[Closed] Clever logo... (well I thought so anyway)

By ignoring you can't make a fully informed decision, can you TJ?
[img] [/img]

See the thing i'm struggling with is that you say you are able to disregard it, I figure this means that you actually do disregard it, otherwise the statement is meaningless.

so when you answer the compound question

Are you saying that you disregard it but it does have an effect?

But then with regard to ignoring the marketing, When I ask if ignoring it means it has no effect you also so 'No' which means that it does have an effect.

you can see how this might cause some confusion, for in the one post you have given 2 seemingly contradictory answers

Are you saying that you disregard it but it does have an effect?

No - I am not saying that I disregard it but it does have an effect.

next question

Charlie - it means I am aware of the effects and chose to ignore them or intentionally allow for the effects to ensure I make a choice free from bias

but means they have no effect doesn't it?
no

Well played Charlie I do believe you just got TJ to either admit that it does have an effect on him (and is therefore useful and valuable). OR possibly that it doesn't have an effect on him because he is impervious.

I'm not entirely sure which, but either way it means he is wrong 😀

No - I am not saying that I disregard it but it does have an effect.

Are you saying you disregard it?

ooops double

Charlie: it's quite simple: he ignores it completely. He cannot ignore it completely though, but it does not effect him. And he recognises those effects on him and compensates for them so they didn't happen. Thus he is impervious to branding, but not impervious.

😥

g'night all

- it means I am aware of the effects and chose to ignore them or intentionally allow for the effects to ensure I make a choice free from bias

I think I'm fairly inured to marketing/branding - but in fact I'd specifically NOT buy an item with massive logos on it and I avoid stuff that's "on trend" generally

I can't claim to be free from bias because of the above

If I wanted to be genuinely free from bias I'd have to quantify the effect any branding/marketing was having upon me in order to counter it. I just don't see that as achievable

(bah - you people made me read 2 pages of this !!)

TJ needs to be watching BBC2 now.

Made In Britain, about 35mins in.

Why did you ask for my next question, then not answer it?

just in case you didn't see it

Are you saying you disregard it?

I'm lovin it!

Molgrips - judging by the fact that so many folk deny its possible then I thought they had never seen it.

But this is nothing to do with values. What you say makes no sense there. You're telling me about different world views and values, I'm talking about psychology and even neurology. Totally different things.

as for the extended meaning - thats precisely what was claimed that brought me into this

No, it really wasn't. You've got the wrong end of the stick - honestly, you have. I'm not having a go - just need to point it out.

TJ, if you understand that different pieces of music can make you feel different emotions, then its not much of a leap from there to understand that sound clips or film (adverts) can do the same, or that colours, type, slogans etc can. And then if each of those things is done with a particular brand or product you associate those emotions with it.

damo2576 A great example of that was a few years ago clarks shoes did a tv advert for kids shoes the music was "white horses" from a tv show that remember as a child and as I was mr average late 30s 2 young children it struck a chord.
Also if I remember correctly doesnt TJ advocate running red lights? Does this mean TJ is actually marketing all cyclists as unpredictable by way of his actions.

- it means I am aware of the effects and chose to ignore them or intentionally allow for the effects to ensure I make a choice free from bias

So - sight unseen, do you buy a branded item, or a non-branded one? I gave the example of a Shimano seat post vs a no-name seat post.

Choices
a) you know the Shimano brand and buy that one based on its likely reliability
b) you know the Shimano brand and you buy the no-name one because you dont like Shimano stuff
c) you buy the no-name one on principle, despite having no idea if it is good or not.

Your choice?

I'm away for one day and 19 more pages appear! Ye Gods, I've got some catching up to do with this one, although I assume not much has changed 😆

Trying to convince TJ he's wrong in this discussion, is no different from trying to convince a religious person what they believe in - man invented in the first place! And thus doesn't actually exist!

Well after seeing some of the beautiful logos on this thread (mainly the Loewy and Lubalin ones) can I take back my original statement about the Garmin logo?

I assume not much has changed

What leads you to that assumption? 😉

DrJ - there is simply not enough information to a make any sort of meaningful answer. too many unknown factors. So the only possible answer is mu

Damo - yes - but I am aware that there is an attempt to manipulate me and thus would do my best to discount it.

[i]would do my best to discount it. [/i]

and how woudl you decide if your best was good enough or, conversely, that you weren't overcompensating and dismissing a product which had merit because you were trying not to be influenced by the marketing/brand image?

molgrips - Member

"Molgrips - judging by the fact that so many folk deny its possible then I thought they had never seen it."

But this is nothing to do with values. What you say makes no sense there. You're telling me about different world views and values, I'm talking about psychology and even neurology. Totally different things.

"as for the extended meaning - thats precisely what was claimed that brought me into this"

No, it really wasn't. You've got the wrong end of the stick - honestly, you have. I'm not having a go - just need to point it out.

yes it was . Go to page 4

How dare you tell me what my motivations are?

