours	5.5 Hours	4.9 Hours
Seattle, WA	6.25 Hours	5.67 Hours	5.25 Hours	4.4 Hours	4.15 Hours	2.8 Hours	2.5 Hours	2.0 Hours	0 Hours	N/A	4.5 Hours
Montreal, QC	1.5 Hours	1.75 Hours	2.6 Hours	2.0 Hours	3.6 Hours	N/A	5.3 Hours	5.5 Hours	N/A	0 Hours	1.25 Hours
Toronto, ON	1.67 Hours	1.4 Hours	2.1 Hours	1.5 Hours	3.0 Hours	N/A	4.67 Hours	4.9 Hours	4.5 Hours	1.25 Hours	0 Hours

Next, let us assume that rather than travelling by air, once chooses to travel by road (we could consider traveling by rail, but outside of the Washington, DC/New York/Boston rail corridor, that is a ridiculous notion for anything other than freight).  Times between major cities are listed assuming the use of major interstate highways, and adherence to appropriate speed limits.  No allowance is made for stopping for refueling, rest, or other personal needs.

Driving Times Between Major Cities[4]

	New York, NY	Washington, DC	Atlanta, GA	Chicago, IL	Dallas, TX	Phoenix, AZ	Los Angeles, CA	San Francisco, CA	Seattle, WA	Montreal, QC	Toronto, ON
New York, NY	0 Hours	4 Hours	14 Hours	13 Hours	24 Hours	38 Hours	44 Hours	46 Hours	46 Hours	6 Hours	8 Hours
Washington, DC	4 Hours	0 Hours	10 Hours	12 Hours	20 Hours	36 Hours	42 Hours	44 Hours	44 Hours	10 Hours	9 Hours
Atlanta, GA	14 Hours	10 Hours	0 Hours	11 Hours	12 Hours	28 Hours	33 Hours	39 Hours	42 Hours	19 Hours	15 Hours
Chicago, IL	13 Hours	12 Hours	11 Hours	0 Hours	15 Hours	28 Hours	31 Hours	33 Hours	33 Hours	13 Hours	8 Hours
Dallas, TX	24 Hours	20 Hours	12 Hours	15 Hours	0 Hours	16 Hours	22 Hours	28 Hours	34 Hours	28 Hours	23 Hours
Phoenix, AZ	38 Hours	36 Hours	28 Hours	28 Hours	16 Hours	0 Hours	6 Hours	12 Hours	23 Hours	42 Hours	36 Hours
Los Angeles, CA	44 Hours	42 Hours	33 Hours	31 Hours	22 Hours	6 Hours	0 Hours	7 Hours	19 Hours	46 Hours	41 Hours
San Francisco, CA	46 Hours	44 Hours	39 Hours	33 Hours	28 Hours	12 Hours	7 Hours	0 Hours	14 Hours	48 Hours	43 Hours
Seattle, WA	46 Hours	44 Hours	42 Hours	33 Hours	34 Hours	23 Hours	19 Hours	14 Hours	0 Hours	46 Hours	41 Hours
Montreal, QC	6 Hours	10 Hours	19 Hours	13 Hours	28 Hours	42 Hours	46 Hours	48 Hours	46 Hours	0 Hours	6 Hours
Toronto, ON	8 Hours	9 Hours	15 Hours	8 Hours	23 Hours	36 Hours	41 Hours	43 Hours	41 Hours	6 Hours	0 Hours

Finally, while sending people between locations in North America is important, perhaps even more important to a business is shipping goods.  While the driving times between cities can have an impact on shipping times, so too can the availability of freight rail facilities, distance from distribution centers if using commercial carriers, and distance from major transit infrastructure such as interstate highways, waterways, and bridges.  For the sake of simplicity, I have listed the typical shipping times between major cities for goods via ground services on commercial carriers.  Of course, for a price, goods can be shipped faster than the times listed, and depending on the nature and bulk of the goods being shipped, time to destination can also be significantly longer.  

Shipping Times Between Major Cities via Commercial Ground Transportation[5]

