| |
02/02/2009 -11:00 AM |
Last year, and within weeks of one another, three publishers that I track made the same mistake. They changed their logos.
Don’t get me wrong, a logo change isn’t always a disaster. Sometimes it is long overdue, a welcome change, a vast improvement.
Other times, not so much.
When these changes were made—two to music titles, one to a crafting title—sales dropped precipitously, and through every channel. Bulk sales, returns flows, bookstore pay on scan data all showed a loss of 20 percent in sold copies.
The logos were in need of updating, the changes were to various degrees, but all three of these changes shared two characteristics. Â
One, the logo was less readable: A less legible typeface, a smaller font, a reduced use of contrast, or the implementation of an abbreviated name.
Two: In no case was any warning provided to the retailers, the distributors, or the circulation group prior to the change being made.
The net result was that newsstand browsers didn’t recognize or couldn’t find their title on the newsstand. Perhaps they will get used to the new logos; perhaps they will, in the end, prefer the new look. But long after that happens, the publications’ sales will still be trying to recover from the rippling effect of the lower efficiencies and subsequent downward distribution and sales spirals.
To successfully change logos, or for any successful re-design, publishers need to bring the circulation department into the loop. They need to bring their readers into the loop. Testing the new logo on the newsstand, in direct mail pieces, on line; giving the readers a few issues advance notice to adjust to the pending change; calling out the new logo on the cover of the publication itself. Each of these steps can help prevent a loss in sales that might prove irretrievable.



Connect with Magazine, eMedia & Publishing Industry Peers

No Upcoming Webinars
