A logo is central to brand identity. A change can signal to consumers that the product has been updated or reimagined, potentially refreshing the brand’s image or aligning it with current trends. However, if the change is too drastic or doesn’t resonate with the existing customer base, it might lead to confusion or even loss of brand loyalty.
People often associate certain attributes or values with a logo. A new logo might be perceived as a sign of innovation, a shift in brand strategy, or an attempt to appeal to a new demographic. The reception can vary; some might appreciate the change as a sign of progress, while others might feel disconnected from the brand they knew.
If the logo change coincides with a strategic shift in market positioning (like moving from a luxury to a mass-market appeal), it can significantly influence how the product is perceived in the marketplace. The effectiveness of this move depends on how well the new logo communicates the new positioning.
Many consumers have an emotional attachment to logos, especially for products they’ve used for years. Altering this can either revitalize interest or alienate long-time users. The success here depends on how well the new design captures the essence of what made the brand beloved initially while updating for contemporary relevance.
A new logo can garner attention, providing an opportunity for marketing campaigns. This can be beneficial in terms of media coverage and social media buzz, potentially increasing visibility. However, if the logo change is poorly received, it might generate negative publicity.
Actually, this should be a conversation. We are not casting our votes yet. We all should express what we like or don’t like. These proposals are drafts at this point. If enough ppl express feedback that goes in the same direction then the proposal may get updated before it goes to vote.
Love the idea that a temporary logo change would signal there’s voting upcoming and in progress. Maybe two different but connected alterations of the same design to distinguish these two phases. Brilliant 🫶🏻
Nay. Actually, I wish Sanctum used the same blue logo everywhere. It’s bright. It’s friendly. I want to look at $Cloud in my wallet and see the same cheerful blue logo
And put this one up every time there’s voting in progress. Like a flag signaling that the king is in the castle or is gone visiting peoples or other territories.
If we are going full futard in 2025 then adopting the ad-hoc red futardio logo for a week broadcasts that intention. Sanctum has great design and UX so we don’t need to be precious or worried about disrupting that with a fun temporary logo. This entire year will be a big experiment so this is an opportunity to hoist a flag that says as much.
The logo change is meant to be temporary, just for a week, and was intended as something fun, a quick test to try things out! CW’s new logo is very nice and would celebrate this new phase, while the earlier one also had a meaningful connection to this moment of change.
If the proposal passes, it would be an exciting way to see our influence in action, making a tangible change and supporting the Sanctum team’s idea, even if just for fun. I don’t see it as a matter of personal taste. If it doesn’t pass, it would reflect the community’s will but might also come across as resistance to change or new ideas. And in my opinion, we need to stay open to these, especially as we’re exploring a completely new way of doing things!
)