3152Re: Limited a limiting name?
- Jan 4, 2006For what it's worth, I agree with you, Ned. The implication is that
the company is immature or fly-by-night.
If a client is an Ltd. (really an LLC or LLP, generally) versus a
Corp. or Inc., I advise them to drop the term from their press
materials unless there's a legality involved.
But Brits and wannabe Brits don't always share that opinion - for
this I blame Johnny Lydon and his apres-Pistols band Public Image
--- In email@example.com, Ned Barnett <ned@b...> wrote:
> Does anybody here share (or disagree) with my thought
that "Limited" in a
> company or brand name is somehow "limiting" (in connotation, not
> I have a proto-client who wants to brand a service "Limited" and
> telling him I think that will play well in the US (he's from
> IMO "Limited" is far more common, and with a far lower level
> connotation). We can't agree, so I'm looking to be validated or
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>