DrJ - there is simply not enough information to a make any sort of meaningful answer. too many unknown factors. So the only possible answer is mu

There is quite enough information - what I describe is a normal internet transaction.

But your failure to answer the question is noted.

No its not. Its about an attitude to living my life that leads me to look at teh world in a certain way. Its clear you and many others have not grasped this

I'm not talking about you, I haven't all thread (bar the odd comment). I'm trying to explain what branding is, nothing to do with how you see the world.

How dare you tell me what my motivations are?

Wtf? I'm not telling you anything of the sort!!

I read page 4 when it came up. It was the bit with the fonts - about impressions - this is not the same as hidden meanings.

We are still talking at cross purposes here.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

DRJ

price, availability, colour, thats three bits of information. Price being a critical one.

Its a pointless question.

Molgrips. I understand what branding is. I accept your definitions and have done right thru the thread. You simply do not understand the point I have been arguing. You think you do but once again it has gone right by you.

yes you are trying to tell me my motivations. I came into this thread to point out the nonsense being talked about the hidden meanings (or impressions if you want - that is a meaning or a message) that people claimied was in the choice of font.

This is why I came into the thread. Obviously the debate has moved on from that point but the basic point remains

people were claiming tht the choice of font gave an impression - a subtext, a hidden meaning - some information that was more than just the words used. I pointed out that many folk simply do not see this at all.

This is where it started. This is what the debate is about:

[b]TandemJeremy[/b]
Loving the attacks on me - emperors new clothes again?

[b]TandemJeremy[/b]
Thats just part of the money wasting circle jerk

[b]TandemJeremy[/b]
I pity anyone who believes in all this stuff and who wastes their life and / or money doing it.

[b]TandemJeremy[/b]
MF - my point is the difference is only to people in your world who care about logos - the rest of us it makes no odds to at all

[b]mastiles_fanylion[/b]
You under-estimate the effect brand has on most people TJ.

[b]TandemJeremy[/b]
MF - and I believe you vastly overstate it.

This is the debate I've been contributing to.

Jeremy has dismissed the world of branding. He said, basically, that only us self satisfied arty farty types can tell the differences between one brand and the next, and that nobody outside the 'circle jerk' pays any attention.

In case you missed it above, it was here:

[b]TandemJeremy[/b]
MF - my point is the difference is only to people in your world who care about logos - the rest of us it makes no odds to at all

That is TJs point. The point this discussion has hinged on, and the point I think my posts among many others have categorically corrected him on.

The branding of goods - a practice in which logos play a huge part - has, does, and will continue to have a profound effect on the daily lives of all who live in our current society. Even those who, quite admirably, try to avoid being suckered in by it.

That's not overstating the power of branding - it's pointing out a rather sad fact of life. You can be as anti brand as you like. You could never buy a new product in your life, but if you consider yourself a member of our society - as must anyone with an internet connection - you'll never escape it. It shapes the world in which we live, it effects the day to day lives of every single person on this thread and most off it.

The power of branding, of which logos are a key component, is [i]very[/i] real.

TandemJeremy therefore simply has to, in the face of the sheer volume of considered evidence that has been put forward to him since, concede that this:

[b]TandemJeremy[/b]
MF - my point is the difference is only to people in your world who care about logos - the rest of us it makes no odds to at all

the initial point he made and therefore the point this entire debate is hanging on, is simply not true.

Logos make odds to the vast majority of people in our society, and some of those outside it, every single day.

But what I imagine will happen is it will now be reduced to semantics, where the difference between a 'logo' and 'brand' are debated. But doing so will only detract from the very real truth that TandemJeremy has, in this thread, for some time now, been proven really quite wrong.

wot jackthedog said.

even TJ's now agreeing he has to actively compensate for the effect rather than 'it has no effect'.

TandemJeremy - Member
How dare you tell me what my motivations are?

That's two brilliantly tounge-in-cheek, self aware comments on this thread now (not both from TJ). Chapeau to you too TJ 🙂

TJ, just admit defeat.

New experiences can be good, mmkay?

Empires fall, accepted truths are dismissed by the cold, hard reality of logic.

Let's all join hands and venture forth into a bright new tomorrow, one where the faintest possibility of you being wrong is no longer a myth.

OK chaps if you think you're actually going to get anywhere with this, I think you're mistaken.
All that is happening is the metaphorical coffers of the TJshow budget are being boosted. to be fair he needs some distraction.

Tails will be chased and greasy pigs will remain uncaptured, that is as far as things will go. To look at things objectively

- TJ simply CANNOT be right due to the following:
no evidence such as hard facts, data, links to guardian articles, research papers, statutory advice, wiki pages or laws have been provided. This is the usual way that we are shown what is right. All that has been submitted is personal experience and anecdote

Poor old ELF- the first casualty of war is always the innocent.

and on that basis, I'm out

Oh, and I've always liked the simplicity of this logo

[img] [/img]

the initial point he made and therefore the point this entire debate is hanging on, is simply not true.

