Know-How Exchange : Copywriting

I have actually written proposals for both companies. Used Verdana Bold for titles and sub-heads, Garamond for text. I got the assignment from IBM, not from Apple -- but I am positive that neither decision had anything to do with the font(s). (At Apple it was mostly an internal staffing change; the whole project was scrubbed. At IBM I think I was uniquely qualified for the specific task.)

Sounds like your professor is more interested in your perceptions of the two companies than in the content of the proposal or in typography per se.

Dear Jim,

For the last three decades I've earned a good part of my living creating page layouts, logos, and type lock-ups. I trained as—and work—as a graphic designer. Although I have a collection of over 3,000 typefaces, as a rule, I generally use no more than 0.5 percent of them on a regular basis.

Your question is a good one because it reveals much of what's wrong with today’s business thinking generally, while outlining elements of what’s wrong with marketing education in particular.

I have a few observations, some of which probably won't endear me to your professor.

Let’s dissect the request for creativity and let's put a different spin on it, one that is wanting in much of today's business thinking in general and one that is all but invisible in much of today's marketing thinking.

While I agree that it’s great (and essential) for any business venture to stand out, let’s see this happening because the company actively creates and pursues fantastic customer experience.

Let’s have companies being creative int he ways in which they generate major, lasting value for money.

Let’s see companies hardwiring enormous social proof into their overall messaging.

Let's see companies making a stand, standing for something that's solid and socially supportive, and let’s have those companies reinvesting a healthy percentage of their revenues into quality of life programs for their employees and their families, and for the social and community causes and programs the business supports.

Let’s see that company crafting a branding strategy that gets people talking with their friends and families about the company, and let's see creative brands connecting with their customers and doing so for all the right reasons.

Let’s see the business making huge returns, and doing GOOD with those returns rather than boosting their own CEO and executive bonuses and "redistributing" revenues in order to avoid paying tax (Google the recent activities of Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Holdings PLC to find out more about this kind of "creativity").

It’s in THESE kinds of efforts that marketing presentations and their supporting strategies need to get and be creative with, NOT in the selection of a font.

From a marketing standpoint, if the most "creative" thing about ANY marketing proposal is the font the document is printed in, there is something DRASTICALLY wrong with both the proposal AND with the mentality of the person urging or driving its creation (which in this case, is your professor).

While I agree that Times New Roman and Arial are overused, there is no need for a presentation typeface to be “creative”; ideally, the typeface chosen needs to exude clarity, authority, appeal, and legibility.

From what I’ve seen over the last ten years in the world of business as a whole—much of which errs toward the conservative in its overall approach—one person’s idea of a font that’s “creative” is another person’s version of “WTF is THIS?”

Despite their sizes and their reputations for being “different”, both IBM and Apple have an appeal that exists because of the customer bases they serve, and because of the product experiences they offer, NOT because of their font selection abilities.

To answer the point of your question: "if you were writing a proposal to Apple or IBM"? I’d use two typefaces, one a san serif, one a classical serif.

A few examples might include Minion for body copy and Myriad for subheads and titles.

Or Baskerville OR Georgia for body copy and Franklin Gothic for subheads and titles.

Or some variation of similar fonts. Caslon is another excellent choice for a classic font.

I’d urge you and everyone in your class to AVOID florid, overly styled, and ornate fonts
AT. ALL. COSTS.

This link: https://www.typography.com/techniques/fonts-for-financials/ ought to give you a good visual idea of style.

There is really no need to choose any typefaces that are more “creative” than those show in this link. None.

The links below might also help.

https://www.thebookdesigner.com/2010/02/3-great-typeface-combinations-you-c...

https://store1.adobe.com/cfusion/store/html/index.cfm?store=OLS-US&even...

https://classroom.synonym.com/font-report-2578.html

Good luck to you.