AI does many things well.
Naming brands is not one of them.

We’ve tried it. A lot.
And we’ve worked with countless teams who have tried it too. The results are consistently underwhelming. Generic. Forgettable. Sometimes unusable.

As a brand naming agency, this isn’t theory for us. We talk to teams every day. From big tech companies to solo founders. Many have spent weeks prompting AI to name something important, and still have nothing they can actually ship.

So why does AI struggle so much with naming. Let’s break it down.

AI Minimizes the Importance of Naming

Serious business decisions deserve serious focus.
When naming is reduced to “let’s see what ChatGPT spits out,” the thinking gets outsourced instead of sharpened.

Naming isn’t just output. It’s judgment, prioritization, and strategy. AI shortcuts the process by skipping the hard work of defining what truly matters. When you cut your own brain out of the process, you don’t get clarity. You get noise.

AI Is a Total Yes-Man

Encouragement is nice. Pushback is essential.

Great naming work requires challenge. Questioning assumptions. Stress-testing strategy. Surfacing what’s missing. AI rarely does this. Instead, it accepts the brief as-is and responds with affirmation.

“That’s a great idea.”
“Love this direction.”

That’s not strategy. That’s validation without discernment.

AI Produces Low-Quality Ideas

AI is trained on what already exists. So the output feels familiar. Because it is.

No matter what you’re naming or what themes you explore, the same names surface again and again. Flux. Pulse. Nexum. Atlas.
Ask for coined names and you’ll see Axera, Vectra, Tivra, Fluxon. Different prompts. Same results.

It’s not creativity. It’s remixing.

AI Can’t Handle the Rigor Trademarks Require

A name that isn’t legally viable isn’t a name. It’s a liability.

Trademark clearance is one of the hardest and most critical parts of any naming engagement. AI struggles here. It can’t reliably assess risk, nuance, or real-world trademark conflicts.

At best, it gives false confidence. At worst, it sends teams down dead ends they’ll have to unwind later.

Humans Crave Creativity

We crave creativity both as creators and as witnesses.

That’s why we have poetry, novels, dance, art, doodles in the margins. And names like Google, Slack, and Wii.

Our brains want to play. Our instincts look for a spark. A great name creates an emotional pull you can feel immediately.

AI doesn’t experience that spark. It can’t recognize it either.

AI Doesn’t Have “The Spark”

With enough guidance, AI might land names like Netscape or Instant Messenger. Functional. Literal. Fine.

But names like Google, Slack, or Wii. That leap requires taste, instinct, and creative risk. More often, AI settles for low-hanging fruit. Flash. Pulse. Quix.

If you’re going to describe the result of a naming exercise with an idiom, you want “cream of the crop.” Not bottom of the barrel.

It Leads to Wasted Time and Lost Opportunities

DIY naming feels efficient. Until it isn’t.

When AI doesn’t produce a usable name, progress stalls. Without a name, you can’t launch. You can’t market. You can’t ship.

What starts as a cost-saving move often turns into lost momentum, missed opportunities, and real revenue impact.

Where to Go From Here

We’re not anti-AI. Far from it.

AI is a powerful research accelerator. It’s great for gathering inputs, references, and raw material. Just like dictionaries, books, encyclopedias, and Wikipedia. Only faster.

But speed isn’t the same as strategy.

If you want a great name, you need a great process. One that applies judgment, creativity, and rigor at every step.

Give naming the attention it deserves.

Explore our free naming guides if you want to do it right yourself. Or reach out and we’ll help you land a name that actually works.

Check out our free guides. 

Or just say hello.