After reading just about half of this thread and carefully considering the usefulness of branding and logos I have come to the conclusion that TJ is an ignorant idiot.
I think that if there were lots of colours including red before Coke, and only one colour after it, then Coke could be safely credited with the red Santa ubiquity that we see today 🙂
Perhaps Santa altered his branding to benefit from the mental association with Coke?
GrahamS: When McDonalds produces a new burger, happy meal, wrap or whatever then I don't rush in to try it. Instead I use my past experiences of the McDonalds BRAND to decide I shouldn't bother with the new OBJECT.
This is similar to the Shimano XTR seatpost example I mentioned before, which Teej conveniently ignored. On the basis of the Shimano BRAND you can make an assessment of an OBJECT you don't have direct access to, and decide whether or not to buy it, or to consider buying it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7152054.stm
No idea if that works or not, but thats just one reference to the origins of the red santa. Red was the most poplular colour to represent the character, from about the 4th century it appears. Looks like you cant credit CC with making the other colours redundent, it was aleady the most popular colour. CC just made it so sooner.
Molgrips - I am perfectly prepared to accept that other world views exist - and ones I find incomprehensible. It would be nice if other folk would accept the same
however I have been repeatedly told on this thread that my world view is impossible and does not exist. That ignoring marketing and branding is impossible, that basing purchases on what something is not what it is marketed as is impossible
really - do you think everyone is such a slave to marketing that they have no free will? All decisions are only made because of marketing?
Or as I do that we can do our best to ignore these pernicious influences and to disregard marketing and branding. It really is possible to do this.
Molgrips - I am perfectly prepared to accept that other world views exist - and ones I find incomprehensible. It would be nice if other folk would accept the same
This has nothing to do with 'world view'. It has to do with the definition of a word, and the consequent implications of that.
really - do you think everyone is such a slave to marketing that they have no free will?
You are absolutely miles off the point with that.
Furthermore, you've got absolutely no idea how people work. Not surprising given the autistic traits you display. Just accept that you're not too good at this stuff.
Even furthermore still - marketing is not necessarily pernicious. If it's completely honest and accurate information, how is it bad?
This was designed to tap into the average American male's obsession with female breasts - in itself an expression of "mother" in the gestalt subconcious of that group.
[img] 
[/img]
Strange that such crappy food should be such a big seller...
Molgrips - why can you not stop to think about what I have said. Definitions of a word - what one?
Ach well - deffo bored now.
i do feel sorry for the folk with such closed minds. I accept you see the world as you do. You will not accept I see the world as I do.
My motives are not as yours
and it's Molgrips versus TJ.. the Battle Royale.. will there ever be an end to this thread..? Can it end constructively..?
or will it be a battle to the bitter end..?
[img] 
[/img]
That ignoring marketing and branding is impossible,
No one has said it is impossible, I think many people living in slums all over the world, make their decisions largely independently of marketing. You however, admit you however large avoid 'branded' clothes. So you must be paying some attention to branding, not ignoring it. If you truly ignored it, you would, by sheer statistics have a number of branded items.
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Came on here as it had lots of posts and I thought it might be quite an interesting discussion. How wrong I was. The usual suspects ruining a thread as usual
[img] 
[/img]
FWIW, I thought this one was good.
[img] 
[/img]
My wife avoids Nestlé products
shes is correct and very moral been doing the same for decades
i do feel sorry for the folk with such closed minds
What on Earth are you on about TJ? Just about everyone on this thread holds opposing views to you on this issue; are you saying we're all wrong? See, you've not actually proven yourself right, quite the opposite in fact. You bang on about well I don't really know what really it's such nonsense, and dismiss graphic designers as unnecessary, yet when you are presented with an argment which basically rubbishes you r own, you are too egotistical and close-minded to accept that you are in fact wrong.
Again, look at London Transport as an example as a 'braynd', then tell me that all that design etc isn't worth it. You numpty, you're talking out of your smelly bottom.
Jeeze; I have no formal training in design, everything I know I have learned myself, yet I still know what braynds are and the importance for branding and logos within our society. It;'s a form of visual language you are clearly illiterate in, yet instead of just shutting up and accepting your own ignorance, and possibly even flipping learning something, you've gone on some crusade to prove just how right you are.
