New Farmer's Insurance Logo
- Started
- Last post
- 27 Responses
- vaxorcist0
ok, this went totally sideways, possibly my rant..
Logos aren't just "cool designs" ....they have to be appropriate to the brand/company/audience/market... not, they're often re-done in a few years or regretted for a long time...
and I don't think this Farmers logo fits the brand or target market .... of course they're not advertising directly to farmers, but with a name like that, why not at least have some awareness of not being too slick... otherwise, why not just change the name at the same time?
And...even if design firms may compete mostly on "good design", ad agencies with brains and guts know the targeting is what matters more than you think...
TARGETING is a main reason an agency gets more than $99 per logo, otherwise it's just either a "coolness contest" or a "doller per logo" thing... this is why we justify ideas to a client who would otherwise get a dollar logo and turn it into a matter of "whatever the client likes vs whatever the designer likes" and then you go downhill into a messy compromise...
So... this targeting is the trump card, once we lose it, we risk losing our cred and being just another low-budget supplier....
- monospaced0
I think you're overthinking it. The new redesign is a clear evolution, not a complete overhaul, so they definitely took into consideration their 90-year heritage and audience on that front. Otherwise, it's just cleaning up: detailed sun rays were simplified, shield is retained along with color, but without the tiny type (that never worked anyway). And, since they are now just an everyday insurance company, they are clearly looking forward. For everyone saying that this is trendy "flat" design, I will say that it's just clean design. Perhaps they should have used a serif typeface, sure... but I don't think they missed the target, not at all.
- lol @ audienceCygnusZero4
- you know what I mean... families/companies that have been customers for a long-ass time... that's what I meantmonospaced
- Agreed.duckseason
- ...maybe I am overthinking it, part of my guts tell me it looks like 1930's futurism meets hipster flat-design-er-ism.vaxorcist
- aesthetically, I can see how parts of it are quite nice, but what are they trying to say?vaxorcist
- they wrote on every press release what they're saying... but mostly that the logo isn't 85 years oldmonospaced
- do you think there's a problem if i need a press release explaining a logo? i don't get how heritage is a bad thing especially for themdoesnotexist
- especially for themdoesnotexist
- no, I'm just saying that if he's wondering WHY they're doing this, they're totally transparent about itmonospaced
- CygnusZero40
Why is it so little on their site?
- And why is it so big on this page? hehe
http://www.farmers.c…CygnusZero4 - Because they have a douchebag washed up actor on their homepage.utopian
- And why is it so big on this page? hehe
- vaxorcist0
"Make the Logo Smaller" .... maybe that was said in some meeting...
- doesnotexist0
reminds me of this
- I LIKE PURPLEcbass99
- which is basically what vaxorcist is sayingdoesnotexist
- this logo redesign isn't even close to thismonospaced
- it is close!doesnotexist
- they took everything away from the old mark that made it specialdoesnotexist
- they kept all the elementsmonospaced
- I agree that the typeface sucks, and it could have a more hand made feel thoughmonospaced
- dbloc0
I guess the background looks more like crops now with a shield in front of it.
- vaxorcist0
Interesting graphically, but it reminds me of something like a George Orwell novel, animal farm, the FUTURA-like font, the color burst behind the sheild, it seems a bit like an early 20'th century authoritarian government thing, not a friendly neighborhood local insurance agent.... part of me thinks this will look too "wall street" for the target market that may want something old fashioned and friendly, not too cold and perfect....
also, it reminds me a bit of the color scheme of....
- weird, reminds me of the color scheme of the US flagmonospaced
- <dbloc
- monospaced0
Definite improvement. Should serve them well moving forward.
- doesnotexist0
preferred the old one. new one is full of trend rash.
- utopian0
NOT FLAT ENOUGH.
- vaxorcist0
OK.... rant here.. from my ad agency background, where we had to often shoot down internal great designs that wouldn't work at all for a particular brand/target market.
I think the new one is cool and trendy... good for a different brand and market, not for actual farmers, nor for people who are looking for the plain-spoken honesty associated with farmers in a world of fast talking insurance salesmen with expensive suits and shiny business cards...
This is possibly a great example of design for designers sake - nicely elegant, not for the target market's mindset.... people are skeptical of insurance companies, banks too big to fail, wall street and corporate welfare from gov't bailouts,etc...
- JUST LIKE GEICO...
Once they start advertising and marketing heavily, their pricing soar!utopian - lol, you think this is insurance for actual farmers???? Fucking lolmonospaced
- no..... ugh, not for actual farmers... but their appeal is "like real poeple" not "slick wall streeters"vaxorcist
- JUST LIKE GEICO...
- utopian0
Let's be fair, all insurance is a scam and a marketing gimmick.
- utopian0
*waits for house to catch fire...or collapse... to see how the insurance really pays out!
- monospaced0
"good for a different brand and market, not for actual farmers, nor for people who are looking for the plain-spoken honesty associated with farmers in a world of fast talking insurance salesmen with expensive suits and shiny business cards..."
chill out, it's not insurance for actual farmers dude
- It once was: http://en.wikipedia.…ideaist
- irrelevantmonospaced
- Mono's right. They're actively seeking to shift this perception.waterhouse
- not actual farmers.. but the appeal of an imagined past where insurance was not all shysters...vaxorcist
- fuckin' a, you think this new logo only appeals to shysters and rich fucks? c'mon...monospaced
- capn_ron0
Not insurance for Farmers. It is just the name.
- refunktion0
Originally, it was intended for farmers.
- doesnotexist0
did you guys know farmer's insurance was for farmers back in the day?
- really, for farmers?refunktion
- dude. i looked it up, it's real.doesnotexist
- on the internet?dbloc
- wasn't that state farm's ad, if you read it on the internet it must be truevaxorcist
- dbloc0
Farmers was originally for farmers that did farming