The key is that this really would be the official name and this is the name that will be used by astronomers in perpetuity.
Most educated persons know that these star naming companies have no official capacity. If the officially sanctioned name was available for a fee then you would have wealthy people willing to pay larger prices for the brightest stars. Also, keep in mind this will be operated by a non-profit organization on the order of the AAAS so people will know it's analogous to donating to a charity, with the accompanying tax deductibility status, unlike with the star naming companies.
Also since this is the official name, in the computer programs giving star locations these names for the stars would be listed along with their numerical designation. For example in the thread on sci.astro some astronomers who operated observatories or planetariums mentioned how disappointed or angry people became when the astronomers couldn't find "their" star in the star finding program or they couldn't locate it in the sky. With the IAU official designation the names would be included in the computer programs with accurate coordinates. You might also include a short biography of the person who named the star when you pulled up the star name.
Since these are the official designations of the stars you would want to include these names with any scientific publications discussing the star. It might be too long to include both the numerical designation and the personal name every time the star is mentioned in a paper, so you might use only the numerical name in the paper itself, but at the end give an acknowledgement to the person it's named after. It might be phrased for example like: "The authors wish to thank John T. Smith for supporting the further advancement of astronomy, and in particular our study of John T. Smith's star."
You could even have a greater premium being charged for stars that undergo the greatest study and receive the greatest mention in scientific publications. And you could have a notice sent, as part of the support fee, to the supporter whenever a paper appears discussing their star with a short description written at popular science level on why that study is important.
With a potential in flow I say in the hundreds of millions of dollars or more *yearly* to astronomy, I think most astronomers would be in favor of such a small acknowledgement at the end of their papers. And in absolutely the truest sense those supporters WILL be paying for that astronomers research since the total amount would go not only to building more observatories and instruments but also into supporting scientists research.
You might also allow the supporter to choose a star being studied by universities nearby. So when they receive acknowledgement of a paper studying their star they could go to open public viewing dates at the university's observatory and ask to see their star.


Bob Clark