	New York, NY	Washington, DC	Atlanta, GA	Chicago, IL	Dallas, TX	Phoenix, AZ	Los Angeles, CA	San Francisco, CA	Seattle, WA	Montreal, QC	Toronto, ON
New York, NY	1 Day	1 Day	2 Days	2 Days	3 Days	4 Days	4 Days	5 Days	5 Days	2 Days	2 Days
Washington, DC	1 Day	1 Day	2 Days	2 Days	3 Days	4 Days	4 Days	5 Days	5 Days	2 Days	2 Days
Atlanta, GA	2 Days	2 Days	1 Day	2 Days	2 Days	4 Days	4 Days	4 Days	5 Days	4 Days	3 Days
Chicago, IL	2 Days	2 Days	2 Days	1 Day	2 Days	3 Days	4 Days	4 Days	4 Days	3 Days	2 Days
Dallas, TX	3 Days	3 Days	2 Days	2 Days	1 Day	3 Days	3 Days	4 Days	4 Days	8 Days	8 Days
Phoenix, AZ	4 Days	4 Days	4 Days	3 Days	3 Days	1 Day	2 Days	3 Days	3 Days	9 Days	8 Days
Los Angeles, CA	4 Days	4 Days	4 Days	4 Days	3 Days	2 Days	1 Day	2 Days	3 Days	9 Days	8 Days
San Francisco, CA	5 Days	5 Days	4 Days	4 Days	4 Days	3 Days	2 Days	1 Day	2 Days	9 Days	8 Days
Seattle, WA	5 Days	5 Days	5 Days	4 Days	4 Days	3 Days	3 Days	2 Days	1 Day	9 Days	8 Days
Montreal, QC	2 Days	2 Days	4 Days	3 Days	8 Days	9 Days	9 Days	9 Days	9 Days	1 Day	1 Day
Toronto, ON	2 Days	2 Days	3 Days	2 Days	8 Days	8 Days	8 Days	8 Days	8 Days	1 Day	1 Day

In the United States, there is a term for the area between the heavily populated centers around New York on the east coast and Los Angeles on the west coast: “fly-over country.”  While this intentionally insulting description disregards the economic, social, and political importance of this vast expanse of land, it does reflect the fact that – relatively speaking – the east and west coasts of the United States contain a substantial proportion of the population and economic activity in the country, with large areas of often thinly populated territory in between.  The same can be said for Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver in Canada.  Whether considering where to locate a facility, where to develop partnerships, or whether to target specific regional markets, the key for any business in North America to consider is that distance and time are inextricably linked. 

For more information on how Geyer Global Partners can help your business to "Go Global," visit our website at www.geyerglobal.de.

---

[1] Swissmiss, www.swiss-miss.com.

[2] Encyclopedia Britannica, www.britannica.com.

[3] Average times compiled using publicly available commercial airline timetables.

[4] Average times compiled using www.mapquest.com.  If multiple routes between cities are available, an average was taken of the available routes.

[5] Shipping times are determined in consultation with the United Parcel Service, and reflect UPS Ground service within the United States, UPS Worldwide Standard service between the United States and Canada, and UPS Standard service within Canada.

The Argument Against Business Jargon

by Peter R. Geyer, Managing Principal, Geyer Global Partners

“Geyer Global Partners helps you to leverage your company’s core competencies to gain traction in the monetization of the North American marketplace through the incentivization of global deliverables by providing seamless turnkey solutions to your international value proposition.”

Are you impressed yet?  

As any professional should do from time to time, I have been spending time lately looking at materials put out by other consultants in my field.  In particular, I have been trying to conduct some intelligence on: Who are my competitors?  Who offers potentially complementary services?  Are other consultants doing things that I can learn from (either good things or bad things)? Conducting this research has been a useful enterprise, in that it helps to focus the mind on new ways in which consultants can assist in the professional development of their clients.  It is equally useful in that it points out ways in which professionals in North American business use their own peculiar language – what I will call “business jargon” – to communicate with each other or, in some cases, to avoid communicating with each other.

It has unfortunately become an article of faith among graduates of American business schools that the successful and liberal application of business jargon is a reliable indicator of having understood the subject matter.  In other words, if you can use words and phrases that have no coherent meaning outside of business, you must have actually paid attention during those long management lectures.  Even better, so the thinking goes, if a manager can liberally season his reports with jargon that even most clients or colleagues cannot understand, it somehow justifies that manager’s salary.

The drawbacks of this approach to the use of language should be obvious.  Certainly, each profession has its own jargon.  Software engineers or mechanical engineers talking among themselves are completely unintelligible to a person who is not a software or a mechanical engineer.  For years I worked as a business appraiser, and I could have conversations with other business appraisers about depreciation curves and approaches to the determination of enterprise value that would leave a typical listener in desperate need of a copy of the USPAP[1] glossary and a stiff drink.  But the role of a manager is to lead and to communicate with people with a wide variety of backgrounds.  As such, managers need to be able to communicate in ways that are clear and that avoid unnecessary jargon.

