“Although Davidson left Nike, in September 1983, Knight invited her to a company lunch. There, he presented her with a diamond ring engraved with the swoosh, and Nike stock in an amount that remains a secret. Of the gift, Davidson says, “this was something rather special for Phil to do, because I originally billed him and he paid that invoice.”

There IS value in logos/branding.

You make a valid point about companies making their logos work. Absolutely, but that’s not to say a poorly designed logo can’t act against what the business culture is trying to achieve. Logos help to identify and differentiate. If they were all standard logotypes, our first impression of brands would be almost exactly the same.

Jessamyn,

…they are not just buying a little logo to throw on their envelopes, business cards and other products…

They are investing in corporate branding.

Very true, which is why I believe it’s wrong to design without the promise of fair compensation.

Dina,

I agree with you. It sounds as if Jessamyn is underpricing herself. Thanks for responding to both Jess and Thomas in such depth. I appreciate your time.

Don,

It’s interesting to read both the positives and negatives you list on 99designs. There’s a great post (and discussion in the comments) on the Logo Factor here: Are logo design contests legal? I’ve yet to see any provide a definite answer.

First off 99designs have a shady way of charging a contest holder. They say the cost will be 37 credits but it isn’t until you’ve gone through the whole process of filling in the sign up forms, describing your project, that you learn a credit is really just a sugar coated dollar.
If it costs 37 dollars to hold a contest why don’t they state right at the beginning it cost 37 dollars……

There’s a good chance, as happened with me, you will see a brilliant concept submitted by someone with absolutely no graphic design skills. If you have any scruples you won’t be able to use the concept. That hurts.

The designers can be quite treacherous. They’ll see a great concept submitted by someone else. and then they’ll create strongly derivative designs and PM links to them

If you are a softy, like me, you’ll waste a lot of time posting comments to designers who aren’t very good. For example should a contest holder really have to explain what kerning is to a “designer”

Generally the fonts, used in entries, are freebies. That perfect font could be just a few dollars away……

Cheers Don

A) LIke many small start ups I am on a very, very tight budget and I know from experience that a fancy logo is not critical to my business succeeding. Most of my competitors have wordmarks created, for free, at their local print shop.

B) Based on my EXTENSIVE research if you have less than five hundred dollars to spend ,on a logo, then your best chance of getting a logo, you’ll love, is from 99 designs.

C) I feel no guilt in running a contest because let’s face it why do most of the people enter the contests. They do it because because designing is fun. That’s right FUN.

D) The contests are self policing. If one of the contestants sees someone else entering a stolen/doctored icon they are quick to point it out.

BTW I am extremely happy with the logo I ended up with.

Cheers Don

And all the other companies you mentioned, GE, IBM, etc. . . having a consistent, recognizable logo no doubt helps them, but really, they’re known for their products, and any consistent logo would have done. Shell Oil could just as well have been Apple Oil, or Future Oil, Noble Gas, or whatever.

Ritz’s logo, okay, you’re right. Well chosen (perhaps because they went with something pretty obvious, symbols of royalty and all).

Nike’s logo (regardless of how it was arrived at) is, I think, unusual in how well it really does convey, just visually, what the brand’s about, and given that we’re talking apparel here, it’s worth noting that it does look good on a pair of sneakers.

Target’s logo is a strange case, too. I don’t think it’s inherently better than anything else they may have picked, but they’ve really done something with what it in their recent commercials.

(I think you’re point, Dina, about a professional graphic designer providing you the right files and formats is also well taken.)

My argument, though, is that there’s better, more meaningful things to pay a graphic designer for than agonizing about a logo. I’m standing by my assertion that consumers could care less about logos, but if you have evidence to the contrary, I’d listen. I just think that when they do SEEM to care about a logo, as in the case of Mac users who put the Apple logo on their bumper, it’s really because they care about the product, or the cultural memes about the product (or maybe in the case of cars or handbags, the status a brand conveys), and their affection for a logo is a secondary attachment.

None of which is to say that a good designer can’t do a lot for a business–layout ads and other forms of communication, develop signage, etc. I have a great respect for graphic designers and what they do. I just question whether a corporate logo is the best use of their skills.

And it’s a question of proportion. If you’re a small ma-and-pop, maybe a $500 for a logo is kind of extreme. On the other hand, if you’re launching a new company and spending millions or tens of millions on marketing, well, it seems stupid to ONLY spend $500 to see what a professional can do for you and your logo.

I agree with you that there are many, many crappy logos out there. Some of them are probably done by professionals, but I’ll bet a lot of them aren’t. I just don’t think you can badmouth, er, lump ALL logos into the “useless” category.

