Merryl Lynch Logo is dead

[puc86]

1) Identify the issue of brand confusion by having too many logos and fonts

2) Hire firm to fix the issue

3) Have firm create a new logo with more fonts, colors and  slogans

4) Accept that as a reasonable solution

5) Ignore the fact we already have popular logos and fonts

6) Do not properly vet the changes

7) Roll out the changes to pretty much universal hate and mockery

8 ) Ignore the consumers and start wasting more money on rebranding

9) Finish rebranding

10) Waste more money and revert everything to a logo you already had in house

 

Everyone should be fired, if it weren't for horrible no good very bad money wasting ideas I am not sure if we would have any ideas at all. Heads should roll but they won't because its just USF doing USF things. 

[Bull Dozer]

Colin also reporting CCS was one of the main voices pushing for this. 

[Bull Dozer]

1 minute ago, puc86 said:

1) Identify the issue of brand confusion by having too many logos and fonts

2) Hire firm to fix the issue

3) Have firm create a new logo with more fonts, colors and  slogans

4) Accept that as a reasonable solution

5) Ignore the fact we already have popular logos and fonts

6) Do not properly vet the changes

7) Roll out the changes to pretty much universal hate and mockery

8 ) Ignore the consumers and start wasting more money on rebranding

9) Finish rebranding

10) Waste more money and revert everything to a logo you already had in house

 

Everyone should be fired, if it weren't for horrible no good very bad money wasting ideas I am not sure if we would have any ideas at all. Heads should roll but they won't because its just USF doing USF things. 

I'm just glad they scrapped it the USF thing to do would be to roll with it anyways. It took more balls to do this than to keep it. I do agree this is a fireable offense though 

[Apis Bull]

USF has made so many academic advancements in recent years,but you want to fire people over a logo screw up?  It's a logo.  It was really bad,.  Its getting fixed. 

[chrisdashley]

8 minutes ago, puc86 said:

1) Identify the issue of brand confusion by having too many logos and fonts

2) Hire firm to fix the issue

3) Have firm create a new logo with more fonts, colors and  slogans

4) Accept that as a reasonable solution

5) Ignore the fact we already have popular logos and fonts

6) Do not properly vet the changes

7) Roll out the changes to pretty much universal hate and mockery

8 ) Ignore the consumers and start wasting more money on rebranding

9) Finish rebranding

10) Waste more money and revert everything to a logo you already had in house

 

Everyone should be fired, if it weren't for horrible no good very bad money wasting ideas I am not sure if we would have any ideas at all. Heads should roll but they won't because its just USF doing USF things. 

****. I'm agreeing with puc again. Must be a full moon.

[Dave_Glaser]

14 minutes ago, puc86 said:

1) Identify the issue of brand confusion by having too many logos and fonts

2) Hire firm to fix the issue

3) Have firm create a new logo with more fonts, colors and  slogans

4) Accept that as a reasonable solution

5) Ignore the fact we already have popular logos and fonts

6) Do not properly vet the changes

7) Roll out the changes to pretty much universal hate and mockery

8 ) Ignore the consumers and start wasting more money on rebranding

9) Finish rebranding

10) Waste more money and revert everything to a logo you already had in house

 

Everyone should be fired, if it weren't for horrible no good very bad money wasting ideas I am not sure if we would have any ideas at all. Heads should roll but they won't because its just USF doing USF things. 

Joe Hice. Goodbye

[Bull Dozer]

9 minutes ago, Apis Bull said:

USF has made so many academic advancements in recent years,but you want to fire people over a logo screw up?  It's a logo.  It was really bad,.  Its getting fixed. 

Yup, those people in charge of academic advancement probably aren't the big people pushing this overall. Maybe one of them that is already on the way out but I'm talking people in charge of marketing. Some true focus groups could have prevented this from ever happening. Just some basic stuff. My guess is somebody was trying to give somebody more powerful the results they wanted. Considering how bad the reaction was you can't convince me real research was done about this.... 

Also just because somebody is great at academic advancement doesn't mean they are great at marketing. Maybe somebody just needs to be kept on their own yard but somebody in makrekting or who hired the marketing firm to do this should definitely pay the piper. They foolishly wasted USF's resources. 

Edited May 4, 2019 by Bull Dozer

[Dave_Glaser]

20 minutes ago, puc86 said:

1) Identify the issue of brand confusion by having too many logos and fonts

2) Hire firm to fix the issue

3) Have firm create a new logo with more fonts, colors and  slogans

4) Accept that as a reasonable solution

5) Ignore the fact we already have popular logos and fonts

6) Do not properly vet the changes

7) Roll out the changes to pretty much universal hate and mockery

8 ) Ignore the consumers and start wasting more money on rebranding

9) Finish rebranding

10) Waste more money and revert everything to a logo you already had in house

 

Everyone should be fired, if it weren't for horrible no good very bad money wasting ideas I am not sure if we would have any ideas at all. Heads should roll but they won't because its just USF doing USF things. 

If this report is accurate, bravo. That’s a hard call to make when you’ve already made that investment, but give credit where due. There should be no other branding than the iconic “U” - it should be used exclusively and creatively. That’s how you build a good brand.

[Bull Dozer]

Also I think the fact powerful alumni who is a big player in marketing took charge of this says alot.... The fact Zimmerman felt the need to hold our hand in the transition shows we majorly dropped the ball here. Unfortunately jobs come with accountability, If you fail at something this scale you have to get what's coming. Especially when the reaction to the logo tells me this wasn't properly vetted... 

Edited May 4, 2019 by Bull Dozer

[Dave_Glaser]

9 minutes ago, Bull Dozer said:

Yup, those people in charge of academic advancement probably aren't the big people pushing this overall. Maybe one of them that is already on the way out but I'm talking people in charge of marketing. Some true focus groups could have prevented this from ever happening. Just some basic stuff. My guess is somebody was trying to give somebody more powerful the results they wanted. Considering how bad the reaction was you can't convince me real research was done about this.... 

Also just because somebody is great at academic advancement doesn't mean they are great at marketing. Maybe somebody just needs to be kept on their own yard but somebody in makrekting or who hired the marketing firm to do this should definitely pay the piper. They foolishly wasted USF's resources. 

Again. Joe Hice. Goodbye