Do malls/shopping centers require current logo sign updates?

[Super S]

A thought occurred to me today.

I have seen some older shopping centers, which haven't really had much in the way of remodeling, where the signage of all of the major tenants is the most current logo. I have also seen some where a road sign will have a current logo, while the stores themselves have no updates

Do some shopping centers and malls require that the tenants update their signage when they adopt a new logo? Or is this up to the stores? There are some, such as Rite Aid, who decided to do mass updates all at once, while others, such as Walmart and Safeway, typically phase in new logos over a few years, as do franchise operators such as Burger King, Arbys, etc.

I got to thinking about how the old Jantzen Beach Mall, which had a 1972 vintage Montgomery Ward, updated their signage at least three times, while other locations like Clackamas Town Center had the same signs from 1982-closing, and the Longview, WA store had signage dating to the 1960s at the end. I also remember several different logos for both Meier & Frank and The Bon Marche, and both were inconsistent in updating building signage, as well as inconsistent updates to both Sears & Kmart before they started to do massive closings.

I can see to a point where the owner of a mall/shopping center might want updated signs to project an image, but can also see some retailers balking at such a requirement if this is a significant expense.

[ClownLoach]

A thought occurred to me today.

I have seen some older shopping centers, which haven't really had much in the way of remodeling, where the signage of all of the major tenants is the most current logo. I have also seen some where a road sign will have a current logo, while the stores themselves have no updates

Do some shopping centers and malls require that the tenants update their signage when they adopt a new logo? Or is this up to the stores? There are some, such as Rite Aid, who decided to do mass updates all at once, while others, such as Walmart and Safeway, typically phase in new logos over a few years, as do franchise operators such as Burger King, Arbys, etc.

I got to thinking about how the old Jantzen Beach Mall, which had a 1972 vintage Montgomery Ward, updated their signage at least three times, while other locations like Clackamas Town Center had the same signs from 1982-closing, and the Longview, WA store had signage dating to the 1960s at the end. I also remember several different logos for both Meier & Frank and The Bon Marche, and both were inconsistent in updating building signage, as well as inconsistent updates to both Sears & Kmart before they started to do massive closings.

I can see to a point where the owner of a mall/shopping center might want updated signs to project an image, but can also see some retailers balking at such a requirement if this is a significant expense.

My experience has been that the property owners will force updates, not necessarily to the newest logo though.

For example I had a store in a large strip mall in San Diego market with freeway pylon signs and the property owner decided to replace all the signs.

We had to choose to either pay $10,000 to be on the new signs or we could pay nothing but our old pylon sign would be demolished and thus our visibility reduced.

However, there was no discussion of the logo. They looked up a new logo online which was actually wrong and had it installed by their vendor. I still had our old logo on the store itself and we had recently replaced all the guts with new LED materials, the store was our oldest format and we were only using new logo on new formats. The property owner had to remove the sign with the new logo and replace it with the old logo at no additional charge so that the sign matched the building. To this day it still is about a 7 year old sign with 30+ year old logo but at least everything matches.

So the signage for the center itself really just depends on the whim of the property manager and if they choose to update things or not.

I did have a store in a different center where we remodeled to new format and changed the store sign, and they asked us to also replace the pylon and monument signs at our expense because they no longer matched.

My previous company had the same issue but with drastically worse difference between old logo and new logo, and I am not aware of any store where a landlord demanded an update. The new logo would not work well on an old store due to architecture and color scheme. They did change a handful of very old stores to the new logo and it looked very bad as it was basically red on red.

I did notice a significant difference in cost between when we initiated a sign change and a landlord did... They attach a fat markup.

[ClownLoach]

One more notable factor: when done correctly, some branding changes do result in sales increases. That may push retailers to spend the big bucks on new signage. I did notice this a few times where an older store had been remodeled but did not get a sign change. Later due to other reasons (inoperative sign, exterior improvement etc.) the store would get a new sign with new branding and for whatever reason we would see a traffic and sales lift for the next year or so. It usually only works on older stores where changes were made, like a remodel, and the site is on a busy street with many other stores. This could be something repeated in other chains and a reason why they might choose to rebrand one store but not another as they know what delivers a return on investment.

An example where it obviously doesn't work is the Ralphs chain in SoCal. They have remodeled several stores recently from "regular" to the "fresh fare" upgraded format but they no longer make changes to the exterior signage (Brea, Foothill Ranch). They must have learned that due to their own poor management of that "fresh fare" sub brand it no longer delivers a return on investment to rebrand the store signage so they choose not to do so anymore. New signs are very expensive, usually because of fees and other permit expenses charged by local municipalities.

Finally, sometimes local ordinances are passed that restrict signage. They may decide that in a certain area the size, shape, dimensions etc. must be in a certain way going forward. For many retailers their old signage might be larger/better than what the new signage is allowed to be so they'll keep their "grandfathered in" signs. CVS went through this with a few stores I can think of in SoCal where they chose to rebrand with the "heart" logo that removes the "slash" between "CVS" and "pharmacy" but that was considered to be new signage. As a result the new sign is a tiny fraction of the size of the old one (Santa Ana near South Coast Plaza). They would have been far better off if they hadn't updated to the newer logo.

