I recently received an email from someone asking me for a quote on a logo/illustration. Now In this persons defense – they are not a designer and probably didn’t know any better. Said person mentioned that they were also looking at the service of LogoWorks. And this made me curious so I did a Google search…
Now I must warn you…i’m going to go off for a bit…
Logoworks seems to be a bargain basement design shop aimed at geting small businesses up and running FAST. All their logo packages are less than $700. They promise a 3 day turn around and unlimited revisions on most logo packages.
They also offer 10 reasons why you should hire them. I’ll just interject some of my recently gained knowledge between the bullet points 
Original, custom logos you can afford, with no hidden fees. See our packages.
…Well original logos you say? Wow…just google logoworks rip off and you will find dozens of direct and obvious rip offs of other logos. Here are just a few examples (originals on the top…rips on the bottom).
Check out the rest of the Logoworks rip offs here
A fast, convenient, and proven design process.
Logo works promises a 3 day turnaround. I’m sorry, but if a logo can be designed in 3 days then the designer is not utilizing the design process. I usually follow a 3 step process: 1 Research ,2 Designing ,3 Refining. Each phase usually takes about 10-15 hours. No way these designers go through all that in 3 days. One evident solution to this 3 day turnaround must be that they STEAL other designers designs!!! hmmm…
Professional logo designers in-house and freelance.
Another point i’d like to refute. If they offer logo packages for $300, how can they afford to pay professional designers? hm….
Over 45,000 satisfied customers – 98% would recommend Logoworks to a friend.
…what about those customers who found out their logo is a rip off of a trademarked logo? hmm…
Unlimited revisions for all but one of our packages.
Again this is against the way most logo designers work. You usually get limited number of revisions. Anything other than that you usually pay extra for. How can they afford to pay ‘professional’ designers and offer unlimited revisions.
So lets get back to the title of this blog post…Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300
Well…to put this very frankly: YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR. Great design takes time, research, hard work, discipline, experience, talent, and great communication with the client. When you take shortcuts (especially in price) you sacrifice these things and in turn sacrifice the quality of the logo. I understand that clients are usually looking for a good deal, but really cheap design is not it! (cheap design often ends up like this)
For further and probably more eloquent reading check out Jacob Cass’s article “Why logo design does not cost 5 dollars”. The logos below cost way more than $5
What do you guys think?
Is there a market for el-cheapo design? (obviously) Where does this stand in relation to your skills and services? Do you feel like you have to compete with companies like logoworks? How do we educate clients about these things?
Share This Article
Other Popular Posts:
87 Responses to “Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300”
Leave a Reply
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
Pingback from Bram.us » Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300
March 30th, 2009 at 5:19 am[...] that clients are usually looking for a good deal, but really cheap design is not it!” – oh.so.true Spread the [...]
-
Pingback from Cheap Logos, websites and eBay stores | eCommerce Website Design eBay Store Design Social Media Marketing
March 30th, 2009 at 5:32 am[...] just read a great article on logo design; Niki Brown could not have said it better! Seriously people wake up and smell the reality; you [...]
-
Trackback from How magazine
March 30th, 2009 at 10:09 amFound on Twitter…
Design twitterer thedesignorder, just posted a link to a thoughtful explanation …
-
Pingback from Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300 : Design Newz
March 30th, 2009 at 2:33 pm[...] Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300 [...]
-
Pingback from Daily Links | AndySowards.com :: Professional Web Design, Development, Programming, Hacks, Downloads, Math and being a Web 2.0 Hipster?
March 30th, 2009 at 6:17 pm[...] Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300 | The Design O'Blog Great read of why Logos are so valuable [...]
-
Pingback from Inspiring Design Links for Creatives for 2009-03-31 | This Inspires Me
March 31st, 2009 at 3:09 am[...] Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300 (tags: logos logo branding) [...]
-
Pingback from The Best of the Week | Logos Guide | The visual works of Otba Mushaweh
April 1st, 2009 at 1:30 am[...] Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300 [...]
-
Pingback from Graphic Designer Blog - graphic design web design business resources » Blog Archive » Cheap Design Companies Suck!
April 1st, 2009 at 6:30 am[...] Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300 [...]
-
Pingback from uneekGrafix | Blog » Blog Archive » Logo Designs
April 2nd, 2009 at 1:00 pm[...] interesting idea I came across while researching this idea was on Niki Browns site Design O’Blog its about the cost of a logo and why they should cost at least $300.00. [...]