To be honest, I think that managers insist on using business jargon for one of two reasons.  The more charitable reason is that this is the lingua franca of the universe of professional “business” as taught in American business schools.  Business jargon is the language that is used among peers within and between department heads all the way up to executive suites, so this is naturally the language that seeps into every day communication with customers and partners.  I myself have tried to banish as much business jargon from this blog as I can, with only middling results, because it becomes a part of how you frame your worldview.  The less charitable reason for using business jargon is that it provides the manager a shield and plausible deniability if their advice or leadership turns out to be pointing their company in the wrong direction.  The manager can use business jargon to sound intelligent, but when things go wrong, they can then claim that their subordinate, their superiors, or their partners did not understand the nuances of their recommendations.  I have an MBA, have worked as a consultant for almost 20 years, and can speak business jargon with the best of them.  I have read dozens of reports (and publicity materials in brochures and websites) that have been nothing more than meaningless gibberish, designed only to make one party sound smart and everybody else feel stupid by comparison.

Whether we take the charitable view or the uncharitable view, the partner or subordinate is the one who is at a disadvantage.  If a partner or a subordinate stands up and says that he does not understand the recommendations of a manager’s report, he opens himself up to the ridicule of his peers – or worse,  of his superiors (who may not understand the report either).  If that partner or subordinate does not stand up and say that he does not understand the manager’s recommendations, he may end up following poorly conceived advice that is a bad fit for his organization.  

When you consider companies seeking to expand overseas, issues of language and understanding become particularly acute.  Everybody wants to work with partners that have impressive sounding managers, but if the expanding company and their partner cannot communicate with each other in a way that is mutually understandable, no amount of impressive sounding language is going to provide the company with value for their money.

It is essential that both the expanding company and its partners to clearly communicate their needs and their strategies to each other if their work together is to be successful.  Potential partners need to understand that managers at expanding companies may be speaking English as a second language, may not have attended an American business school, and may not understand implicit cultural references entwined within certain turns of phrase.  By the same token, it is also essential that expanding companies be willing to tell potential partners that their goals and strategies are unclear.  Even more importantly, it is essential that expanding companies know whether the business jargon being thrown at them by potential partners actually makes sense, or is just an effort to obscure the fact that the potential partner has nothing of value to offer.

For more information on how Geyer Global Partners can help your business to "Go Global," visit our website at www.geyerglobal.de.

---

[1] Uniform Standards of Appraisal Practice

What is in a name?

by Peter R. Geyer, Managing Principal, Geyer Global Partners

There is an old marketing tale (that is handily debunked here) about how back in the 1970s Chevrolet tried to market the Nova automobile in Mexico, only to find that it sold poorly.  When they looked into the matter, they discovered that "Nova" in Spanish could be read as "no va" which roughly means "doesn't go."

While it turns out that this story is not actually true, it does demonstrate the usefulness of having somebody familiar with your new overseas target market actually review your product, its marketing, and its positioning prior to release.  What may seem like an awesome name or marketing strategy in one language or culture, may actually end up sending all the wrong signals in another language or culture.  Even the best product in the world can be unnecessarily burdened if it unintentionally sends the wrong signals to its international customer base. 

As I have had occasion to walk around Berlin since moving here 6 months ago, I have run across several businesses that appear to be very successful here in Germany, but that I think would have a tougher time in the North American marketplace.  I make my comments here with absolutely no malice or ill will.  I declare here upfront that I have absolutely no relationship with any of these companies, and that I have no idea whether they currently have, will have, or ever have had any plans to expand into North America or anywhere else.  I merely offer my own unsolicited observations based purely on their names as a starting point for a conversation.

Le Crobag

If you have been to a train station anywhere in Germany, you have probably seen the bakery shop Le Crobag.  Since 1981, this award-winning Hamburg-based bakery franchise has offered freshly prepared croissants, sandwiches, breads, and other tasty sundries to commuters and other travelers from 120 stores located in train stations and transport hubs.  It is an excellent concept – selling high-quality, freshly prepared products in high-volume and low-cost, to consumers who are on the move and don't have time for a more substantial meal – and from what I can tell as a casual observer, it is a reasonably well-executed model.  With a website that is not only in German, but French, Polish, and English, it would appear that Le Crobag has aspirations of international expansion. 

What is up with that name?

When the company was first founded, Le Crobag was originally called Le Croissant, but I assume that name was changed because the original was too generic.  Unfortunately, from a North American perspective (if I may be so bold as to speak for an entire continent), the Le Crobag name has a few issues.  The French article "Le" is a good start, as it immediately gives the consumer an idea of who they are, and what they do.  But the word "Crobag" is an epic fail.  First, it sounds like an epithet that a teenage boy would call a female teacher.  I can immediately imagine hearing somebody say, "Mrs. Crabtree just gave me an "F" in social studies.  What a crobag!"  Second, the word Crobag does not even sound French, so the French article preceding a decidedly non-French subject creates an unpleasant dissonance in the consumer's ear.  I get that the original idea of the name was probably combining the words "croissant" and "bag," which makes sense, as they are selling croissants that will be taken away in bags.  It might be more phonetically pleasing to a North American consumer to make the entire name French, by substituting the English word "bag" with the French word "sac."  While the name "Le Crosac" still sounds like a teen epithet, it is at least linguistically consistent, and thus less jarring. 

