Add Comment Watch Thread
So reading through Gizmodo earlier, I see a "design" tag and of course read it. All these people who bitch about paying more than 2 or the lower range of 3 digits for logos and branding should learn a thing or two about the worth of an identity(and this was brought up recently with that Facebook posts crowd sourcing a company re-brand or whatever).

http://stocklogos.com/topic/famous-logo-designs-and-how-much-did-they-cost

Now obviously certain things don't relate(huge corporations vs. upstarts...though examples of companies paying bottom dollar during their upstart are there) but identity is hugely important, and a grand portion of people understand that concept.

Who knows, maybe your next identity/branding job will be for the next Nike? Insane what gets paid out on some of these rebrands(JCP and GAP's recent rebrands are ugly and all, but that ugly simplicity gets rewarded very well) though.

  • Johnny Keko said about 10 months ago

    I can already see potential clients referencing that article "hey man design me a logo, i love nike's logo, here's 35 dollars" lol

  • A.Merkison said about 10 months ago

    Johnny Keko said:I can already see potential clients referencing that article "hey man design me a logo, i love nike's logo, here's 35 dollars" lol

    At lease Phil Knight had the conscience to give her $600k worth of stock in the company after the fact.

    And yeah, I can see people doing that too...but examples like the BBC and their horribly plain logo paying out as much as it did(huge corporation and all yadda yadda, and yes I know lots of planning and revision likely went into it as per usual with all identity branding) are still eye opening.

  • Swillhouse Saints said about 10 months ago

    Im gonna reference that BBC logo next time a client tries to cheap out.

  • Anthony Smith said about 10 months ago

    The way they've worded that article is bullshit, trying to pass off these huge prices as exclusive to the logo itself. Count how many times they use the word 'logo' compared to 'branding', despite the fact that almost every single example in their list is the price of the companies identity as a whole (theyve not stated otherwise in any example). I think those millions of dollars spent are spot on for all those companies making billions.

  • cmeyers said about 10 months ago

    Anthony Smith said:The way they've worded that article is bullshit, trying to pass off these huge prices as exclusive to the logo itself. Count how many times they use the word 'logo' compared to 'branding', despite the fact that almost every single example in their list is the price of the companies identity as a whole (theyve not stated otherwise in any example). I think those millions of dollars spent are spot on for all those companies making billions.

    yep. i still love the story behind the next branding.


    3:09.

  • A.Merkison said about 10 months ago

    Anthony Smith said:The way they've worded that article is bullshit, trying to pass off these huge prices as exclusive to the logo itself. Count how many times they use the word 'logo' compared to 'branding', despite the fact that almost every single example in their list is the price of the companies identity as a whole (theyve not stated otherwise in any example). I think those millions of dollars spent are spot on for all those companies making billions.

    They actually did make a point to say the listed prices include branding unless otherwise stated on the Pepsi caption. Unless it's a widely known example(Nike, Facebook, etc.) of just the logo design, financial records open to public record would only record the branding as a whole(unless 2 different entities did branding and logo separately) and not likely itemized as such. They make note of the Glassgow Goodwill Games logo being logo only pricing, as well as known examples of Nike, and Rand's work. Twitter, Google and Coke were other examples of logo only(Coke's branding has changed a million times over, but the logo has remained the same, etc etc). They have 14 examples and of those 14 they show exclusive logo work on 6 or 7. I wouldn't say that's "almost every single one."

    Obviously Accenture and BP are branding jobs, but that's still a very hefty amount of money on branding and drives the point home how important it is.

  • Anthony Smith said about 10 months ago

    A.Merkison said:They actually did make a point to say the listed prices include branding unless otherwise stated on the Pepsi caption.

    I know.

    That is the first and last mention of branding being part of the price in the entire article, despite more than half of the examples being fucking massive branding jobs. Deliberately misleading, in my opinion, resulting in unfortunate comments like this

    Swillhouse Saints said:Im gonna reference that BBC logo next time a client tries to cheap out.

    Didnt read the rest of your post. Life is too short. Sorry. Thanks for sharing though!

  • Johnny Keko said about 10 months ago

    Anthony Smith said:
    Didnt read the rest of your post. Life is too short. Sorry.

    Made me lol!

  • tidyink said about 10 months ago

    To be fair, although the BBC re-design was simple, it saved them a small fortune. They dropped 3 colours out of the design that significantly reduced their printing costs.

  • tidyink said about 10 months ago

    Also was 'accenture' really $100,000,0000? That's gotta be bullshit.

  • Tim said about 10 months ago

    haha holy crap, these logos arent that great to be that expensive.

  • Matt Borchert said about 10 months ago

    Tim said:haha holy crap, these logos arent that great to be that expensive.

    Those are some of the most iconic logos ever produced...many of those are case studies in logo design classes of how to do things right.

    The Accenture price tag also incorporates a huge marketing strategy...not all of those numbers are correct. For example the person who did the NIke logo got a very large payment down the road when nike blew up.

  • Who is Ryan C. said about 9 months ago



    This shit should've been $0

  • A.Merkison said about 9 months ago

    Matt Borchert said:
    Tim said:haha holy crap, these logos arent that great to be that expensive.

    Those are some of the most iconic logos ever produced...many of those are case studies in logo design classes of how to do things right.

    The Accenture price tag also incorporates a huge marketing strategy...not all of those numbers are correct. For example the person who did the NIke logo got a very large payment down the road when nike blew up.

    Eh, she charged Phil Knight $35 for the logo. She wrote him a bill out, it isn't what he offered her. The logo was for his original company (Blue Ribbon Sports) and Phil wasn't wild about it but said he thought he could grow to like it. 3 years after Nike went public(1983) she was invited to a company lunch where he presented her with a diamond ring and an envelope with a number of stocks in the company inside. So it isn't like she ever received more cash out of it in the traditional sense. She herself said the gift was not expected as she invoiced Knight $35 and he paid it already, fulfilling the monetary obligation. She worked with the company for a few years after the design was done as a designer, but she never made a dime off the logo in earnest outside the original amount. The gift was only a bonus.

  • xic said about 9 months ago

    Who is Ryan C. said:

    This shit should've been $0

    word

    and when will Pepsi ever stay with one logo design , really liked the old one they had a few years back

    and hey grab this book, this is a life saver http://www.logodesignlovebook.com/

  • cmeyers said about 9 months ago

    Tim said:haha holy crap, these logos arent that great to be that expensive.

    show me great logos/branding.

  • Sam Weinberg said about 9 months ago

    Wow, I love Melbourne's logo. Didn't know they had one.

  • Serji Gold said about 9 months ago

    Browsed the website further and stumbled upon this:
    http://stocklogos.com/contests
    Makes me want to cringe. $200 for the winning logo.

  • Matt Borchert said about 9 months ago

    Serji Gold said:Browsed the website further and stumbled upon this:

    http://stocklogos.com/contests
    Makes me want to cringe. $200 for the winning logo.

    Looking at the quality of submissions they won't even get their $200 worth haha.

  • Serji Gold said about 9 months ago

    Matt Borchert said:
    Serji Gold said:Browsed the website further and stumbled upon this:

    http://stocklogos.com/contests
    Makes me want to cringe. $200 for the winning logo.

    Looking at the quality of submissions they won't even get their $200 worth haha.

    Indeed! I can imagine some users who tirelessly keep submitting their work to as many contests as possible and what their compensation turns out to be.

  • chad manzo said about 9 months ago

    cmeyers said:
    Tim said:haha holy crap, these logos arent that great to be that expensive.

    show me great logos/branding.

Sign Up

Forgot Your Password?