Albertsons had the same issue in the Montecito area of Santa Barbara where they wanted to convert a very old Vons to Pavilions but they needed to apply for an exception. The new sign in totality would have been required to be smaller than the existing "V" in the Vons sign under the new ordinance. With the severe setback of the store from the parking lot and mall in front it would appear to customers that Vons had closed and exited. They came to some kind of agreement with the city for an exception and after two years of delays the store was finally rebranded and the remodel finalized

Anyway, I am unaware of any situation in companies I've worked for including many years as a DM, in which a shopping center ever became aware of a new logo and required the chain to change signs to match it for that reason exclusively. As long as the sign is well kept and operational they usually leave the store alone unless they are doing property wide upgrades as explained previously where everyone is affected equally, new logos or old. It did seem to me like it was more difficult to obtain their approval to replace a broken sign and rebrand at the same time than just a swap out "same for same" where many times we wouldn't even notify the landlord past calling for security to cone off the lane by the storefront for an early morning or late night installation. Most of the time we were replacing older signs that were neon inside and they were not designed in a manner that would be conducive to a "quick and easy" LED conversion, so the entire sign had to be thrown away and replaced. Signs are typically made by more local companies, not necessarily national firms, and as such they are not consistent inside which makes it difficult to upgrade especially if the original manufacturers went out of business which is very common on signs more than a couple decades old. Some markets do have bigger specialty firms that dominate the area and have stood the test of time which makes it easier to work with, YESCO in the Las Vegas area is an example.

[babs]

Speaking of updated logos. Why does the on-court logo at the Target Center use an upper case version of their logo when Target has switched to lower case letters? Seems like a huge miss, especially this year as the Minnesota Timberwolves are doing so well and getting more national TV coverage.

[ClownLoach]

Speaking of updated logos. Why does the on-court logo at the Target Center use an upper case version of their logo when Target has switched to lower case letters? Seems like a huge miss, especially this year as the Minnesota Timberwolves are doing so well and getting more national TV coverage.

Good question. I think they use lettering that is a different font on Target Field as well. Many Target stores are losing their lettering entirely though and getting just a bullseye on them. I guess it could go any way, maybe it's more noticeable with the unusual font that it is an arena named after Target versus just an ad for Target on the court? If I remember correctly, Staples Center never got updated signage either when Staples changed their logo, and then they sold back the lifetime naming rights.

[tkaye]

I also remember several different logos for both Meier & Frank and The Bon Marche, and both were inconsistent in updating building signage, as well as inconsistent updates to both Sears & Kmart before they started to do massive closings.

I can see to a point where the owner of a mall/shopping center might want updated signs to project an image, but can also see some retailers balking at such a requirement if this is a significant expense.

The Bon rarely updated their signage other than on the Downtown Seattle store. Off the top of my head: Downtown Spokane had lettering from the '50s; Tacoma, Southcenter, Karcher Mall, and Columbia Center all had their original '60s signage; the same can be said for the '70s and '80s builds. Northgate's '60s exterior signage was removed and only the signs right above the entrances remained. When the Kitsap Mall store was expanded in the early '90s, they did not update the signage from the '70s/'80s logo.

Generally speaking, the traditional mall anchor stores own(ed) their own property and the mall owner can't demand much from them in the way of building updates. In the case of The Bon, they (Allied Stores) were the developer-owner of several malls until they spun them off in the late '80s.

[ClownLoach]

I also remember several different logos for both Meier & Frank and The Bon Marche, and both were inconsistent in updating building signage, as well as inconsistent updates to both Sears & Kmart before they started to do massive closings.

I can see to a point where the owner of a mall/shopping center might want updated signs to project an image, but can also see some retailers balking at such a requirement if this is a significant expense.

The Bon rarely updated their signage other than on the Downtown Seattle store. Off the top of my head: Downtown Spokane had lettering from the '50s; Tacoma, Southcenter, Karcher Mall, and Columbia Center all had their original '60s signage; the same can be said for the '70s and '80s builds. Northgate's '60s exterior signage was removed and only the signs right above the entrances remained. When the Kitsap Mall store was expanded in the early '90s, they did not update the signage from the '70s/'80s logo.

Generally speaking, the traditional mall anchor stores own(ed) their own property and the mall owner can't demand much from them in the way of building updates. In the case of The Bon, they (Allied Stores) were the developer-owner of several malls until they spun them off in the late '80s.

In a nutshell, if there's a return on investment they update the signage. If not they don't do it.

That should speak volumes to the quality, or lack thereof, within branding programs. Some are worth the expense of changing all the signs, others are not. Generally, the purpose of rebranding is to show customers that a formerly stagnant business has been revitalized, remodeled, and there is something new and exciting to see inside which warranted spending a small fortune on new signs.

One of the worst things a retailer can do is change their logo then put the new logo on a old, unremodeled store that doesn't meet the promises of that new brand. The only time it makes sense is when such branding is so late in the cycle, and the branding change was so different, that the customer no longer recognizes the old signage. Best example is probably Office Depot, who left a few "blue and gold" signed converted Office Club stores with their old brand too long. It got to a point where the oldest logo from the early 80s was no longer recognized by most of the public and it necessitated correction. But more recently it has not warranted the expense of say rebranding an OfficeMax to Office Depot even though it's the go forward brand, even if they change the sign on the outside nothing is going to be different on the inside so it's not a worthwhile investment.