-
Pingback from Friday Vidcast 4-03-09 | This Is Aarons Life
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:33 am[...] also talk about one of the recent posts over at the Design-o-Blog. There is a great article about Logos and how they should cost more than $300. I really enjoyed [...]
-
Pingback from Spec you! Why Design Designers Never* Work For Free | The Design O'Blog
April 16th, 2009 at 5:07 am[...] deserve to be respected and paid a decent wage for their work. (For more on this read the article: Why logos should cost more than $300) We are trained to think, analyze, research, and produce thought provoking design that meets our [...]
-
Pingback from iStockphoto.com Now Selling Stock Logos… Your Thoughts? | The Design O'Blog by Niki Brown
September 22nd, 2009 at 5:27 pm[...] reaction was to be angry about iStockphoto.com selling stock logos. I wrote a post a while ago on why logos should cost more than $300 that sums up some of my feelings on cheap logo design. Logos are a particularly difficult aspect of [...]
-
Pingback from Why Your Church Website Should Cost More than $100 | eGrace Creative
September 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 pm[...] probably should know that this article is inspired by three different interactions. One, reading Niki Brown’s article, Why Logos Should Cost More Than $300. Two, reading Jacob Cass’ Why logo design does not cost $5. Third, a common question I hear [...]
Calee says:
Oh this makes me livid. It almost makes me want to order one from them and have them make revisions ad nauseum or contact the companies they’re ripping off. You think they’d get sued… Doesn’t make sense!
March 30th, 2009 at 5:12 am
Anthony says:
You just said exactly how I feel! It’s not only logos but I have seen several website design companies advertising cheap website design. They offer garbage but the bulk of visitors don’t know the difference.
What can be done to educate people that cheap is not best?
Have we failed in our marketing efforts or in the way we come across to our potential clients?
March 30th, 2009 at 5:15 am
Anthony Hortin says:
Great post. As both yourself and Jacob put it, “you get what you pay for”. Can’t emphasize that enough. I’d like to see a mechanic or similar put in the same amount of hours as what you can, working on a logo. I’m pretty sure they’d be charging more than $300.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:21 am
Paul Davis says:
I don’t think we could educate the market in general. I think it is just plain difficult to tell a client they should spend 10 times as much for a logo when they are told they can get one for 10% of what you’re charging.
I do think that the lesser cheaper logos will probably get less attention, which goes against everything a logo is meant to do.
In design, throwing money at things, usually means a better result, that extends to logos too.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:24 am
Brad Choma says:
I’m not specifically trying to pimp my blog, but if you hit my name I invite you to read an article called “Design Contests: a lot of losers and one winner (who is also a loser)” which explores the cheapening of modern design.
We need to stop raising awareness of issues within our own community and find a way to break through to the mainstream in a meaningful way.
There is a second entry about a site called Your Logo Makes Me Barf which takes the “value of design” argument to a whole new level.
Love the article by the way. Nice detective work.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:31 am
Paul says:
There certainly is a market but once it becomes saturated with derivative logos and customers wise up to the fact that their logo looks like every other logo out there then the move into the professional arena.
It’s the same with SEO. People reduce the art down to a monkey job, charge peanuts and get the industry a bad name – then the rest pick up the pieces and have to rebuild trust by doing the craft some justice again.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:33 am
David Airey says:
Hi Niki,
The good thing about companies like Logoworks is that they deal with the clients I prefer to avoid, and there’ll always be a market for cheap work, no matter what the industry.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:33 am
Baris Wanschers says:
I agree with you. But the same goes for designing printed matter and websites. I should have sent this article to my clients during the time I ran my own company
March 30th, 2009 at 5:47 am
Kristoffer Lawson says:
I don’t know … while Sun’s logo is brilliant, isn’t Disney’s logo just Walt Disney’s own signature? Hardly likely to be super expensive. I would also guess Coca Cola’s logo didn’t necessary cost much back in the day.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:50 am
SC says:
Would be good if prospective clients could read this article!
BTW, I think the Nike logo was initially free, as a intern actually designed it. I think years later they got some remuneration for it :O)
March 30th, 2009 at 5:55 am
danny says:
twitter logo cost $6:)
March 30th, 2009 at 6:15 am
David says:
Wow, great article. Did you know that Logoworks is owned by HP for more than two years already?