Your argument = no point in developing language or owt might as well point at stuff and just grunt 'ug' at it.
Ooh you've annoyed me today you have.
And you cooduv had the likes of Binners and others, what know stuff about stuff, showing you round the wonderful world of logo and braynd design, but instead you've just hijacked this thread to satisfy your own ego. You nasty man.
I think you should be banned. 😐
No I'm sorry but ffs, eh?
You've upset me, TJ. 😥
CharlieMungus - MemberYou however, admit you however large avoid 'branded' clothes.
I did not say that. I said I own hardly any. Not the same thing. you continue to claim motivations for me that I do not have.
Jeeze; I have no formal training in desing
FWIW, I think you do a fantastic impression of Des 😉
[img] 
[/img]
I agree with Elfin. Mostly. Except for the "smelly bottom" thing.
... and being upset, and that...
[img] 
[/img]
FWIW, I think you do a fantastic impression of Des
No don't Clubber it's not funny. I love the world of design and art and stuff, and along comes TJ rubbishes stuff that I and many others enjoy pees on our bonfire. With no thought for who he upsets.
It's just bang out of order.
Saying that people like myself, Binners, Winegums etc are essentially 'worthless' and our efforts are redundant, well, that's really insulting.
What a horrible mayn. 🙁
[img] 
[/img]
More rubbish 'branding' which doesn't convey anything useful, or mean anything in particular 😀
[img] 
[/img]
Elfinsafety - Member
No don't Clubber it's not funny. I love the world of design and art and stuff, and along comes TJ rubbishes stuff that I and many others enjoy pees on our bonfire. With no thought for who he upsets.
I can only assume that this is a brilliantly self aware post. Chapeau 🙂
Elf - sorry you have missed my point. All I am saying is what I do and that many others do the same. I have been told its impossible to do so.
Logos, brands and marketing mean much less and are much less effective than those in the industry claim. Thsi whole thing started because people were claiming thaqt the fonts used hold some sort of deep meaning as do logos
What I attempt to do is to minimise the effects of marketing and branding upon my purchasing decisions. I try to buy things for waht they are - not for waht they are marketed as
i have repeatedly been told that this is impossible and that I cannot live my life like this. apparently it is impossible to ignore the effects of market and branding to any degree.
too many folk are unable to accept that other world views exist.
TJ + Molgrips + Elfinsafety
Just make up...
[img] 
[/img]
this is the first time you;ve said 'minimise' you've spent nearly 900 posts saying they have 'no effect' on you.
Logos, brands and marketing mean much less and are much less effective than those in the industry claim.
You keep saying this but what claims are they making and what proof have you that it isn't so, other than your own assumption based on yours and your circle of friends' experience?
I did not say that. I said I own hardly any. Not the same thing. you continue to claim motivations for me that I do not have.
OK then,
1)Do you buy branded goods?
2)Do you avoid buying branded goods?
I assume the answer to the first question is no. So to me, two possibilities arise
1) that the answer to the second is 'yes'
2) By lucky coincidence, in your brand blindness you have never by chance, bought branded items.
Given that say '1' is not true, i can only see that '2' is true. or is there another option?
Molgrips - why can you not stop to think about what I have said. Definitions of a word - what one?
For fk's sake!
The definition of the word 'BRAND'.
I am thinking very carefully about everything you say, that's why I'm trying to have this discussion. That's how I have realised that you and I are actually talking about different things.... You've apparently not figured this out yet.
wwaswas - Memberthis is the first time you;ve said 'minimise' you've spent nearly 900 posts saying they have 'no effect' on you.
No it is not.
totally bored now.
I have been trying to tell TJ about the difference between brand and logo for the last 21 pages....
Seriously TJ, As Fred says, visual communication is a really fascinating subject. You've fallen into the reactionary trap of thinking all 'branding' exists to satisfy consumerist capitalism and punt stuff to people who don't need it. That's an incredibly short-sighted view.