Bad Couture

On Karl-Marx-Allee in Berlin, there is a very nice bathroom fittings boutique called Bad Couture.  Its large glass windows are filled with attractive and stylish items to make your home’s bathroom look like a place where you would want to spend more time.  Unlike Le Crobag, Bad Couture is a single store and, as far as I know, it has no aspirations for growth overseas.  That is probably a good thing.  While Bad Couture is an excellent name in Germany - where it is a mixture of German and French meaning "Bath Design" - it would be a death sentence anywhere in the English-speaking world.

What is up with that name?

Bad Couture is a real-world example of what is being warned about in the apocryphal Chevrolet Nova story told earlier.  While Bad Couture makes perfect sense in a German-speaking context, Bad Couture in an English-speaking context is an explicit statement that the contents of the store are of tacky or poor design.  A particularly pernicious trap that this particular name would fall into in North America is that it is combining two different languages into a single name (much like Le Crobag).  Even though the phonetic sound of Bad Couture is not displeasing to the ear, its mix of languages would confuse an English-speaking consumer.  Americans generally will know the meaning of "Couture" through wide-spread exposure to fashion magazines and television shows about the fashion industry, and even if they do not, the word is close enough to the English word "Culture" to carry with it positive aspirational connotations.  However, the German word "Bad" has the disadvantage of having the exact same spelling as an English word with strongly negative connotations.  First impressions are key, and you don't want the first impressions to be either confusion or negativity.  

Of course, I do not want to pick only on the Germans.  Having lived previously elsewhere in Europe, I was amused by some American companies that caused me to think, "Oh my!  They'd better not try to export that to Europe!"  And in a spirit of fair-play, I will share with you my particular favorite.

Frugal Fannie's

Formerly a chain, but now reduced back to its original store in Westwood, Massachusetts, Frugal Fannie's was originally, apart from being a retailer in its own right, a clothing wholesaler.  Back in 1983, when one of their major customers went bankrupt and Frugal Fannie's found itself with a warehouse full of clothing with no buyer, they decided to open this warehouse to the public for a weekend to try to get rid of their overstock.  That weekend sale was so successful that they held another one.  Frugal Fannie's realized quickly that they were on to a new concept in retail: keep overhead incredibly low, open only on weekends, and sell clothing at steeply reduced prices.  

What is up with that name?

Fannie is the nickname of one of Frugal Fannie's founders, and frugal definitely describes the type of consumer that they are targeting.  But heaven help them if they ever decide to take their concept to Great Britain.  I had the good fortune to attend boarding school in England back in the late 1980s.  At the time, what Americans call "fanny packs" were all the rage.  These are belted pouches that can be strapped to your waist and that are large enough to carry cameras, wallets, keys, or other bulky items that may not fit in your trouser pockets.  I had one of these fanny packs, which I would use when going into town (really, it was the 1980s, it wasn't that bad back then).  However, whenever I would say something to the effect of, "Where is my fanny pack?  I need somewhere to carry my wallet," my British friends would either give me exceedingly odd looks, or they would immediately fall to the floor laughing hysterically.  It turns out that the word "fanny" is somewhat archaic British slang for female genitalia.  Even though its spelling is slightly different, if Frugal Fannie's moved to Great Britain, it is probably not the best marketing to have a sign over the door that brings to mind a "cheap c**t." (My sincere apology to all concerned for that last comment, but the British slang term is equally vulgar in its meaning.)  Admittedly, the word fanny in North America is also humorous for being polite slang for somebody's backside – generally used by mothers who shy away from using the word “butt” in front of their children – but the joke lacks the same vigorous punch that it carries in Britain.

I of course realize that the names of all of the companies I have mentioned here were developed with a particular market and a particular consumer in mind.  For where they are now, these names are perfectly good and are perfectly appropriate, and I certainly mean none of them any malice or harm by taking their names out of their original and intended context.  But I use them here as examples of how, when you move to a new country or to a new continent, the old rules for coming up with an effective name no longer apply.  That is why it is so important to get advice from somebody with intimate understanding of the target market in order to ensure something as basic as your name does not create the wrong impression.

For more information on how Geyer Global Partners can help your business to "Go Global," visit our website at www.geyerglobal.de.