Interested, if HP knows what they are doing.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:24 am
Arun J says:
This and ‘design contests’ are the things I hate most about this profession. There is always some cheapazz out there devaluing your work’s worth.
I’d rather do it pro-bono or for something in exchange than do it for cheap.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:25 am
Rock Langston says:
Thanks for posting this. One of the reasons I stay away from logo design is that there is a prevalent “just add water and stir” attitude about this area of graphic design. As a logo is the underpinning of building a look, presence, and a business, why would anyone think it’s the place to try and get something for nothing?
D. Airey is absolutely right. There are wonderful clients and projects out there, so let’s smile politely and dismiss these bottom feeders, then move forward to work with the people who value what we do.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:38 am
Jeff SanGeorge says:
Good article. Trying to communicate the value of logo discovery and design process is a real challenge to communicate to potential clients who are finding $99 logo design on Google. I’ve lost several logo bids because of price lately. Next time I’ll send them this article!
March 30th, 2009 at 6:39 am
Lauren says:
I totally support your post! It really drives me crazy when non designers treat us designers as “design prostitutes.” I get so sick of non designers expecting to be priced out a logo that costs something between $100 and $300. You’re right how a great logo takes time and research. If the “client” really wants a great logo, they need to just take into account that it will cost them more than $300 to get something. That should be a part of their own personal marketing plan. If they want their business to be a success, they need to look at their logo and what is says about their business.
Thanks for the post. It really speaks to how design services are taken advantage of by non designers.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:39 am
Bryan Zmijewski says:
Actually Niki, the Nike logo was created for $35.
http://tinyurl.com/e6wak
The beauty of capitalism is that the market will fluctuate based on what people are willing to pay for what they expect.
It’s all about education and finding a market that likes your approach.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:44 am
michelle taylor says:
What a great article.I have been thinking the same kind of thing myself. As a fashion designer and logo designer….I am often up against these kinds of companies. I do believe that you gte what you pay for and the kind of clients I wish to work with do not generally hammer me on price. …as they see us as high quality.
It is very frustrating as I usually end up spending twice as long as I said and only charging for original quote.
thanks for this …;-)
March 30th, 2009 at 7:07 am
49DollarLogo says:
There are many competitors with cheap rates, out there for logo design. Quality depends on the individual who makes it, and is not based on the rates cahrged by the individual.
March 30th, 2009 at 7:12 am
Andrew Stobbe says:
This sort of thing goes on at many levels, not just logos. There are companies that shamelessly copy the work of others, without regards to copyright laws. It is so sad, and so blatant.
$300 logos
$300 websites
Why do people think skimping on brand is a good idea. Makes no sense.
I think the best solution is more conversations like this, with potential clients. Knowledge is key.
My 2 pennies.
March 30th, 2009 at 7:23 am
ahmed says:
great article. i have encountered clients who come with paper cuttings of samples of how they want their finished logo
March 30th, 2009 at 7:25 am
Perfect Circle Media says:
Thanks for sharing this important observation. I agree with David’s comment that there are down-market versions of goods & services in any sector.
Unfortunately for the people who use a service like this, it’s likely they have to start over and the $300 is sunk cost. Like an entrance fee, or a lesson in what not to do. Sometimes lessons have a cost. Perhaps by then, these same clients are ready to move on to one of the many talented studios that keep overheard low (by not renting an office, for example) in order to offer competitive prices on great graphic design.
March 30th, 2009 at 7:35 am
semblance says:
This is definitely an article I would like to show some clients.
Even though some very famous logos seem simple, it takes time to weigh all the options to get to the better solution. Time is money.
(Nike paid a student $35 for the Nike logo in 1971. 12 Years later she did get a gold Swoosh ring embedded with diamond and an envelope with Nike stock.)
March 30th, 2009 at 7:50 am
Dr Tchock says:
It’s funny how designers describe the emergence of budget design services as “devaluing” their work. The market decides your work’s value, not you.
There’s an enormous amount of fluff and self-importance that goes into design, perhaps it’s things like this that will add a bit of humility to the design process. You know, some companies will not see a return on using a $30,000 over a $300 logo, so why pay more?
Just sayin’
March 30th, 2009 at 8:37 am
Suzie Kelly says:
BRAVO Niki Brown… or should I say.. NANCY DREW??
Great post.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:09 am
Wez Maynard says:
First of all @Dr Tchock – change your name to Dr Shmuck, what a ridiculous comment to make.
