(Re)/(more)branding - should we do the unthinkable?

… I’m the first to put up strong objection to rebranding.
I saw this advert today. Is there room for all brands? Keep SAFEnetwork and safecoin, but skin it to different markets? Bitcoin is a household name, and bitcoin green would have been a good name for a branded safe coin?

Not sure how I feel. I’d like safecoin to be the household name. To get the attention of the masses, crypto wise is the word “bitcoin” important?

Maybe safeBitcoin from a marketing perspective would work? Many of us out here care about the technology. Your average punter only cares about well known branding. Anyone want to put together some safeBitcoin branding? Users don’t care much for the implementation - they care about its ease of use, speed and performance… and branding.

safeBitcoin on the SAFEnetwork using a SAFEWallet.

Best of both world above, and eventually Bit from safeBitcoin could be dropped?

Here is that advert.

Bitcoin SAFE ?

Skinning wouldn’t hurt? You could target many markets, adoption rate could go up - and you could state that your login is compatible and powered by the same network somewhere?

Coca-Cola branched out to many mini brands you would have thought unthinkable. Coke zero, diet coke, full fat coke, vanilla coke, stevia green coke … Cola with names on. It seems to have worked out okay.

If we keep the word SAFE in there somewhere, I think we’ll do well.

BitcoinSafe, EtheriumSafe, SafeCash…

MobileSafe, DesktopSafe, EuroSafe…


BitcoinSAFE - powered by the SAFEnetwork and compatible SAFEnetwork wallets.

It will all still be safeCoin underneath?


Hmm. I’m struggling to think of a small brand that successfully piggybacked on a much bigger, very well-known brand in that way. Coca-Cola owned the best known brand in the world so they could do what they like with it but I can’t imagine CocaPepsi working out too well, all legal issues aside.


greenwashSafe ? naah, no way


Safecoin is in a class of its own distinct from and far above what Bitcoin can offer. To lean on Bitcoin branding, diminishes the power of the SAFE brand, I think. It’s like McLaren saying that they want to borrow Toyota’s branding because it’s more commonly known. The products of each brand serve a different purpose in a different manner.


Having Bitcoin in the SAFE network or SAFE coin branding would be very misleading, as it’s not Bitcoin.

In my opinion only Bitcoin related products / services / forks should have Bitcoin in their brands, same with Ethereum etc. If Ethereum had called its self BitcoinSmart, it wouldn’t have gone down well, because it’s just not Bitcoin.

However, proxy-tokens that represent Bitcoin & Ether on the SAFE network and be ‘withdrawn’ through Bitcoin / Eth gateways could legitimately be branded SafeBitcoin & SafeEth etc. They would hold the value of ETH or BTC, but be anonymous, fast, and cheap to transact.


i see where you are coming from and i agree that it would probably be beneficial for ‘getting off the ground’



is pretty much my line of thinking :innocent:

…i don’t think it would be beneficial in the long run …


There was a toothpaste (or cream) ice tea company (thanks @jpl i had remembered wrong) that was a bland name and they rebranded to include bitcoin in their name and their yearly sales went up 3 times. The company did not have any connections to computers or internet and certainly not bitcoin. Yet the public recognised the name “bitcoin” and trebled sales overnight.

This I think is so true and certain to come back and bite us very hard in the butt. It could even destroy any change of being accepted by the wider community (not just crypto community) within any reasonable timeframe.

Maybe include “Not Bitcoin” in the branding message :slight_smile: JK


Bitcoin toothpaste? Blimey didn’t hear about that one. There was a drinks company that rebranded itself Blockchain Ice Tea that got a massive initial boost but bombed again just as quickly (very crypto :wink:) and I believe the company went back to it’s original name after that.


Bitmaid, definitely has a little something-something to it. So, who wants to create (yet another) fork of Bitcoin under that name? Much like Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold, Bitcoin Diamond, BitcoinDark and Bitcoin Atom, it doesn’t really need to have much of a reason for being. :joy:


right in this moment i feel the need to flood the world with coin like b!tcoin, bitc0in, bitcoan, btcn, bitcn, bitcon, … i think i should go to bed xD


bitcoin = slow, high fees, not scalable, not anonymous, blockchain-based
safecoin = lightning fast, almost no transaction fee, easily scales, completely anonymous, no blockchain.

I don’t see what we could gain from bitcoin’s branding. safecoin will be a brand of its own
in due time. and by that time stand far apart from all other coins.


The SAFE Network is SO not about “coin” that using Bitcoin as a comparable would be so very wrong, and actually counterproductive.


Watch the whole thing, it’s hilarious. The bitconnect funny man is a guest.
The bitconnect guy should get more offers to speak at events.


No, this is a terrible idea. We want to be distancing ourselves from the sea of sh!tcoins out there, not disguising ourselves as one…


Even though I agree with what you say, what @Zoki is referring to, if I am not mistaken, is about sub-branding and market segmentation, not really about piggybacking another brand.

It is something to mull about, I wouldn’t discard it automatically.


Yeah, maybe not…


Safecoin is already half similar to Bitcoin in letters. Not much point making it more similar.

1 Like

I’ve suggested before… it’s not the network you want to market but the products that use it.

There’s something to be said for targets groups of users, with their interest but the network should be agnostic and background to that.

The better analogy then is that SAFE is like blockchain, as a concept or technology. BTC LTC ETH etc… are the products that we want to see arise from that base.


Sorry @Zoki, I can see that it might be tempting to use a popular name to get off the ground, but it would a) be untrue and b) would backfire horribly by making us seem sensationalist.

1 Like

Alternative branding would make sense if we want to be trendy and eliminate the word “coin” from the name proper (like the recently announced libra).

EX. “ Safena, the safe coin and currency of the SAFE Network.”