
Fashion brands all seem to be using the same font - ValentineC
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-20/why-fashion-brands-all-use-the-same-style-font-in-their-logos
======
two2two
Since the article doesn’t directly give an answer, I’ll assert that it’s a
result of the proliferation of screens and what younger generations are used
to seeing. When selecting a typeface to modify for a brand, it’s becoming
increasingly difficult to not feel comic-sans type objections to anything with
a little character.

I predict the future of branding will be comprised mainly of symbols (logos).
Names will all be in a similar, device friendly, typeface as we see here.

~~~
booleandilemma
I wonder if companies will ever try to get emojis for their logos?

------
sonnyblarney
This happened in every other industry for very interesting but vague reasons,
I suggest a lot of the same behaviour is at play in fashion.

See the great documentary 'Helvetica' [1] for an exploration of that issue. (I
couldn't believe that I was going to watch a documentary about a font. But I
did, and it changed my view of a lot of things)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helvetica_(film)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helvetica_\(film\))

~~~
mannykannot
Very meta: the fashion of fashion.

I am not renowned for my sense of fashion or of marketing, so this is probably
wrong, but I would have thought that this means there's no better time to pick
a distinctive font.

It is not clear to me why it would be important for one font to work
everywhere: if you can get trademark protection on one, can one not do so for
several variants? I recall an interview with one of Google's early employees
saying that he was initially aghast at the idea of Google Doodles: your logo
represents your brand, or something to that effect. Maybe that sort of one-
true-logo dogma is behind this trend.

------
pkaler
Uggh. I dislike the new Burberry logo. All these brands seemed to be moving to
Gotham, Futura, or Proxima Nova.

My guess is that is because the typeface has to look good in print, signage,
large screens, small screens, stitched into cloth, and stamped into buttons.

Has anyone worked in textiles and know the tradeoffs of different typefaces?

~~~
Jhsto
I do not think putting the brand on a textile has much relevance. I own
designer pieces and they have little visible branding. Sure, engraving sans
serif on a button is easier than serif, but if you have watched documentaries
like Helvetica, the real reason is likely legibility.

~~~
kirykl
Branding textiles either visibly on the outside or on small tags inside is
where most of all high fashion textiles derive value. How is that not
relevant?

In fact when sold to “last season” liquidators many high fashion labels are
cut or removed to indicate loss of value

~~~
Jhsto
At least to me, the value proposition is different. I do not buy much avant-
garde, so most of my pieces look quite ordinary. The difference to say, H&M
jacket, is the durability and materials. I do not think these are exclusive to
just designer brands, so basically, designer clothing buys me quality
assurance. In my perspective, I could spend the time to find brands which
consistently produce good garments, or go to second-hand stores to look for
bargains, but that takes too much time. That is, I'd buy a garment from Kering
subsidiaries just because Farfetch says it's authentic. But, for me at least,
I would be okay for all branding to be stripped away before the garment ships.
This is pretty much for safety reasons while I am wearing the cloth.

------
gburt
This article doesn't seem to answer the question. It just asserts, without
evidence, that "luxury is about no-nonsense boldness." Why wasn't this true in
the past?

~~~
theoh
You're taking that line out of context and rephrasing it.

"That said, the overall trend is hard to miss: Luxury isn’t connoted with
fussy extras; no-nonsense boldness is the rule. “Spartan solutions have been
rampant in all areas of design,” Gardner says."

In other words, the current trend is to use no-nonsense boldness to connote
luxury. It is explicitly described as a trend. Fashions change, and the
article doesn't deny that or claim to explain why. It might have something to
do with increasing typographical literacy among the public, or with the
popularity of authentic, no-frills, "vintage industrial" design.

------
disishhsha
The new Burberry logo would look right at home on a pack of hot dogs.

------
beerlord
Trends in fashion are changing since events like the Panama Papers.
Ostentatious displays of wealth and luxury are no longer in vogue. Many luxury
clients have obtained their wealth through some degree or fraudulent activity
or are operating in societies marked by high degrees of inequality.

Demonstrating status to the street pleb is no longer fashionable or desirable.
Demonstrating status to your fellow elites is - and they recognise brands and
styles.

Luxury brands know their clientele extremely well, and the logo changes
represent all this.

------
nderjung
It's not just fashion brands, Bloomberg's entire website is "using the same"
font. Number 8 on HN right now is Inter UI.

------
Animats
They're emulating the success of PINK and HOLLISTER, maybe? Those brands have
been using plain block letters on blah garments for years.

~~~
pkaler
I doubt it. Hollister sells $32 jeans. No one in the luxury space wants to
copy that.

They are probably copying Tom Ford which uses Gotham. Tom Ford sells $4000
leather bags.

~~~
Animats
And PINK sells sweat pants with really ugly giant lettering. That's the font
the high end is emulating.