Agreed market is most instances decides the cost of a logo – but that is completely dependent on what market you are pitching at.
If i ever had a client who wanted to spend ‘no more than £50′ on a logo – its happened – i’d have no hesitation in showing them the door. As a designer you need to decide where you fit your services and into what market.
And as for self importance – have you ever sat in a pr or marketing meeting?
‘just sayin’.
I’d also go so far as to say, unless its a favor, i would always push the client to push a brand guide with their logo – colours, acceptable usage, workable methods, size ratios etc etc.
——-
Logo fact for you!!
The Nike swoosh cost $35 and is one of the most recognizable logos in the world today.
Which is a point i think i should also raise – you have to be completely aware of what the logo your designing is going to be used for, and pitch accordingly.
Coffee shop = low end cost spectrum
Band using your artworked logo on ALL t-shirts etc = higher cost spectrum
March 30th, 2009 at 9:09 am
Zach Dunn says:
I don’t think logo design should be reduced to a series of sales pitches that put the work into a bargain bin. Revision rounds for example, are not a bad thing. But adding the word “Unlimited” to a package seems to add value to the average client.
Like Brad Choma, I’m not trying to push out my blog for the hell of it, but I did an article a month back on my frustration with lack of respect towards the design profession. It may be worth a read for anyone looking for further discussion – The Real Problem with Design Contests
March 30th, 2009 at 9:23 am
Karyl says:
Dr Tchock:
I find that it’s not the “design process” that costs money, it’s my time. A lot of clients don’t place value on my time, simply because they don’t understand what we do. They think we wave our hands over our computers and designs pop up on the screen. This is why graphic artists & designers inevitably hear things like, “Do I have to pay for roughs if I don’t like them?” and “I was hoping to pay more like $50″.
Simply put, the design process takes time. Even with a minimum of research, designing and doing the subsequent revisions takes time to carry out, and with the majority of freelance designers charging between 30-50 dollars an hour (I think the industry average is like, 42 or something), it’s VERY hard to design a logo for less than (or equal to) 300 dollars, even with a minimum of research and limited revisions.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Niki says:
@Zach
I do think the unlimited revisions would tend to make the clients dictate design to the designer – when they are really hiring the designer for their expertise. Getting a design to the point of where a client ‘wants’ is is not nessicarly the best thing. Its more about what they need vs what they want.
Great discussion everyone! Keep it up!
March 30th, 2009 at 9:32 am
Kate says:
Ew. Those logos make my insides hurt.
I face a similar kind of dilemma at work (not pimping my product, I promise the example is relevant) —
I do in-house design and marketing for an Invisible Fence Brand distributor. We built our brand on professional installation, customized fence layouts, dog training and top tier product materials.
But when people call our dealers and ask for a quote, they don’t understand why our systems cost more than the pet containment systems they can buy off the shelf at Home Depot. It might serve the same kind of purpose, but it’s far from the same thing. We have to establish that value in our sales pitch – explaining how we’re different, blah blah blah.
Seems like these new Insta-Logo sites are forcing legitimate / top-tier designers to come up with a sales pitch that demonstrates the value of a customized product. And even though a lot of these megabrands have simple/inexpensive logos, they’ve poured millions of dollars into marketing. The logo is the visual foundation, and a smart company will appreciate the value of a strong base.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:33 am
Frog says:
Well said, completely agree. I know a guy that charges $30 a logo… I rest my case.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Nicholas says:
This article makes perfect sense. I can hardly believe it. Thank you for opening my eyes to what is in store for the later in life design firms.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:33 am
Matt says:
Great post, but you coulda saved yourself a lot of typing if you just redirected people to yourlogomakesmebarf.com .
March 30th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Stefan says:
I think the real argument comes down to what the client is buying, a product or a service. Dr Tchock’s comments, and many who would find a site like Logoworks of value, clearly misunderstand the role of design. It’s not a matter of self-importance but simply a matter of perspective and offering. As designers, we provide the service of creative problem solving. Logoworks provides a product. Dr Tchock is correct that the market dictates the value of a product, but as agents of service, we dictate the value of our talent. In the end, it’s the potential client’s choice as to whether the value of our talent is ‘worth it.’ I would argue that anyone that would patronize Logoworks is far more interested in a soul-less product than a thoughtful service and would therefore not be the type of client we would pursue anyway.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Brent says:
The Nike Swoosh cost $35 and was designed by a university student. I don’t know if that’s way more…
March 30th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Jerlyn says:
I was about to comment on the same thing: the Nike swoosh was $35…
March 30th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Rick R. says:
Bravo. Original design work should never be “price shopped” for cheaper options. This goes into one of my favorite (and super true) quotes: “Good work isn’t cheap and cheap work isn’t good.”
