
The most overused logos, at the moment - TheBiv
http://www.gtgraphics.org/genericlogos.html
======
gkoberger
Site is down for me, however this works:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20140625100152/http://www.gtgrap...](https://web.archive.org/web/20140625100152/http://www.gtgraphics.org/genericlogos.html)

~~~
nichochar
wow, this may seem stupid but I found this comment awesome. I was about to
poste "down" or "down for me" when I saw yours and you simply bring a
solution. Kind of inspired by the attitude man

------
jwallaceparker
When I was young my great-grandfather started a tanning business, in the sense
that he was a tanner who produced leather goods.

He had to buy a sign to put above his shop. The sign maker asked him if he
wanted to put a logo on the sign, too.

"Why?" asked my grandfather.

"So people will recognize your business," said the sign maker.

"That's what the name is for," answered grandfather.

Even at the time I thought this was an interesting perspective.

I always remember that day because afterward when the sign maker left the next
person to come into the tanning store was a woman from a nearby dessert shop
who gave us free ice cream cones.

Unrelated to logo design, that woman later married my uncle!

~~~
Retric
Logos seem more important in the physical realm than the digital one. Great
for advertizing on Bilbords, shirts, TV etc but meaningless when the goal is
to click the link not remember the company.

~~~
Gustomaximus
There is still plenty of awareness generation on digital ads, especially
desktop. Across I few products/brands I have monitored this effect. Typically
I find on desktop display ads you will generate 2-4 additional visitors for
every on ad click. Mobile interestingly is significantly less, more like an
extra 0.5 visitors for each click generated.

More than logos, you need consistent and recognisable look and feel to an
advert. This way the companies presence is communicated at a glace, which is
what most people offer to digital ads.

------
incision
As the article admits - _' Although, generally, the quality of work is
high...'_ the general quality of these designs is interesting to me.

Historically, low-quality art and design was a good (though certainly not
conclusive) indicator of a low quality product.

These days, every fly by night business can have a slick logo, every
shovelware game can gleam in stills thanks to the underlying engine and every
inane YouTuber has a pre-roll that could pass for a major studio.

All at once barriers to entrance are lower, reach is wider and and filtering
becomes much harder. Social networks and learning/recommendation features feel
like logical if not simply necessary conclusions in response.

~~~
GFischer
I think there are interesting opportunities there, for curated content :)

For example, I want an equivalent of "TV channels" with varied programming
for, say, Netflix, and while YouTube does have channels, it's not easy for
myself to discover them (it takes a lot of time and there's no easy branding
to ease the discovery process).

Edit: I agree that most of those logos do look pretty good. And things like
Bootstrap have lowered the barrier needed for a website to look professional.
Both are good things, but make using old heuristics for filtering ineffective
:)

------
lifeisstillgood
A good logo is the least of your problems. A property company? go with a set
of roofs over your name, a car company? Choose a swishy logo. Make sure your
company name is clear and readable and get on with the hundred other things
you need to produce million dollar turnover.

Once your company is employing a hundred people, turning over 8 figures _then_
you can afford a rebranding exercise. Before that it's so much procrastination
and mental wank.

You live and breathe your company's essence - if that's not what you want, try
therapy not logos.

However, it must have taken some time to gather that and is an impressive
overview. More power to them.

------
timthorn
What's interesting to me (as an Englishman with family connections to the USA)
is that all the logos feel very American. I can't put my finger on why, but
there's something that marks them out as coming from that culture.

~~~
Kluny
They also invented the concept of national flags. Might have something to do
with that.

~~~
krallja
Really big citation needed.

------
jedberg
The best advice I ever heard about logos was from Mat Groening, creator of
Simpsons and Futurama. He said, "Whenever I make a main character, I try to
make them recognizable as a simple black and white silhouette". Think about
Bart, Homer, Marge, Lisa, Bender, Fry, Leela. All of them instantly
recognizable with just a few solid lines.

If you do the same with your logo, it will be super memorable and
recognizable. Think about all the best ones -- Nike, Apple, Mcdonalds. The
reddit logo and HN's "Y" follow that rule too.

~~~
grayclhn
The Heartbleed logo comes immediately to mind as well.

------
thinkmoore
Maybe companies should pay for good design instead of paying as little as
possible for people to enter "competitions"? Good design takes time. Good
designers should be compensated.

