There's something very appealing to me about people who name their companies after themselves. Ling's cars, Prusa Research, Linus Media Group. Maybe I'm only remembering the good examples, but when you put yourself out there, it seems like there is a strong incentive to not fuck up your reputation.
The 19th century feel it lends may also be a part of it, and is also not accidental: the naming scheme originates from the times before the modern corporation, where no isolation from liability meant a failed business could easily leave the founder on the street (but loans were also much less accessible). Not much to lose further, then, is there?
> There's something very appealing to me about people who name their companies after themselves. Ling's cars, Prusa Research, Linus Media Group. Maybe I'm only remembering the good examples, but when you put yourself out there, it seems like there is a strong incentive to not fuck up your reputation.
So it would seem, but companies can and do survive their founders, and at that point they are no different than any other. Not to mention that founders can be motivated by reputation in an idiosyncratic manner.