Thanks for taking the time to reinforce the truth about logo design and why paying $300.00 you usually get what you pay for – A weak looking logo or a total rip-off in one way or another.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Cody says:
Just position yourself differently. Sell what LogoWorks can’t offer; experience, process, and results.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Mike says:
Looks like you really hit a nerve here, Niki. Thanks for the post.
Companies like Logoworks and Guru.com really prey upon people in business (probably mostly small and independent) who don’t really know marketing, branding and promotion. For people in this situation, the need to get a professionally-designed logo is often in competition with the need to make a car payment or payroll. Their mindset is on minimizing costs. Not saying that this exempts them from the need for a pro logo, but in conjunction with a lack of appreciation for branding, limited funds make choosing to pay for a professionally designed logo more difficult.
But there is an upside to the proliferation of cheap logos. It makes the better logos stand out more. Sure, there are agencies who over-price their services. But the good ones do the research and have the expertise to deliver value that corresponds with what they charge. A design mill like Logoworks is no substitute. And, as others have said, there’s a lot more to branding than just a logo. A true professional will give a client more than just a logo.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Steve says:
Most of the time you do get what you pay for but not always. I worked for a company that spent over $200K to have a famous designer create their logo. What he came back with was ridiculous. I actually had to choose the PMS colors. All he recommended was “blue” and “green”. The font wasn’t even original. The company almost went out of business. They laid everyone off and spent a year fixing the product before relaunching. They should have spent that $200K on something else.
I also don’t understand why every artist I work with wants to redesign my logo as their first order of work. Insulting my current brand is not a good way to make a first impression.
March 30th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Niki says:
@steve I totally agree with you. But usually when you pay that much for a logo you get a whole team of designers working on your project, and they probably researched the HELL out of it.
Btw…love the freedom grill logo
March 30th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
crazywabbit says:
Logo design or any kind of design should not have a shelf price on it. I charge differently for every logo. It depends on the company size, budget, time frame etc..
March 30th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
pissed says:
I wish I could spent the real amount of hours required to design an original logo. I’ve worked for companies, including my current employer, that will now allow me to do so because of how they’ve structured their business. And no, it’s not quality work because I’m not given the time to do quality original stuff, which I know I can do; but my portfolio does show my real ability.
My first real on the job logo assignment was to complete a design for a software company logo 4 hours after the moment it was assigned, which involved a back seat designer boss with no art/design background standing over my shoulder.
This really goes back to these so called design schools, some of them aren’t really design programs; but you pay your money and you’re no expectation of how your skill set (coming out of that particular program) will be viewed, or how to improved to reach as certain level. They just misguide the students and produce a work force that fuels this ‘cheap work’/low quality market where companies will find people to do this sort of sweat shop work for them. The designers don’t know any better and/or they need a job.
I wonder what can be done about this, because it does devalue a designers abilities. I feel like I have to do this type of work in order to keep my job.
Also, people who do not have a traditional design background should not be art directors. Many businesses don’t have art directors, only designers, leaving all the art direction to the boss who most likely has no art/design background – they only ‘know what they like’ and insist good design solutions can be executed in 2 hours.
March 30th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Chanelle Henry says:
I totally agree with the article definitely, and usually you get what you paid for UNLESS your brand speaks for itself, in which case why are you even getting a logo, just go rule the world (total sarcasm)
Anyway from what I learned from doing free logos for non-profits (NEVER AGAIN), and other low paying schmucks is that when you do deal with these people that don’t want to pay anything, they don’t take any VALUE in their own business, in which turn they don’t really do the research or have the pride in their company/organization to even know what they want. Then you end up doing about 15 revisions because they are still having an identity crisis. So this easy free 4 hour project turns into 3 months of back and forth trying to figure out why you even committed this much time of your life to even help this person out.
That being said, when you get a client that wants a logo created for a “fair” price, you get a client that is proud of their company, and want to be successful. I think we should let the “bottom feeders” as Rock Langston said to have these cheap logos taken by them, and their time will come when they get sued that they will realize that they got what they paid for.