~~~
fjolthor
Good design isn't as essential as other facets of a company starting out.

~~~
notduncansmith
I'd be careful about conflating "a good logo" with "good design". Design will
make or break plenty of companies. Logos don't really matter; as long as it a)
fits the brand, b) doesn't offend anyone, and c) won't get you sued, your logo
is doing its job. Way too much importance is placed on logos, in my opinion.

------
MikeKusold
I think that he is a little unfair in the "Roofs and cubic buildings"
category. Most of those are for real estate companies, and they have some
variation. As long as a competitor doesn't have a very similar logo, these are
very good for real estate companies.

------
ThomPete
People generally misinterpret the role of a logo.

It's purpose is not to be unique but to be rememberable.

That's all that really matters (and of course not offending people)

~~~
gkoberger
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.

~~~
ChrisLTD
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.

~~~
GFischer
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?

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

~~~
GFischer
Here's what Jason Cohen wrote on naming ideas:

[http://blog.asmartbear.com/naming-
startup.html](http://blog.asmartbear.com/naming-startup.html)

And on naming his company (Smart Bear):

[http://blog.asmartbear.com/pick-company-name-
brand.html](http://blog.asmartbear.com/pick-company-name-brand.html)

~~~
thaumasiotes
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.

------
mantesso
I'd add these ones:
[http://yourlogoisnothardcore.tumblr.com](http://yourlogoisnothardcore.tumblr.com)

------
DanBC
Can someone explain the first example?

A name with an arc through the name. What's the design purpose? Because most
of them look a bit like the name has been crossed out.

I could understand it if the arcs were behind the name - that would mean the
name is kind of hovering over a sphere. But lots of the examples show the name
behind that arc.

EDIT: one of the later categories is "Use of the font 'satisfaction'". I
looked and thought that some of the names were using a different font, because
I was sure that Altus was Atlus (even though Atlus isn't a word). So I guess
that design really fails? (I misread some others - "street bitch"; "sleet your
bed". I don't have any reading problem that I'm aware of. I am a bit tired.
But how would someone guard against that kind of problem with their logo?)

Complaining about use of spheres seems a tad harsh - there aren't many solids
and spheres are less distracting than most others.

~~~
bhickey
> Can someone explain the first example?

I think the arc is the Earth.

~~~
DanBC
Okay, that makes sense. Except it's so poorly executed in some examples that
it doesn't look like the name hovering above a planet, but a name that's just
been crossed out.

------
ForHackernews
These all seem fine. Honestly, if your company is something incredibly generic
like _______ Capital Strategies, then a generic logo with some letters and an
arrow is perfectly acceptable.

------
Alupis
I can honestly say, picking a new logo for a new business is hard work!

You want something recognizable and unique, represents your brand and
message... at all pixel sizes, in greyscale and color, etc. How will this look
printed on letterhead? How about in an email signature? What about stretched
out for a banner on our building? Is it too similar to someone else's?

With all that said, -- the logos in the article are all pretty generic "safe"
logos for more "corporate-like" businesses... which isn't necessarily a bad
thing.

~~~
protonfish
Which is why you should just pick a font and write out the name of your
company. Most of the rest of logo "design" is just cruft.

------
krallja
> Trees where the trunks are people or hands

Oh hey, Khan Academy!

------
jleader
I liked "Midwest Dental Arts", in the group described as "The company's
acronym cut in two colors by an arc (usually Trajan font)". All the other
logos in the group have a downwards-concave arc; the dental logo is concave
upwards, like a smile. It may be a little hokey, but it's the only one in the
group that's playing with the cliche.

------
_RPM
Blocked by mod_slotlimit. More information about this error may be available
in the server error log.

------
alex_doom
Those all look like they are made in those dime-store logo factories. They
charge $100-500 for some copy'n'paste shapes that the client "loves" because
it looks just like their competitor.

------
emehrkay
Very surprised not to see the hexagon. I thought that I was being original
when creating a hexagon logo, but took a look around and realized that I chose
the shape because it was familiar.

------
krzrak
great :) I wonder, how did they find all those logos?

~~~
swamp40
They probably made them all, for $5 each.

------
steanne
i am relieved that the company named papyrus, who's listed for using a
specific font, ISN'T listed for using papyrus.

------
tedchs
Looks like this is one of the "most overused Web servers" at the moment. HTTP
errors about mod_slotlimit.

------
hxw
Of course logos from spec work sites will be generic and overused. Good,
original logos cost a lot of money.

------
jccooper
I like the "Direct Capital Group", which manages to fit three categories at
the same time.

------
thisjepisje
Satisfaction is a great font though.

~~~
krzrak
I find it completely illegible. But maybe it's just me...

------
WaxProlix
So if these are instances of a bad logo, what makes a _good_ one?

~~~
awendt
See “What Makes A Great Logo”, [http://www.code-
interactive.com/thinker/a112.html](http://www.code-
interactive.com/thinker/a112.html)

