So Indiana University has a new initiative to develop a “new–or at least a choerent” brand identity, and they have set aside a nice big ol’ budget in order to do this.
First, they changed from “Red & White” to “Cream & Crimson.” Because, you know, you just can’t have a crowd of people cheering for their home team when some of them are wearing RED, and the others are wearing CRIMSON. What might the rivals think, for heaven’s sake?
Now, though, NOW they have really done it. They have paid a design firm nearly $69,000 to create a new brand logo for I.U. And guess what! They DID IT! Much celebration and wahoooing in the streets! Huzzah!
Unfortunately, it looks, to my untrained eye, a hell of a lot like the OLD, non-$69,000 I.U. logo. I would say, in fact, that it looks exactly like the old I.U. logo. If you’re familiar with I.U.'s old logo, check out the new, $69,000 one at the link I posted below. I believe that is the OLD logo in the upper left corner, as opposed the new brand-spanking new one in the center of the page.
Eh? You’re impressed, aren’t you? I am, I know. Practically to the point to wondering what could be done, scholarship-wise, with nearly 70 grand.
The University of Maryland did the same thing a few years ago, and paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for a new logo – one that looks more “modern” or “forward-thinking.” Here’s what they came up with: Check out the spherical rendition of the Maryland state flag. Anyone can make the exact same bland logo in 2 minutes with a GIF of the flag and a basic graphics editing program. (the previous logo actually had an air of tradition to it, with family/state seals and what not, which most people thought was far better)
According to Barbara Winter in her book Making a Living Without a Job, Orville Redenbacher paid an agency $13,000 to come up with a name for his new product. They said, “We think you should call it Orville Redenbacher’s Gourmet Popping Corn.” Could have saved himseld the 13 grand by studying his driver’s license.
So the new one is in the box right above ‘Game Day Saturdays’, and the old one is the white one in the upper left corner?? They look the same to me, except one is white and one is red, errr. make that cream and crimson. Then again with a ‘U’ and an ‘I’, there’s only so much you can do.
Glad they changed it to crimson though. Now when the play the Badgers, I’ll be able to tell the fans wearing crimson from the fans wearing the UW’s color-Cardinal red. Wheww!!! :rolleyes:
See? Thank goodness forward-thinking I.U. officials foresaw this dilemma. I can’t imagine WHAT would happen, if the stadium were full of just a bunch of people wearing RED.
I am just so thankful I don’t have to worry about making these monumental decisions. Imagine the stress involved…“Crimson? Red? Hmmm. Crimson? I dunno, maybe RED? No, no, how could I be so stupid! CRIMSON is the best choice by far…”
And I would have loved to watch the process that went into the new design. Oh, the meetings they must have had! The deadlines! The stress! The competition amongst formerly-close designers, some of whom wanted Bright Crimson, some of whom wanted Deep Crimson. I can only imagine the strife that must have occurred.
The University of Iowa tried this a while ago. Our sports logo, the tiger hawk, is a beloved emblem–full of tradition and easily recognized in the world of college sports (if not particularly feared anymore…) Last year the yokels who have been ruining our sports decided the problem was not crap coaches…it was our logo! So they came out with a more “fearsome” and “pointy” logo that juuuust about everyone hated. Here is the only link I can find to the new one–it’s on the flag. Our old logo (and as it appears, our still current logo) is at the top of the page. linkey linkey
On the bright side: The beloved icon of our University, the gold dome is still being used as our University’s educational logo, even though it was thoughtlessly burned down by some idiot construction folk. It’s in the lower left corner
There is a clear, $70K difference between the two, as any cultured sophisticate can see. The serifs and upward strokes are much thinner in the new version. These changes give it lighter, more airy feeling that gives the impression of modern sensibilities rather than the stodgy collegiate feel of the previous version.
[/channelling]
Locally, Armstrong State College (now known as "Armstrong Atlantic State University :rolleyes: ) is known as the Pirates. Somebody got a bug up their ass that the logo (a side view of a “pirate” (like the one you see in those “Can you draw this pirate?” art contests)) was somehow racist!
They changed the mascot (and all logo-emblazoned merchandise) to the “Sting Rays”. In less than a year (and much expense) the idiots in charge relented and gave in to the students, both current and alumni, and changed everything back.
Call me cynical, but this reeks of a kickback. Or just plain stupidity. Never once did I see a group of protesting pirates marching outside the school.
“Arrrrrrr, mateys, she be a racist logo. It shivers me timbers, arrrrrrr”
my husband works for an ad firm.
It seems that the larger the company/customer, the more expensive something gets.
why?
because committee A needs to review it past committee B who needs to take a vote. Then committee A gives the ad firm a go ahead only to have committe B call to stop the presses, literally. In redesign, committee C decides that the logo should be red and not blue. Committes d-g need to decide specifically which shade of pantone red. Then Committe H decides that, really, the logo needs to be more ‘nostalgic’ and ‘needs to echo the original’ upon which committe A decides that after all, Sports Jock font is the way to go.
repeat ad nauseum.
Have design firm come up with 10 different designs. Have the President of clients firm pick out the original and “tweak” it.
or
have a college have a student design the logo. But the ad firm still needs to color seperate, send to presses, press check, make sure font is a true type style, etc, because the student isn’t familiar with the processes involved in getting a logo onto “real world” applications and the teacher sure isnt going to do it for free.
and a lot of the time, the prices quoted include printing costs (which are a huge chink of money).
I realize that ultimately it is the client that decides to pay for the logo (or waste money as the case may be) but I just wanted to let you know why you get $69,0000 price tags.
Developing a “coherent brand identity” is a huge amount of work.
It’s one of those things that your average person looking at the result says “A circle and a triangle? My four-year old could’ve done that”, but in fact there’s a massive amount of difficulty behind the scenes.
I can see how huge a deal it would be if we wanted to change to a whole new logo…in fact, I can’t even imagine the nightmare beaucratic process that would ensue, if, for instance, they wanted to change the logo to an “I” above a “U” or something like that.
But this logo has been in use here for years. Years and years and YEARS. Basically, they dusted it off and did a slight color shift. And I realize that the process described byBad News Baboon is exactly what has to happen, in the world of corporate logo stuff. It’s just that I look at that amount of money, and … Wow. That’s a LOT of cash.
I’m also a little irked that they managed to spend the money elsewhere, rather than contributing to their local economy. I suppose there is a good political rationale, if that’s not too much of an oxymoron. Heh.