As a teacher of mine said, if they can pay $500-$1000 for an office chair/desk and supplies that will only last for a couple years, why can’t they pay for a logo which basically defined who you are and lasts as long as you do?
Point made?
March 30th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
David says:
For everyone wanting to try Calee mentioned in the first post, there is no need to give these companies anymore money than they already get. Just read this blog, its very funny, and does exactly that. makes them go through revisions over and over again.
The 50 Dollar Logo Experiment
March 30th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Jack says:
I disagree with you. Every company has a different purpose for a logo and the design. I’ve paid $1000 for a nice logo and I’ve also paid $5 (last week) for a logo design that is actually pretty cool. The $1000 logo has one many awards including being featured in LogoLounge. But the point is that I needed something cheap for a website that I don’t want to put a lot of money into until it starts generating revenue. A cool looking $5 logo worked perfectly. If the logo was stolen that is something completely different. I don’t support that. One think you have to remember is that you are competing in a global market now. Bored 15 year old kids in various parts of the world are bidding on this work. While they won’t have the experience to know all the elements that go into building a great logo and ultimately a brand, they can churn out a cool logo for $5-$15 in 24 hours. Just what I needed in this case.
March 31st, 2009 at 12:44 am
Abbas says:
There’s definitely a market for a cheap logo, it’s the very low-end of the scale but a market nonetheless. Whether you like it or not, in the current financial climate (!) it’s all about cutting costs.
What I will say is that if you’re approached by a company who wants a logo designing, but doesn’t want to pay more than £50, find out why. Don’t just fend them off with a abrupt no, you’re on a one way street to a bad reputation.
Research the company. It only takes a few minutes, dail them into Google, if they don’t have a web presence and you can’t find any information about the company off your own back, it’s probably a given that they’re at the low-end of the scale. Logo design, infact any design work, is the last thing they want to spending a big chunk of their hard earned cash on – they’re not trying to insult you.
There will always be companies out there who don’t really appreciate the role of the designer. But there are companies who can’t afford to pay some of the prices mentioned and, therefore, have to take a cheaper route. It would be unfair to lump them all into the same category.
March 31st, 2009 at 5:36 am
Niki says:
@jack
I cool that you disagree, but I think you are missing the point. Logos are more than something that ‘looks cool’ they are a reflection of your brand. IMO if a company does not care enough about their brand to invest in professional design work – they have no business …well…being in business. If they dont take their marketing seriously then they arent a serious company.
@abbas
Same thing goes for your comment. If a company can not afford to invest in marketing – then what is the point of being in business? Marketing yourself is an insanely important part of business!
I dont want to point companies like to the door and say no, but instead I want to educate them. This is one of the reasons I wrote this post.
March 31st, 2009 at 5:50 am
Abbas says:
I was under the impression that the sole point of being in business was to make money.
Successful businesses don’t necessarily need to be marketed to be successful. It’s an important part of business but it’s not the be all and end all. Small businesses rely much more on reputation to generate income.
It’s our job as designers to promote the advantages of effective marketing and sell the idea.
Your aiming you’re post at the wrong people. You’re telling designers something they already know.
March 31st, 2009 at 7:52 am
Corey Freeman says:
Didn’t the Nike Swoosh get created by a designer who just had a random idea? I don’t think it had a bunch of research behind it…I could be wrong.
Still, logos are definitely a reflection of brand and even more than companies like logoworks, clients who want “flashy” or …web 2.0-y… logos get to me as well. It feels like few people these days understand the process…
I WISH I could design really good logos. As it is, I’m more apt to go the route of a mascot. Hopefully that’s a skill I can develop in the future.
March 31st, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Robert Scozzari says:
Great article. Thanks for doing the homework.
April 1st, 2009 at 1:55 am
49DollarLogo says:
The low-cost logos are more for people who want quick and dirt-cheap logos. Obviously the time of the designer is valuable, and I agree that design contests like crowdspring, are demeaning to designers, but these are simply facts of internet life, just like how open source pulls the plug on proprietary, paid software. The same adage “you get what you pay for” applies in every business, including the design profession. People who are willing to pay more, will get more of the designer’s time, otherwise the product will be a run-of-the-mill product (in this case-logo). If you dont mind run of the mill, and you are really looking to pay $50 for the logo, you got it, but I am not going to spend more than 2 hours of my time on that.
April 1st, 2009 at 2:03 am
jhoysi says:
Excellent article, love how you fire the bargain basement “designer”’s marketing back!
