Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Ohio State spends $45K on logo, seal changes

seger.25@osu.edu

Published: Sunday, February 10, 2013

Updated: Monday, February 11, 2013 15:02

logo

OSU spent $7,700 on design refinement and another $37,500 on research of the new athletic logo, academic logo and university seal it released to the public on Feb. 4.

Ohio State spent $7,700 on design refinement and another $37,500 on qualitative and quantitative research of the new athletic logo, academic logo and university seal it released to the public on Feb. 4, said Jacquie Aberegg, assistant vice president of OSU marketing, in an email.

While the Block “O” has been part of the OSU athletic department’s logo for decades, the words “Ohio State” on the department’s logo will now be all black instead of black and white.

Aberegg said it is important the Block “O” continue to be the mark of OSU varsity sports teams and merchandise.

The academic logo has also been changed to a Block “O” with the words “The Ohio State University” to the right of it.

“The (new) design retains its national recognition and familiarity, while strengthening the presence of the ‘Ohio State’ name to support future marketing applications,” Aberegg said.

However, some OSU students think the new athletic logo is too bold.

“I would have to agree with a lot of other people that I don’t like it as much at all,” said Matthew Ferry, a second-year in biology. “I think having the white spaces in between (the letters) outlined them better.”

The Block “O” will take the place of the pre-existing round “O” on OSU’s university seal, which is mostly seen on diplomas and official university documents.

OSU’s mission with the changes was to give the school one notable identity and to create a symbol that gives the best representation of academics and athletics, Aberegg said.

“We engaged hundreds of students, staff, faculty, alumni, friends and Ohioans to ensure the new identity would carry the depth and breadth of the institution,” Aberegg said in the email. “Unifying the university’s areas of excellence under a common identity system — with the iconic Block ‘O’ as the common element — amplifies the strength of our institution.”

Aberegg said the university greatly reduced the cost of the update by using the expertise of faculty, staff and alumni to carefully explore the possibilities and implications that are involved in making such a change.

The decision-making process has been taking place for 10 months, but there will still be a few more months until the change is really noticeable, Aberegg said.

“Formal guidelines and updated identity marks will become available in March/April,” Aberegg said. “The update will become visible through some of our larger units beginning in April/May.”

The implementation of the updated visual identity “will be a rolling change over the next 12-18 months,” Aberegg said, and it will be applied “from stationery to online applications to building signage. Identity updates will be incorporated into current workflows and construction plans.”

 

This story has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 11, 2013

An earlier version of the headline for this story said the university spent $45,000 on a new athletic logo. In fact, it spent $45,000 on the university seal, academic logo and athletic logo. The earlier version also stated that the Board of Trustees approved the athletic logo change, but the Board only needed to approve changes to the university seal.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

26 comments

Anonymous
Thu Feb 14 2013 18:51
get back to wok then
Anonymous
Thu Feb 14 2013 17:24
some who read and respond are obviously graduates
Anonymous
Thu Feb 14 2013 14:49
Oh come on BSME AND MBA grad. Quit YOUR whining! If YOU have time to read the Lantern and respond to these comments, YOU are not spending enough time studying.
BSME AND MBA grad
Thu Feb 14 2013 12:54
Oh come on guys. Quit your whining! If you have time to read the Lantern and respond to this minute change, you are not spending enough time studying.
ccc
Thu Feb 14 2013 11:28
It's ugly. I was not a fan of the previous logo and this is a step sideways in the same pile of ugly. It looks like it should be a logo for a video game or an amusement park ride. It's not timeless or classic either. It's tacky, and somehow reminds me of Puddy's 8-ball jacket from Seinfeld in the sense of 1990's era sports paraphernalia, Starter jackets and the like. Why can't we just use the basic block O?

I too question the process as well. "Experts" and other interested parties were involved in the decision? I've seen plenty of work done by "experts" that was 'out of touch', amateur and shoddy, or perhaps they weren't given enough control by the client.

GordonGees Bowtie
Wed Feb 13 2013 14:49
This logo is not only ugly, but it is also expensive and disgusting.

I get that sometimes we need to evolve and change...but wow is that logo terrible. 45k? Yikes.

Anonymous
Wed Feb 13 2013 10:14
I'm just glad this spending has become public.
I'd like to see more transparency regarding how the school spends money.
Anonymous
Tue Feb 12 2013 19:35
I've been an award-winning graphic artist / marketing & public relations consultant for over 25 years and owned my own agency for 18. I've not only been on the recipient end of consulting contracts like this, I've also sat on governmental bodies that award them.

