It can be an interesting subject, but I don’t think Coca Cola is a good example, because that is more custom logo lettering, not an exclusive custom typeface.

Well, one advantage of having a corporate typeface is that your “look” cannot be duplicated. For a long time (perhaps still) Apple’s look was Garamond Condensed for body copy. Many others were able to make their ads “look like Apple’s” by using the same fonts and general layout. Had Apple chosen a corporate face, then copy cats could not have been quite so close in their attempts to steal Apple’s image.

>Is there any proof that it sells products?

It’s not the role of advertising to sell more products.

If a large corporation has its own custom font it can actually work out cheaper for them than paying huge licence fees for thousands of users. Plus the fact that the font/family is unique to them, and presents a cohesive image (if used within a corporate guideline) to the outside world.

I don’t know if this ever results in an increase in sales, it depends on the type of company. But it can certainly make a company more ’identifiable’ to the public, even if it’s only subliminally, (which, is the case in the majority of the type-unaware).

Nick Cooke

From what has been discussed before, my understanding is that site licensing an existing typeface for an entire corporation gets so expensive it is in their best interest to pay the same or less for an original design from an independent foundry.

In your opinion, what typefaces have proven the most successful when applied to corporate branding. Not necessarily the best type design, but maybe because it is so unique and eye-catching. How does this company stand out amongst it’s competitors with type (and typography) alone?

Well Tom, I assume you’re British, so you must have noticed NatWest Bank and its corporate font that has been in use for a number of years now. That was cutom designed by David Quay and Freda Sack for Wolff Olins I think. It certainly stood out when it was first introduced, and has had a fair few imitators since, though it may be starting to look a bit dated now.

Nick Cooke

Right Nick, NatWest rules.
They will probably hang on to the face still it starts to come back into fashion.

Ha! I was working with Freda and David, doing much of the design and digitising work on the NatWest fonts. It is indeed the typeface that could be used as a case study why to have a corporate font.

NatWest have, actually, sold off the rights to the semi serif version, the display stuff that was so recognisable, to Typhoo (tea brand). Unfortunately, it does not translate well into that environment. Someone also started messing about with the design, changing some characters and it looks - well, how can I describe it - shit!

NatWest now only use the Sans version which was created initially for text use only.

Bruno Maag

Typhoo was one of the imitators of which I was thinking, I didn’t realise it was the actual NatWest font because it looks so, well - shit. That’s what can happen when a graphic ’designer’ works on ’improving’ an existing typeface.

Edit; hey great - we can swear again!

Nick Cooke

They couldn’t resist brewing up a fresh ’t’ and that really took the biscuit. The new owners don’t like small cups apparently so the OpenType version is a bit weak. ;-)