Soccernomics: New Timbers Crest, Take 2

Now that I have commented about it a couple of times I am kinda locked in to commenting once again (and hopefully for the last time) about the Timbers sudden and abrupt re-jiggering of their new crest.  In case you missed the drama, the Timbers, with lots of pomp and circumstance, introduced their new MLS crest in Director Park, during halftime of the USA-England match.  [Weird to think of the hype now, after both sides were revealed to be decidedly mediocre]  The unveiling did not go well. A vocal group of Timbers Army-types announced their displeasure almost immediately with a profanity laced chant.  Classy.

Here was the original version:

Timbers Army types hated it - but special ire was directed at the axe, which, with the shading and detail, was derided as 'cartoonish.' In fact I got a comment on this blog directing me to a Facebook page dedicated to getting the Timbers to change it. No way in heck, thought I, will the Timbers touch it. To me it represented the Timbers trying to stay in touch with the roots of the team (in reality these roots are entirely erzatz, I mean come on, resurecting ther mame for a second division franchise is not the same thing as having a long-standing team).  I was equivocal about it, but my initial reaction was that the shading on the axe was bad.  In fact it was especially bad when the secondary color was produced as yellow which it was a lot at first. In fact, I thought that the Timbers did this intentionally to ease the transition away from yellow. If so, this was a mistake, because the axe shading works much better in the moss green that is the actual secondary color.  In fact the first logo started growing on me and my eight year old son eagerly grabbed a new t-shirt and has worn it proudly:

Which I think, in the dark/light green colors, looks pretty snazzy. Not at all classic like I prefer, but then it is not about me, and I can be objective.

Next thing you know the Timbers abruptly cave to the Timbers Army and announce the newly redesigned new logo:

Which seems to me an improvement in some ways - the logo is a bit cleaner and simpler - but essentially unchanged, save for the axe which has no detail at all. And now, I am not so sure which I prefer. [What I am sure about is that I am pissed off that I spent $20 on a temporary logo shirt for the boy - I await word about what they are going to do with people like me] The boy hates the new logo compared to the old one, which makes sense to me - the old one seemed more geared to the younger set.  The new one feels less logo-y and more crest-y so I guess if I saw the two and had to pick I'd pick the new one, but it sure has the feel of a compromise - a fully realized design tweaked at the last minute.  I thought a good compromise would have been a refreshed original logo as a secondary crest.  And if you are going to redesign it, you should start from scratch.  So in then end, I think the Timbers should have stuck to their original design and, like Arsenal, the fury would have quickly subsided.

I don't know whether to think the Timbers should be applauded for reposinding to the criticism or if this portends something worse - letting the Timbers Army have too much agency over the team's business decisions. The Timbers should have involved the Army in the design process from the get-go, for sure,  and they blundered on the public unveiling because they didn't.  And the Timbers Army has every right to express their opinion and they matter a lot - a successful MLS Timbers need them.  But come on, is this new new logo so different that before the world was ending and now everything is sunshine and light?  No.  [And of course, lots of folks still hate it]

The fact is that the Timbers Army are great and a big reason that soccer in Portland is unique, but they too often act like adolescents and are going to have to clean up their act if the Timbers are going to be a successful MLS team. Profane chanting in a public square? - c'mon, that is totally bush league. The Timbers are going to have to fill a lot of expensive seats and families don't always like sitting and listening to chanted obscenities for two hours.  So there is going to have to be a middle ground here and I know the Timbers Army feel ownership of the team right now, but they are going to have to learn to share.

So that's all soccer, where is the 'nomics? Well, the Timbers are in the always sticky situation of trying to attract new customers while still keeping the loyal ones happy.  Remember New Coke?  I didn't think so.  There is an additional pitfall when part of the allure of being a customer is that you are part of a small club.  It is similar to a popular underground band that hits big.  All of a sudden some of of the utility customers got from consuming the band's music disappears as part of the fun was knowing about a band only a few others did as well.  Lots of big time companies have trouble with this, so it does not surprise me that the Timbers have too.  A little more inclusion before and a little more spine after would seem to have been a better strategy.