The funniest part of it is that no matter how broke government claims to be, they love to spend unseemly amounts of money in consulting fees on projects like this, and they justify the expense to the general public and media by claiming things like "$37,500 was spent on qualitative and quantitative research of the new athletic logo," while ostensibly only $7,700 went to the actual creation of the logo. The truth, of course, is that "qualitative and quantitative research" is code for "the agency fooled the government into believing real work was being conducted on the project for X months-justifying the huge fee-before they finally had one of their graphic artists poop out the logo in about fifteen minutes."

Anonymous
Tue Feb 12 2013 19:21
I'm a grad student at OSU, currently working for peanuts as a teaching assistant. I recently got asked to represent OSU by presenting my work at a major, national conference, so I petitioned the university for a few hundred bucks to help me attend ... and nothing. The coffers were mysteriously "empty." But I'm glad to see they had $45k to throw away on a logo that didn't really need changing in the first place. I hate OSU.
Anonymous
Tue Feb 12 2013 18:32
David,
Thanks for your whining about our whining. We have now been schooled by the Lord of All Whiners.
David
Tue Feb 12 2013 18:12
@Anon: What principal? Paying very little for a new logo for an enormous organization? My point was that they didn't put much money into it, relatively speaking, and you're picking the wrong thing to take a principled stand on.
Anonymous
Tue Feb 12 2013 17:34
I'm a creative director who manages a team of graphic designers for a living, and I think I can offer some insights into how this may have gone down. First, the university probably went through an extensive selection process to find just the right agency to tackle such an important rebranding effort. After carefully selecting that agency, they then likely proceeded to give them very poor direction as to the strategic goals of the rebrand. The agency then probably spent countless frustrating billable hours throwing ideas at the wall until something "felt right" to a committee of decision makers, none of which have the slightest clue about what makes a good logo design. Several options were probably then focus-group tested for qualitative insights from a bunch of students who signed up because they got $50 out of the deal, not because they care in the least about giving valid feedback. In that testing, there may have been one or two outspoken people who said something along the lines of "I like the old logo... but it needs to 'pop' more"... or... "None of these new options have enough 'wow factor' for me. What if you used more black so it stands out?"... or perhaps... "The white inside the words makes me think the school is 'hiding something' (or any other number of inane, worthless comments). Armed with this insightful feedback, the committee had all the information they needed to make the call (probably without ever asking the creative agency's opinion after paying them $45,000). In fact, the whole exercise was probably just a clever ruse to validate some University official's personal opinion that they should just color in the existing logo. Armed with "scientific proof" from testing, he had everything he needed to convince the rest of the committee. And that's how you flush $45,000 down the toilet.
Anonymous
Tue Feb 12 2013 17:11
Hey David

It's the principal of the thing. If the school overpays that much for that work. How much other money do they waste. It's time for the university to be accountable. It's our tax money and our miney we spend at the school how about something like this
T H E
OHIO$TATE
University

David
Tue Feb 12 2013 10:21
$45k is chump change, guys, quit your complaining. Pepsi spent over a million dollars on their crappy new logo. OSU's new logo isn't as crappy as Pepsi's, so they got one heck of a bargain.

Seriously, whining about $45,000 when the university's budget is $5,150,000,000 is a complete waste of time.

Bucky81
Mon Feb 11 2013 21:07
What a joke!...Now we know why they raise the ticket prices and tuition fees to cover stuipidity..??????? Probably didn't think to offer a current graphic student a free quarter to do the job..
Anonymous
Mon Feb 11 2013 13:28
I have emailed the woman who is quoted in the story, to quote on her next project! ; )

and to tell her what i think

graphic designer dad

Anonymous
Mon Feb 11 2013 12:40
some kid was bored during class so he colored in his Ohio State notebook with sharpie. a $45,000 design was born. what a joke.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 11 2013 12:01
That's partly why I don't give to the university anymore. They have more money than they know what to do with.
RiGhT!
Mon Feb 11 2013 11:34
They just paid more for a logo then they pay for me to teach students at osu how do do graphic design. I THREW UP IN MY MOUTH JUST LOOKING AT THAT POS! And yes I understand the hidden costs but that is a pure shame. Congrats to the designer and consultant that pulled off the contract. You worked the system like a perfect puppet master.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 11 2013 10:40
Okay, the self-supporting athletic department most likely paid for it..

But even with that, that is too much!!! Any random graphic designer or someone with microsoft paint could've done the same job, if not much better, for a lot less. Our board of trustees is severely out of touch. I always thought that our logo was outdated, but this looks like an extremely cheap (oh the irony) attempt at revamping it.





log out