As an editor of a magazine about furniture, you write about lots of design and trends and whatnot that your readers are interested in, and your job is to sell magazines. If you changed the masthead every issue, which is essentially your logo, it wouldn’t be recognizable on the newsstand, and sales would suffer. If you went from a glossy, full color perfect-bound publication to black and white, copied, and stapled at the top left, your readers wouldn’t take you at all seriously. You have to look like your customer. Dress for success.

First of all, it’s SERIF, not sarif. Secondly, italics is not universally youthful.

One can’t assume that all consumers don’t care about a company’s logo. I think it’s part of the entire branding package. It gives a visual clue as to the type of company it is.

If Apple’s apple graphic were a soft pencil drawing, would you think of it as a technology company? No, it would look more like a food company, or something to do with education perhaps.

IBM’s logo reminds me of data bits, which was central to their business when that icon was created.

For Shell Oil, the shell does represent what the company is about in a nutshell: oil reserves throughout the world are under water, in shale fields created by millions of years of crap on the sea floor (simply put!).

Ritz Carlton’s lion doesn’t say anything about the hotel business, but it does convey royalty, excellent service, and the ultimate in understated tastefulness. Contrast that with the Super 8 logo, whose logo is equally unconcerned with implying a place to spend the night. It’s yellow and red colors and homey feel, make it look much less exclusive and much less expensive a place to stay than the Ritz.

GE does have a typographic logo. Even though it’s fairly simple, it is always presented consistently. The cursive GE in the circle mark looks to me subtly like the wires in a light bulb, which is what made them.

The logo embodies the company’s promise to the consumer, as well as its history and possibly its future.

Anyway, look, I’m not saying that a company always has to hire a graphic designer to have an effective logo. (May the Design Gods not strike me dead!) There are a gazillion solutions out in the naked world. What I am saying is that sometimes it is efficient to hire a pro, since the designer, ultimately an artist, business person and marketer themselves, understands what a logo is supposed to do, how it will be used over time, what file formats will prove most useful for all the various media a logo could be presented in, etc., etc., etc. There are many, many variables that have to be considered.

People hire a pro to do something they either don’t want to do or can’t do. The problem is that they don’t always know they can’t do it until they do it poorly. You can get logos out there for $10. This is like shopping at Walmart for a business suit. It’ll look like a suit, but it won’t be anything special, it won’t fit right, and it’s so cheaply made that it’ll fall apart after a few wearings. Which doesn’t mean you have to go to Neiman’s ($$$$$) when Nordstom’s house brand ($$$) will do.

So, more food for thought for you. Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts. I’ve been trying to cement my own arguments for hiring a designer. This has been a good exercise.

–d

Regardless of the monetary (or other) value of the reward, it’s still spec work for all the folks whose designs weren’t chosen. And if there’s no cash changing hands, what is the value of the reward, in this case?

Thanks for the insight into how you determine your pricing. It’s always interesting to hear how others do it.

Have you looked recently at the logo design packages offered by some of the inexpensive online logo mills? You might want to reconsider your pricing for the small and medium-sized business. It seems awfully underpriced to me. Don’t sell yourself short! These clients will be using your design to represent their company for years to come.

Haha, on the other hand, you’re probably working right now, while I have time to fritter away on blog posts… (one must have a sense of humor…)

–d

My reason for posting is, after reading several posts discussing design worth vs. what the market will pay, I thought I may offer some tips to get a fair price. For starters, I meet with my prospective client to discuss their needs and feelings for their logo design. During this time I ask many questions about their business to assess their size and potential growth. This enables me to divide each client into 3 basic categories that I use to determine pricing. Most of my clients fall into the medium corporate size. For me, this means I won’t do any logo design for less than $350. Each client I quote an individual price at $350 or above depending on how intricate their needs are, how demanding I feel they may be based on the initial meeting and what I sense they are would be willing to pay based on the initial meeting. I usually provide 5 designs and then bill $40 per hour for alterations.
I also have my large corp. groupings will bill out in the $1000+ range and small entrepreneur which usually earns $150-$250 and payment in favors, such as a local restaurant owner will throw in a free meal for me and a guest.

My big selling point if a client balks at a quote is to explain to them that they are not just buying a little logo to throw on their envelopes, business cards and other products…

They are investing in corporate branding.

Using this method, I have never lost a client due to pricing and always received what I felt was a fair price for my time and creativity.
For what it’s worth and hope it helps.
Jessamyn

(Really? XCI? ‘Cos you make the same crappy sitcoms/fried chicken/music that used to be made by X Company Inc.)

Who cares, except a few marketing execs and clueless CEOs? An engaging commercial, event reach-out, or even a better product? Sounds smart. Spending $100 on a logo? Sounds like you overpaid.

Which is not to say that graphic designers don’t have worthwhile skills. Have them make your ads appealing and readable. Have them photoshop your burgers so they look fat and juicy and hot, not flat and dried and exhausted. Pay them what they’re worth for work you need done, and forget about the logo.