-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Should KOLA rebrand their logo?
- Thread starter 30james
- Start date
They are so #1 it's amazing! Why mess with anything?
True
The Coca-Cola logo hasn't changed since the 1800s (except for that brief screw-up in the 1980s), and that's what KOLA's logo is mimicking.
Don't mess with success
Actually the study of business strategy shows that companies that lead in their industry typically seek out changes toward the end of the growth phase of the product life cycle (PLC), or at the latest while they are in the first portion of the maturity segment of the PLC. Those who subscribe to the "why mess with anything" philosophy typically don't realize that the market has morphed until they are already into the decline phase and by then a competitor has seized the opportunity to redefine the market; and the former leader settles into its decline phase lamenting what it used to be.
Both KOLA and KRTH have smartly operated this way by understanding that the definition of the product and its presentation need to evolve. Had they opted for "why mess with anything" over their tenure then by now other stations would have grabbed the mantle of classic hits leadership away from them.
In this case, the logo is very secondary to the product. In fact, changing the logo of established "non-physical" offerings can be destructive, as we are seeing with Twitter and whatever it is called today.
While the logo may appear on streaming apps, keeping it consistent can be an advantage.
We used to do product life cycle analysis at HBC under Dr. John Kennedy of Notre Dame and one of the key analysis points is that the product is free, not on a shelf and universally "in stock". Today's issue is not branding, but with 30% of homes with no radio, no longer always "in stock".
The question is whether a visual representation of an intangible product is static or progressive.
My perspective is that logos and names based on dial positions are in danger. "FM 100" is not a viable brand today unless the "100" is made to mean something beyond the dial position, like "one hundred percent best music" (bad example, but demonstration of getting away from dial position as a name).
And then there is the issue that stations are not at maturity or in decline, while the whole sector is. Sorta' like buggy whips where one brand may be the best, but overall market size is shrinking.
Not disagreeing with you, but then this question comes to mind: what keeps those of you still in the radio business going and motivated to stick with it? The prospects seem daunting.
No, their logo has reached iconic status and should not be changed
As the old saying goes "If it ain't broke don't fix it"
Which always seems to be the opposite that happens in radio. Like when Alt 105 in San francisco went away only to be replaced two years later with none other then live 105 which was live 105 before rebranding to Alt 105. And there are multiple examples of this over the years.
In la with 93.9 in 2006 blowing up the country station for moving 93.9. Didn't work out to well.
Which always seems to be the opposite that happens in radio. Like when Alt 105 in San francisco went away only to be replaced two years later with none other then live 105 which was live 105 before rebranding to Alt 105. And there are multiple examples of this over the years.
In la with 93.9 in 2006 blowing up the country station for moving 93.9. Didn't work out to well.
Last edited:
Outstanding posts from you both! Mucho Gracious! Shifting platforms is a nerve racking thing.
I have this thought regarding the K-Earth globe which may explain the change. The station's audience could be more into cars and crusing than trees and greens these days, EV's not withstanding, and there is growing political division on this topic what with gas prices, abolishing residential gas stoves, dead lawns and 'no watering' laws due to drought and on and on. Ditch the globe?
The spoken K-Earth brand is still timeless, I think. Just a wild ranging thought.
Last edited:
The old saying can be wrong also. Stagnation is the risk of “but we’ve always done it this way.” Does that mean changing every week? No. But it does man standing still can easily give competitors an advantage. Because it “ain’t broke” until it is.
If we can set aside the overwrought fake culture war BS from June, take Target as a general example. The bullseye has remained (and even that got a new style eons ago), but the way it has been incorporated into the brand has changed over time. The design of the word Target has changed multiple times. Stores are refreshed regularly with new looks. My local stores have never been broken based on the traffic. Still aren’t. But they change and evolve regularly.
Even the almighty Walmart logo has changed—dramatically and frequently all things considered over time. Was the chain broken each time they did that? No. Of course not.
And no, a single radio station is not Walmart. Not saying that. But the idea any given brand is sacrosanct until the wheels completely fall off is naive. There’s no magic formula for when a tweak to branding can be beneficial. And we know, especially in social media and forums like these, there will be loud complainers. Oh well, such is life.
But Target's interior design and layout are more like a radio station's formatics... imaging, transitions from jingles to produced spoken identification, amount of DJ presence, contests, and so on.
A store's layout and decoration are the same as a station's formatics. Neither is comparable to a logo for an audio service.
The logo was also mentioned for both then and Walmart, as just two examples. There will always be some “but but but” down in the weeds. We can find all kinds of businesses that have changed logos without being “broken” which did not break anything. 🙄
The point is standing pat is not always the best option. It can be counterproductive. It can also be the best choice. There is no one universal option even in the same industry.
Wal-Mart doesn't use its logo from its era of rapid expansion in the 1970s, which is probably a good thing.
Walmart Logo and Its History | LogoMyWay
blog.logomyway.com
Probably so. And they’ve kept up with general trends in design. Have they always been at the leading edge? Nah. But they change when it’s time to change.
There will never be full agreement on any type of ranking list, but this has some good examples of designs that worked overall, nitpicking aside: Top 15 Logo Redesigns from Top Companies - AutoGrow
There will never be full agreement on any type of ranking list, but this has some good examples of designs that worked overall, nitpicking aside: Top 15 Logo Redesigns from Top Companies - AutoGrow
And there are many companies whose logo is simply a minor tweak of the bog-standard Helvetica font, including the aforementioned Target:
One thing I might try and do is move the transmitter from Box Spring Mtn to say Sunset Ridge above Claremont. Since they're a grandfathered Superpower Class B (30 kw @ 1300 ft,) even with a required power reduction to probably about 3-4 kw from Sunset they would still cover the entire IE plus add a direct signal to most of the LA Basin. Why not? KRTH covers the entire IE from Wilson -- why shouldn't KOLA cover LA as well.
- Status