To Be Googleable or Ungoogleable – That’s the Question in the State of Sweden

Some brand names and trademarks have become generic words. “Hoovering" (brand name Hoover) in the UK is the generic word for vacuum cleaning. Aspirin (trademark of Bayer) has become a generic term to refer to any OTC painkiller.

Google is facing a similar dilemma. “To Google” nowadays refers to searching the internet – regardless of the search engine used. (I often joke that Descartes would have stated: “I can be googled, therefore I exist”)

Google addressed this threat its brand name in its IPO filing. Under the intellectual property heading of the risks section it said: “We also face risks associated with our trademarks. For example, there is a risk that the word “Google” could become so commonly used that it becomes synonymous with the word “search.” If this happens, we could lose protection for this trademark, which could result in other people using the word “Google” to refer to their own products, thus diminishing our brand.”

Google is therefore keeping track of the dangers of its brand name becoming generic. That’s why they objected to the Swedish term “ogooglebar” (“something that you can't find on the web with the use of a search engine”). Google demanded that the Language Council of Sweden would change the term to “something you can’t find on the web with the use of Google search”.

The Language Council of Sweden refused and decided to drop the term "ungoogleable" from its list of new words. According to the Council’s spokesperson Ann Cederberg, “engaging Google's lawyers took too much time and resources." According to her, the Council therefore opted to remove the phrase from its 2012 list of new words. She furthermore stated that "ungoogleable" is already a popular word in Sweden.  Google will therefore have a uphill battle to stop Swedes from using it.

For Google, it’s a Catch-22 for Google. They are on one hand the most popular brand associated with web searching. But on the other hand, Google want to protect its brand to prevent it from becoming a generic word.

Personally, I agree with Google. After investing so much time and efforts in building its brand, Google is entitled to its brand name.

Do you agree with me? Or do you think that it is already out of Google’s hands? Please let me know!

Leading IPO Attorneys Unanimously Think China Will Be a Major Contributor t0 2011 IPO Issuance

KCSA Strategic Communications conducted a survey and found that the United States is losing its position as the global leader for IPOs.

KCSA conducted an in-depth survey of approximately 50 securities attorneys whose firms advised on 75 percent of the initial public offerings listed on major U.S. exchanges in 2010. According to the results of the independent survey, 71 percent of securities attorneys think the U.S. is losing its share of global IPOs.

"The simple fact is that as the U.S. regulatory environment has become more restrictive, other global exchanges have become more sophisticated and liquid and therefore have gained market share," said Joshua Ford Bonnie, Partner, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett. "Given the difficulties of listing in the U.S., more foreign companies are choosing to list on their home exchange."

"This data confirms that as transaction activity continues to erase geographic boundaries, it is imperative that companies take into account the various audiences with whom they communicate," noted Jeff Corbin, CEO of KCSA Strategic Communications. “Regardless of where investors are located, here in the U.S. or overseas, clear communications transcends language barriers and helps companies achieve a fair valuation."

Despite the U.S.'s declining share of global IPOs, the survey respondents unanimously agree that China will be a strong driver of U.S.-based IPO issuance in 2011.

“We expect that Chinese companies will, at least in the near-term, continue to list on U.S. exchanges due to the more clearly defined listing rules and regulations and the perceived stability and prestige of the U.S. markets," commented Colin Diamond, Partner, White & Case.

In addition, the attorneys surveyed expect increased IPO issuance from other foreign countries.

When asked which foreign countries will drive global IPO issuance, 37 percent of respondents said Brazil and 30 percent said India.

Private Equity backed companies are also expected to dominate the IPO landscape in 2011, according to 74 percent of attorneys surveyed.

All in all, sentiment for next year's IPO market is highly positive, with 77 percent of those surveyed anticipating a stronger IPO market in 2011.

"Over the course of 2010, the IPO market changed significantly. In 2011, we will continue the breathtaking pace of 2010's fourth quarter," commented Richard Truesdell, Partner, Davis Polk & Wardwell. "This is likely driven by the overall improvement in the economy, stabilization of the capital markets and pent up demand for equity offerings."

While the strict regulatory regimes of the early 2000s that led to Sarbanes-Oxley may have had a profound impact on pre-IPO companies, 81 percent of those surveyed think that the Dodd-Frank bill will have no impact on IPO issuance in 2011.

"There is a significant number of companies that are preparing to go public, should go public and most likely will go public in the U.S. markets regardless of increased regulatory requirements," said Michael Littenberg, Partner, Schulte Roth & Zabel. "These are in many cases high quality companies that are at the point in their life cycle where being public makes sense."

Other key findings from the survey include:
a. Better Valuations: 11%
b. Good Market Performance: 18%
c. Increased Demand: 29%
d. Investor Confidence: 20%
e. Strong Pipeline: 22%
What industries are driving IPO issuance?
a. Consumer/Retail: 11%
b. Financial Services: 7%
c. Green Tech: 6%
d. Internet: 10%
e. Life Sciences: 20%
f. Natural Resources: 10%
g. Technology: 28%
h. Other: 9%

(Image curtesey of Swadron)