Though, I don’t know if I would use the Nike Swoosh as an example of logos that cost more than $5, as the designer foolishly gave away all the licensing and rights to it for a mere $25 paycheck…
April 1st, 2009 at 9:09 am
Kevin M. Scarbrough says:
Clearing the air a bit:
1) Yes, the original (it has since been refined) Nike swoosh was designed for $35 by Carolyn Davidson.
2) Nike was not the conglomerate it is today in 1971. Or anywhere close to it.
3) Carolyn Davidson has publicly stated she felt adequately compensated post-global dominance by Nike.
4) In 1983, Phil Knight (whom Davidson dealt with) gave her a Swoosh ring and an envelope of Nike stock. The amount was never disclosed but it has been hinted at a significant amount.
5) And most importantly: The wide spread fame of Nike is attributed to the advertising more than the logo. Which was refined during said time. To include the now-famous “just do it”.
April 1st, 2009 at 11:16 am
liz says:
very interesting.
the clients who only see a logo design valued at a couple hundred aren’t ones i want to work w/ so fine by me if they go to the bargain basement.
if i was someone who hired logoworks to do my logo – not really knowing any better. I’d be PISSED 6 months down the line when a client says “oh your logo looks just like the one for Hoover Vacuums” or something. GOD! I think i’d cry, how embarrassing.
April 1st, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Paul Stevens says:
Great Article,
Being a student designer, with my confidence not quite as high, I could easily fall into doing work for less. Your attitude is very inspiring, and an offering of hope.
Thanks
April 1st, 2009 at 11:55 pm
gaz-j says:
MAN! I cant believe these rip offs!? I’m in total agreement with you on this one. Great logo design has to cost. It isn’t a case of the logo company wanting to cost for it, it simply has to cost! Logos are all about originality something that logoworks have no clue about. Surely this is suss? They must know that what they are doing is wrong not to mention illegal?!
Regards,
Gaz.
April 2nd, 2009 at 12:55 am
lyn says:
umm wasn’t the nike logo designed by a student for a lot less than $300??
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:17 am
Mal says:
Your comment kind of proves the point Lyn. Design should not be sold off for peanuts. The Nike logo was designed for $75, if I remember the story correctly – perhaps that was decent money at the time for a student designer? We don’t really know the particulars, but it definitely suggests that we need to take our work more seriously.
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:55 am
Gavalian says:
I agree with you, but, do not mention on brand logos, because most of them in real look awful
starbucks nike sun mercedes etc are promoted logos, that is why they look expensive. try to put Ford’s logo on yoghurts bottle 
April 2nd, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Brian says:
This is a great post. I would like to say I’ve personally had friend of mine work with Logoworks for a brand new company logo. They paid $400 at the time 2 years ago and got a handful of design within a 7 day period, not 3 or 4 days.
To cut it very short, 1 final logo came 4 weeks later and my friend never saw a logo that his business really liked so they asked for more revisions but got cut short. So he was told no more time can be spent on this logo?? WTF..
So unlimited revisions I would say not! Maybe my friend tested this, which he should not have, especially if international workers are on the line!!
When they say Full time or Freelance professionals, they are referring the the minimum wage workers overseas.
Im not sure but he did not get what he paid for in the slightest
April 6th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Kevin says:
I’m not sure if you’re trying to take a jab at the logo or not, but the Vista Federal Credit Union logo looks like that because it is directly affiliated with Disney.
It doesn’t excuse the color scheme, but it does explain the similarity.
April 8th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Laurel says:
I am right there with you. As a recent graphic design graduate in a super awful market, I had to take a secretarial job to have health benefits and a paycheck. The reason that I took this job though is because I was told there was the possibility of having a design position in a year or so. After spending a day and a half on logo ideas, I was told that I should put my efforts into something more useful since the company decided to go with an online company that can have a logo done for us in 5 business days for $150. *facepalm* No wonder there are hardly any graphic design jobs available…
April 10th, 2009 at 6:15 am
Martin Chaov says:
There will always be cheap heads around us … don’t bother with them. As one old phrase says: There is a passenger for every train!