Oh, and as far as merchandise, the Timbers are trying to have it both ways: hawking the old stuff without explicitly disclosing than change.  In fact if you go to their website the front page has the redesigned logo but the merchandise page has the original new logo with lots of gear to match. [UPDATE: They fixed the logo on the store page - good job - but still show merchandise withe the old logo and no explanation] This is not cool.  This seems to me like something awfully close to fraud - deliberately trying to mislead.

Soccernomics: Crests and the Economic Value of a Good Logo

Just because I have posted on this before I thought I had better follow-up, though even I am weary of too much soccer despite the worlds biggest sporting event being only a few days off.

The Vancouver Whitecaps have released their new MLS crest (as seen above).  Pretty boring in my opinion but, and more importantly, inoffensive. [See my earlier post on MLS crests if you care to witness the horrors of earlier logos]  Interesting that they are going for the FC label - seems to be de rigueur these days.  I have no problem with it - but how about someone bucking the trend and going all American with an SC?

Meanwhile the Timbers will be unveiling their new crest on Saturday at Director Park during the halftime interval of the USA - England match being shown on a big screen there.  To get people worked up into logo frenzy thay have released a series of four teaser videos with clues to the new crest.  In them, they have revealed that the new crest will: one, be round; two, have an axe that 'escapes' the confines of the circle; three, have three chevrons; four, be dark green and light green.  So there you go.

Everything fine as far as it goes, but the light green makes me nervous. "Loud and bold" according to the Timbers.  Sounds like it is to replace the yellow so I imagine will be a bit yellow-green, but hopefully nothing neon-ish like the Sounders' nightmarish green which appears to be a way to keep the colors close to the Seahawks and to their current sponsor, XBOX.

But it got me wondering, just how big an economic gamble is this?

Well, fortunately the Sports Business Journal has a recent article on the latest addition to the MLS, the Philadelphia Union (new crest: OEB approved).

Seattle Sounders FC may not be an expansion team any more, but they still lead MLS in merchandise sales.

The Sounders’ continued success combined with strong sales of Philadelphia Union merchandise have combined to drive double-digit percentage increases in MLS merchandise sales this year. Sell-throughs of MLS merchandise at large retail partners such as Dick’s Sporting Goods have been strong, allowing MLS to set a record for the first quarter for merchandise sales, said Stu Crystal, MLS vice president of consumer products.

...

The club has already sold seven figures worth of merchandise and is expected to hit eight figures by the end of the year. It is enjoying 90 percent sell-through on core items such as replica jerseys and scarves.

“It’s been an incredible shot in the arm for our business,” Crystal said. “There’s a lot of competition with other teams in Philadelphia, but fans have been gobbling up their merchandise.”

Crystal credited the team’s logo as being a major factor in sales. [Emphasis mine] The club incorporated a rattlesnake from the famed “Don’t Tread on Me” flag into its shield. It was an image that its largest supporters group, the Sons of Ben, had used in their campaign to get an MLS franchise.
“The merchandise … is some of the hottest-selling gear for the MLS right now,” said Steve Sterhan, soccer category manager for Adidas America. “We are only five weeks into the season, and retailers are reporting double-digit sell-though.” 

So the answer is that it is pretty big business in general, but still how much does a good logo matter over a bad logo? Or in economics terms, what is the marginal value of a good logo? Crystal suggests it matters a lot, but you can't really test these things. Portland is a smaller market than Philly but has less sports competition, so I would imagine similar sales. Let's go with the eight digit floor of $10 million. If a good logo increases that by 10% we are talking real money and that is only in the first year - the present discounted marginal value of a good logo could easily reach eight figures itself.  Hmmm...let's hope Merritt and the rest of the Timbers management chose wisely.