[b]ALL[/b] communication utilises pointers and visual cues
For example, this:
[img] 
[/img]
owes as much to geometry and maths as it does aesthetics. But its an object of beauty nonetheless. You can appreciate the thought that has gone into it, surely
By dismissing it all, you're greatly narrowing your own horizons I'm afraid fella
[img] 
[/img]
To be fair to TJ, given that he forgot about an incident where a airline damaged his bike and was preparing to defend them untill another forum member reminded him of the incident, he probably can't remember when he was influenced by marketting gumpf, therefore in his own mind he is right.
Molgrips - I am perfectly prepared to accept that other world views exist - and ones I find incomprehensible. It would be nice if other folk would accept the same
I am perfectly prepared to state that I find TJ completely incomprehensible 😀
however I have been repeatedly told on this thread that my world view is impossible and does not exist.
That ignoring marketing and branding is impossible, that basing purchases on what something is not what it is marketed as is impossible
You're stretching it here TJ.
Clearly you have your world view. So that view exists.
We simply think that the practicalities of such a stark and absolute view makes it impossibly fragile and delicate.
In modern western society we are permanently surrounded by brand imagery everywhere you look. It is simply not possible to escape that imagery and still function in our society.
You have decided that such information is worthless, so you [u]try[/u] to ignore its influence and [u]try[/u] to make your purchasing decisions based purely on properties of the OBJECT itself.
In my opinion, that is often a laudable goal (though not always as I've tried to explain, as often I actively want to consider the BRAND).
No one questions that this is your view. (or any variant of it therein).
The only question has been over your very bold assertion that you have achieved this enlightened state with 100% success and that, despite being aware of brands, they have never, and will never, have any influence, however slight, on any of your concious or unconscious decisions.
Now tell me, have you eaten at a McDonalds? 😀
Seriously TJ, As Fred says, visual communication is a really fascinating subject. You've fallen into the reactionary trap of thinking all 'branding' exists to satisfy consumerist capitalism and punt stuff to people who don't need it. That's an incredibly short-sighted view.ALL communication utilises pointers and visual cues
Very well put.
Things are branded to achieve a goal...
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
them commies knew all about brand management;
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Do you ever wonder how you got by before RED BULL came along?
and for what it's worth the very idea that you avoid ProPlus (other products are available, but for some reason you chose to mention that one, rather the e.g. caffeine tablets, doesn't sound very independent) because you think it might look bad popping pills? That's just laughable, Do you really expect us to believe that someone as intelligent and resourceful as yourself in incapable of finding a way to take a small tablet like that, without drawing attention to your self?
No molgrips _ I understand what a brand is and accept the definition you gave. However I separate this from what the object is. This si the key point
Charlie - once again - your assumptions are wrong. You contineu to ascribe to me motivations and actions that I do not have nor have I claimed to have
What I said was I hardly have any branded [i]clothes[/i]. I made no comment on actively serching to or avoiding buying them.
> My wife avoids Nestlé productsJunkyard: shes is correct and very moral been doing the same for decades
Sadly TJ can't avoid Nestlé, because doing so would mean he was influenced by the brand. Bummer eh?
What I attempt to do is to minimise the effects of marketing and branding upon my purchasing decisions. I try to buy things for waht they are - not for waht they are marketed as
There ya go again, Mr OpenMind. As in the case of Shimano, as in the case of McDonalds, as in the case of Ariel, etc etc etc., the brand is a useful tool to evaluate a product. You claim to minimize the effect of branding, but I say to you (again) that this is not always sensible, as the brand allows you to make a purchasing decision in the absence of complete information, such as when buying secondhand, or by the internet.
Charlie - once again - your assumptions are wrong. You contineu to ascribe to me motivations and actions that I do not have nor have I claimed to have
well tell me what the reason is then.
Also tell me why you mentioned ProPlus specifically?
What I said was I hardly have any branded clothes
Please post a pic of some of your outfits!
mastiles_fanylion - MemberI have been trying to tell TJ about the difference between brand and logo for the last 21 pages....
and I understand.
Seriously TJ, As Fred says, visual communication is a really fascinating subject. You've fallen into the reactionary trap of thinking all 'branding' exists to satisfy consumerist capitalism and punt stuff to people who don't need it.
No I haven't.
Jeezo.