April 17th, 2009 at 1:06 am
Tracy Johnson says:
Outstanding blog post. I could not agree more. The design process has been obliterated by the introduction of “design” software to the masses as well. There is no thought process by these idiots. Clients who complain about logo and other design costs are worthless to me. They are nothing more than a lifetime of complaining. For LogoWorks to rip off other logos like that is disgusting. But for a prospective client to want cheap design speaks volumes about how they operate their business – cheaply. I also deal with the actual printing of my designs. On more than one occasion I have seen people use my pdf proof I sent to them as art for their business cards – printed on perfed inkjet paper at home or office. The design industry has turned into a design debacle. We are not appreciated. And there are too many hack “designers” who ruin it for the rest of us who really care, who really think, and who really design.
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:18 am
Pete says:
While I agree with most of what you said, there is nothing special about “abc” and “Fedex” logos (besides the arrow between “e” and “x”)…I could have thought and done those in less than 30 minutes. Those could be $300 logos.
April 29th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Jason says:
Funny thing is NIKE cost under $100. read NOLOGO. Designers don’t get the love they deserve for manifesting brands into physical reality.
May 4th, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Tyler Henson says:
Yes, Logoworks is GARBAGE!!! The company is located in Salt Lake City, UT, and so am I! Not only are they ripping logos, they treat/pay their employees like crap! One of my friends used to work there. They basically say “This company needs a logo. Your team has 3 days to come up with 50 comps. Get to work.” You only get paid if your logo is the one they want, apparently. My friend designed the logo for our local lightrail and bus company, they ended up choosing his design, but they altered his final revision, and said they came up with it on their own, so he didn’t get paid. 3 days of working on a logo, and NOT getting paid??? Hmmm…
May 19th, 2009 at 7:09 am
Chad says:
is simply not true. You wish it were true, you can wish all you want, but it is not true.
Case in point. I have had beautiful logos designed by thelogocompany.net for 150 USD. They are mostly professionals from Europe and 1 or 2 in NYC (USA). The have given me several versions and gotten the idea right 9 out of 10 times.
I would say that before you make statements like this, look at why American designers are charging soo much.
What is true of the Auto Workers in Detroit is true for Designers and other Professions as well.
The Big 3 Autoworkers were costing 70 $ an hour cos 1 workers pay paid for 3 worker’s pension.
Meanwhile, Toyota and Honda workers were (rightly) costing only 43 $ an hour. And where did that lead us ? The big 3 went bust while Toyota and Honda are thriving !
Think about it.
July 22nd, 2009 at 1:32 pm
Mario says:
Great post. You make so good points. There no way anyone can stick to a good design process and charge a few hundred bucks.
August 28th, 2009 at 11:09 am
David says:
Oh how I do agree, it seems sites just like that one are popping up.. and not to mention places like digitalpoint where they have logo contests for 20 bucks and sometimes even less. It’s sadly hurting the entire design industry, because not only is this done with logos but also with everything else design related..
September 18th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Danny says:
Most people who are charging $300 for a logo are people still trying to break in… Like myself.
I haven’t a portfolio with a successful business of which I made the logo for yet. So how do I demand $1000-$3000 for someone to trust that I know what I’m doing? I can’t… I have to build up a portfolio and that will take time and that may come at a financial cost to start with.
Most of what you said is moot however… The company makes the brand successful and not the other way around… You could get the best designer to brand a company and if that company fails was it the company or the brand?
Look at Google… were they the first ones to think of making a word’s letters various alternating colors? If Google wasn’t “Google”… most people would say their brand is crap… but they made their company successful… and now there logo is recognizable and considered a good brand…
If Joe’s Pizza down the street buys a $300 logo from me and their pizza is deliciously-awesome and well received around town… then there brand will become recognizable/successful to some degree too…
September 18th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Steph Adamo says:
Okay – i agree, and i may get jumped on for this bit, but – 10-15 hours of research? There are different kinds of logos, and some of them just don’t require a lot of time to complete. I’m against services like LogoWorks, but at the same time, just because something is designed by a professional doesn’t mean it should cost an arm and a leg, either.
If a client happens to have a small budget for their logo, you don’t just say “fuck you,” because then they turn to LogoWorks. You just spend less time on it. They get what they pay for, sure, but maybe there’s nothing wrong with that.
September 18th, 2009 at 10:42 am
David Boni says:
Good article. It's maddening. I don't mind explaining to potential clients why a solid logo costs more than what some fool in a third-world country is charging, but it's absolutely disheartening when they still go for the cheaper buy. I've come up with thousands of metaphors and anecdotes for this exact situation.
December 9th, 2009 at 9:14 pm