Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I would add that the point of a logo is to convey what the company does.

These logos may not be unique, but I do instantly know "Oh this is a law firm" or "Ah, they sell houses".

These are local businesses with no intention of global recognition, and using a basic template helps convey what they do at just a glance.




If the point of a logo is to convey what the company does, then just about every classic logo fails.

Just to name a few, the logos for Apple, IBM, Coca-Cola, UPS, Nike, BMW, Shell, McDonalds, and GE give no clues as to what the company does.


When I was looking into this, I found two schools of thought, some people think the best thing is to have a unique name and logo, which gives no clue but is unique and rememberable.

Others think it's better to have a descriptive name and logo.

The first approach has the disadvantage of requiring more branding, while the second has the disadvantage of being less distinctive.

I think that the first approach works best if you have a marketing budget and plan to grow, while the second is much better for local businesses or lifestyle or niche businesses where organic search matters more.

VC-backed startups will probably do better with the first route, while bootstrapped side projects might work better with the second approach?


Descriptive names are not popular with existing businesses because they're hard to trademark.


Here's what Jason Cohen wrote on naming ideas:

http://blog.asmartbear.com/naming-startup.html

And on naming his company (Smart Bear):

http://blog.asmartbear.com/pick-company-name-brand.html


I think the conclusion of that first link is worth lifting into the thread here:

> In the end, I’ve never heard a founder of a successful company say the name of the company was an important factor in its success; similarly I’ve not heard of a name being the fatal blow. (emphasis original)

Solid, common-sense advice, and one reason I qualified what I said to "existing companies". For a new one, it doesn't really matter. But for Nike, it really is important to them that their name isn't descriptive.


We're comparing apples to oranges here. There are 7.4 million companies in the US, and most of those are local businesses. Law firms, car repair shops, restaurants, etc.

You're talking about the exceptions -- global billion dollar brands. These aren't that.


Yeah, but for a lot (perhaps most?) businesses, their offerings are somewhat nebulous and their logos can't rely on well-tread iconography. How do you represent legal services in a logo? How about high-end Asian Fusion food? Medical certification services?


Legal services: with a scales Asian fusion: fruit segment & chopsticks Medical certification: equal-armed cross overlapping a document

This took me about 20 seconds, and I don't work in design. They all seem very obvious to me. I actually think most small businesses are pretty focused compared to tech startups.


high-end Asian Fusion food? You're being way too specific in your requirements for a logo, if you need the logo to unambiguously describe the company to that degree.


Sure but it just not as important as one might think.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: