Trader Joe’s makes a private-label mistake

Anyone who shops at Trader Joe’s probably has a favorite private-label item, whether it’s JosephsBrau beer made by Gordon Biersch, Small Organic Pizzas made by Amy’s, or Rocket Ship Crackers from Annie’s. Trader Joe’s has built much of its retail identity around a private‑label portfolio that looks and feels different. On a recent panel discussion published by RetailWire, the chain’s marketing team described its whimsical naming strategy: names such as This Strawberry Walks Into a Bar, Hold the Cone! Ice Cream Cones, Pound Plus, and Avocado’s Number Guacamole aren’t mistakes — they’re crafted to catch the customer’s eye and maybe make them smile. The logic? “We believe that grocery shopping can be fun, that it does not have to be a chore,” said one of the company’s podcast hosts on the Inside Trader Joe’s podcast. The naming strategy works on two fronts. First, it underlines Trader Joe’s positioning as a grocer with personality — less warehouse‑warehouse, more friendly treasure hunt. “Trader Joe’s private labels perfectly reflect its playful, positive brand,” per RetailWire. “These whimsical names differentiate this line, especially compared to other private labels whose simple, logical product names seem more designed for SEO.” Second, the playful names create engagement: Shoppers might pause at the shelf, read the pun, and feel a moment of delight. From the company’s own transcript: “If putting a fun name or even a really strangely long descriptive name of a product on the package helps you find a little bit of fun in your grocery shopping experience, we’re all for that,” Insider Trader Joe’s Co-Host Tara Miller said. What’s in a Trader Joe’s product name? Of course, naming is only half the story. On the podcast episode devoted to the topic of product names, the hosts shared that the Trader Joe’s internal process is deliberate. The team distinguishes between “very descriptive” names (e.g., Mandarin Orange Chicken or Cauliflower Gnocchi) and “whimsical” names that carry meaning and flavor beyond mere description (e.g., Midnight Moo chocolate syrup, or Just the Lobsters). They link the whimsy to the product story: for example, Avocado’s Number Guacamole is a playful nod to Avogadro’s number, to communicate “many avocados per product.” The naming tells the story, while helping the shopper subconsciously think: “This is different, this is fun, this is Trader Joe’s.” Trader Joe’s numbers to know Store count: As of October 2025, Trader Joe’s operates 608 stores across the U.S. Source: ScrapeHero Market position: About 1.6 % of U.S. supermarket and grocery-store industry revenue.Source: IBISWorld Revenue: One estimate puts its annual revenue at around US$16.5 billion. Source: GoRick Expansion plans: In 2024, TJ’s monthly YoY visit growth consistently outpaced the wider grocery category at +8.7 % (versus ~+3.0 %).Source: Placer.ai Store size and SKUs: Trader Joe’s stores are relatively small (around 10,000 square feet) and carry a much more limited number of SKUs (roughly 4,000) compared to large supermarket chains.Source: Acquired Trader Joe’s sued over product name and other product similarities However, there may be a limit to how far playful naming and private‑label positioning can go. A recent lawsuit may test the line between creative private label and unlawful imitation. In October 2025, The J.M. Smucker Company filed suit in federal court in Ohio against Trader Joe’s, alleging that its new “Crustless Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam Sandwiches” mimic Smucker’s flagship frozen snack brand Uncrustables. Smucker claims the rounding, crimped‑edge shape, blue packaging, and “bite” imagery all combine to produce consumer confusion. The retailer is accused of leaning on the established brand equity of Uncrustables rather than making a distinct item, as explained on lawcommentary.com. From Trader Joe’s standpoint, the question becomes: When does being inspired by a category veer into copying? Its private‑label strategy rests on being “different,” yet aligned with shopper needs — value, novelty, and curation. The Smucker lawsuit challenges whether Trader Joe’s version is sufficiently distinct. As one legal commenter noted via AP News: “For the brand owner, what is the point of having this brand if I’m not going to enforce it?” More on retail and bankruptcy: Walmart store closing, auctioning off laptops and flat screen TVs Home Depot CEO soundWalmart store closing, auctioning off laptops and flat screen TVs – TheStreets the alarm on a growing problem Famous restaurant files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy What’s at stake is not just this product, but Trader Joe’s broader private‑label business model. Private labels thrive by giving retailers greater control (cost, margins, exclusivity) and by allowing the retailer’s brand (Trader Joe’s) to shine. According to analysis, Trader Joe’s success demonstrates that “authenticity can be a powerful differentiator,” and that its quirky naming plus curated merchandise delivers a connection beyond price alone, writes Shah Mohammad on his Substack. Trader Joe’s walks a fine line with product names But the risk in pushing boundaries is dilution of clarity (do consumers know what they’re buying?) and legal risk (is the company going too far?). As one commenter on Retail Wire put it: “If product names become too clever without any clarity about what’s inside the package… the result can be frustration.” In many ways, the story of Trader Joe’s now mirrors the evolution of private‑label retail generally: from baseline low‑cost store brand, to premium “house brand” with its own identity, to a label that courts emotion, discovery, and brand personality. Trader Joe’s has arguably been ahead of that curve with its naming conventions and limited assortment model. But as it stretches further, launching items that look dangerously close to marquee national brands, its creative strategy encounters a hard boundary: intellectual property, consumer confusion, and brand reputation. “Trader Joe’s use of funny names creates a strong connection with shoppers and makes them laugh or at least smile,” says retail analyst Bruce Widner. “This may differentiate the grocer from others that offer more functional names, but it does not mean they should play with fire from an intellectual property perspective.” For the shopper in the aisle, the result is still interesting. One moment they smile at This Pumpkin Walks Into A Bar, and the next, a frozen sandwich’s packaging may prompt the question: “Is that the same as the national brand? Or is it Trader Joe’s own take?” As the lawsuit plays out, it may force Trader Joe’s to better balance fun and distinctiveness with compliance and clarity.