Quote:
Originally Posted by sketchyt
Anyone who's ever done any sort of marketing/comms/PR for medium—to large-scale not-for-profits would take an estimate and multiply it by an unholy amount.
Why? It's not worth it otherwise. Here's what it looks like: - Have multiple stakeholders constantly shaking dicks to see who's the most important
- In this case, having CoC, TC, and EcDev align on a creative strategy. This would be like having Star Wars and Star Trek uber-nerds decide which spaceship looks the coolest.
- Go through what would likely be a bajillion rounds of edits/concepts to placate ego and phrases like, "I'll know it when I see it" or "Just make it pretty"
- Start dealing with hair loss and high blood pressure as you watch your original designs/concepts (that were likely decent) get hacked away by people you would only describe as clumsy toddlers with broken crayons
- So then your only avenue to invoice is to design by consensus. Barf.
- Finally achieve consensus by ego while you look at the finished product and watch your creative soul leave your body, never to be found again.
- Release said work and watch it get ridiculed and picked apart (deservedly) by the people you were creating it for
Whether or not the city needed a rebrand, I don't care. Whatever. Personally, I think branding is extremely important and needs to be look at in cycles. I think this city was near the end of that cycle. The city has changed a lot since the last rebrand.
But the cost? Yeah, like Chris Rock said, "I don't agree, but I understand." |
I agree with your post until the bolded...which I don't necessarily disagree on, but I'm really struggling to come up with reasons why it's important for a city?
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygeologist
The longer they can extend an "emergency" ban means it becomes easier for them to implement a forever ban without too much public outcry. It is all part of the plan.
|