Logos make odds to the vast majority of people in our society, and some of those outside it, every single day.

So some of yuo keep asserting. Some of us deny it. No evidence has been offered merely an attempt to shout me down.

MF - my point is the difference is only to people in your world who care about logos - the rest of us it makes no odds to at all

its like that thing with handkerchiefs that gives a visual code about people sexuality -if you know the code then you read it and get the information. if you don't know the code you cannot translate it.

This is the bit you fail to understand. Many folk do not speak the language you use so gain no meaning at all from this.

DRJ

price, availability, colour, thats three bits of information. Price being a critical one.

Its a pointless question.

All assumed the same, obviously, or I would have mentioned them. You can imagine that the no-name item is one penny cheaper, if you like.

The point of the question is to expose the limits of your philosophy. Which it has clearly achieved.

Hmm.. thought about this overnight and here is the simplest logic I can think of to explain it to you TJ.

Earlier you openly admitted that you know what McDonalds, Tesco and Nestle are and you know what they sell.

Those are BRANDS.

You are aware of them.

Ergo, branding has worked. That's it. End of.
That particular point is conceded right there. 😀

If you really look deep inside yourself you [i]might[/i] even be prepared to admit that you know what the logos are for these companies, and perhaps some others such as Starbucks, IKEA, BMW, Bass...

Now, you may [i]try[/i] to prevent the brand from influencing the products you select, disregarding the brand and instead attempting to select products on a purely objective merit basis.

That's fair enough. I think everyone tries that occasionally and it can be a useful approach (though I suspect most folk are more open to the idea that the brand behind a product may directly contribute to its likely merit).

You may also [i]try[/i] to disregard any marketing spin for a product and look beyond the shiny brochure to the actual product merits. Again fair enough. I think everyone regularly tries to do this.

I entirely understand why you might want to do this.

Happy?
(holding out unbranded generic olive branch...)

You simply do not understand the point I have been arguing. You think you do but once again it has gone right by you

Your point is that you put a lot of effort into (and take great personal pride in) not being swayed by marketing and advertising, and brand imagery - is that right? Or do I not understand?

I came into this thread to point out the nonsense being talked about the hidden meanings (or impressions if you want - that is a meaning or a message) that people claimied was in the choice of font

That is not nonsense, I'm afraid. Might not mean anything to you, and that's fine, but it does to most of the rest of us. Lots of experience and introspection has taught me this.

DrJ - a meaningless question exposes the limits of my philosophy? right. If that makes you happy.

I personally simply would not purchase something in that way. I don't do it. Therefore I cannot answer the question. the question is meaningless to me.

Molgrips - Only in the world you live in does it amke any significant difference- to a great many people it makes no significant differnce at all. that is the bleeding point. all the people in that world get so obsessed with all this stuff that they have long ago lost sight of how little importance it has. Many of us don't know the code and thus don't get this information.

Graham- there is still a huge significant point I have tried to make that you seem unable to grasp.

teh brand is not the company, the object is not the brand. It is possible to look beyond what something is branded as to see what it is.

I have really tried to explain this to you over and over again but you do not want to understand.

Earlier you openly admitted that you know what McDonalds, Tesco and Nestle are and you know what they sell.

Those are BRANDS.

You are aware of them.

Ergo, branding has worked. That's it. End of.

I think the acid test is, do you make some assumptions about a product based on its association with those names, as in your example, do you assume that the McDonalds felafel wrap will taste like sh*t?

No - I am not saying that I disregard it but it does have an effect.

ok, let's do it slowly.
Are you saying you disregard it?

DrJ - a meaningless question exposes the limits of my philosophy? right. If that makes you happy.

I personally simply would not purchase something in that way. I don't do it. Therefore I cannot answer the question. the question is meaningless to me.

Again, your failure to answer a simple question is noted, and conclusions drawn about your intellectual honesty.

Only in the world you live in does it amke any significant difference- to a great many people it makes no significant differnce at all

So you are saying that brand management doesn't increase sales?

Or are you saying that it's the link between brand image and real-world performance that's suspect?

I have really tried to explain this to you over and over again but you do not want to understand

No I think he just disagrees 🙂 Why should he share your opinion? You speak as if only you can ever possibly be right, and if we don't agree we're automatically wrong 🙂

So you are saying that brand management doesn't increase sales?

I guess he is also saying that, for example, Johnson and Johnson did not suffer from the Tylenol episode, etc etc etc. Nonsense, in other words.

No molgrips = what I am saying is that much of it has far less importance and effect that is claimed. People make an issue over deciding which font to use for a logo. So long as the font is clear it makes little difference to many folk.

~teh problem is that the only people who get to make these decision are either people who know the code and its important to or people who are afraid to shout - the emperor is naked

Dr J - I do not make purcheses in that way. The factors I use to make a decision are absent from your scenario. therefore I canmake no answer

I have answered similar questions on this thread where it was possible - all that stuff about red bull.

does anyone think there is any point to this anymore?