No Logo still it was a BRAND!

THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THERE WERE NO LOGOS ONLY NAMES,STILL PRODUCT USED TO SELL.TIME HAS CHANGED,SO ARE THE LOGOS.A consensus emerged that corporations were bloated, oversized; they owned too much, employed too many people, and were weighed down with too many things. The very process of producing – running one’s own factories, being responsible for tens of thousands of full-time, permanent employees- began to look less like the route to success and more like a clunky liability. A new kind of corporation began to emerge to rival the traditional all-American manufacturers for market share.
These were the Nikes, Microsofts and later, the Tommy Hilfigers and Intel.
These pioneers made the bold claim that producing goods was only an incidental part of their operations. Thanks to victories in trade liberalisation and labour-law reforms, they were able to have their products made for them by contractors, many of them overseas.The astronomical growth in the wealth and cultural influence of multinational corporations over the past two decades can agruably be traced back to a single, seemingly innocuous idea developed by management theorists in the mid-1980s . What Nike, Microsoft, Tommy Hilfiger or Intel and others produced primarily were not things, they said, but images of their brands.Their real work lay not in manufacturing but in marketing.
nThe companies now compete in a race towards weightlessness: whoever owns the least, has the fewest employees on the payroll and produces the most powerful images, as opposed to products, wins the race.
nThe wave of mergers in the corporate world over the past decade is thus a deceptive phenomenon: it only looks as if the giants, by joining forces, are getting bigger.
The true key to understanding these shifts is to realise that in several crucial ways – not in terms of the companies’ profits of course – these merged entities are actually shrinking. Their apparent bigness is simply the most effective route toward their goal: divestment of the world of things. The contemporary corporate no longer produces products and advertises them – it buys products and ‘brands’ them. In ways, both insidious and overt, the corporate obsession with brand identity is waging a war on public and individual space: on public institutions such as schools, on youthful identities, on the concept of nationality and on the possibilities for unmarketed space.