... Would be confusing.
Names matter. Most simply, we use them to identify things. And therefore, names are symbolic of identity.
My sister got married in April, and it was certainly poignant for my parents to witness the transfer from Ross to Koning. (I use the word 'transfer,' which sounds rather transactional, because I don't intend to assign any particular value +/- to the name change. It is significant, though.) I've thought about keeping my last name when I marry, although there's significance in doing that as well. I certainly don't want to offend anyone. But I've spend 31 years building this identity, and I'm sorta attached to it.
Companies go through this all the time, and there's a lot bundled into those names. Trust, integrity, quality, social consciousness, innovation. Or, on the flip side (and especially recently), corruption, dishonesty, greed, incompetence.
I get really irked when I talk with B2B marketers who feel devalued and misunderstood. (It's a big club.) Same old story... company leadership believes growth stems from sales, and sales result from a strong products. If sales are lagging, the product is the culprit. Where does marketing fit in? No where. Marketing makes fun little leave-behinds for the sales folks.
The product *may be* the culprit. But, let's talk about the packaging. I love this video, Microsoft Redesigns the i-Pod. (No need to elaborate once you've watched it.) Let's talk about reputation. Philip Morris. Enron. Or even less volatile examples, like Pepsi and Advanced Micro Devices. Strong companies, good products. Not "the best."
Names are more than labels. Companies are more than products. If you believe that public opinion is important, you simply can't dismiss the value of your brand.