Blog · Pricing and process
Why one branding quote says 800 and the next says 12,000
The gap is rarely about skill. A cheaper quote often covers a logo alone; a costlier one bundles research, strategy, a full identity system, brand guidelines and usage rights. Comparing two quotes by price alone hides the fact that they are pricing different lists of work, not the same job at different rates.
Three quotes, one brief, no explanation
A company asks three studios for "a new brand identity" and gets three numbers back: 800 pounds, 3,000 pounds, 12,000 pounds. Nobody involved is lying and nobody is incompetent. Each studio has quoted a genuinely different piece of work, and none of the three proposals says so in plain terms. The brief was identical. The scope behind each number was not.
Public price guides published by UK studios show the same spread once you look past the headline figure: a logo alone can run from under 500 pounds at a specialist to a few thousand at an agency, while a full identity system with strategy and guidelines can run into five figures at a strategy-led shop. The range is wide enough that quoting a single "average price for branding" is close to meaningless.
What a quote is actually pricing
Most proposals list a total and a rough description. Few break down what sits behind the number. The table below sets out what typically separates a low quote from a high one, deliverable by deliverable.
| Deliverable | Common at the low end | Common at the high end |
|---|---|---|
| Discovery | Skipped, or a short intake call | Structured interviews, a competitor review, a written brief |
| Strategy | Not itemised, folded into design time | A positioning document the identity is built to express |
| Logo design | A handful of concepts, one revision round | Multiple directions, revisions within agreed scope |
| Identity system | Logo plus one colour palette and a font pairing | Full system: colour, type, imagery style, iconography, mockups |
| Guidelines | None, or a one page cheat sheet | A document a future supplier could work from unaided |
| Usage rights | Files sent over informally, ownership unclear | Written assignment of rights alongside the files |
A location premium sits on top of the deliverable list
Deliverables are not the only variable. A studio with a central London office carries rent, staff and overhead that a smaller or remote studio does not, and that cost shows up in the quote regardless of what gets delivered. None of it changes the brief, the number of design directions, or whether guidelines are included. It changes what the studio has to charge just to keep the lights on. Two quotes with an identical deliverable list can still land far apart once this is factored in, which is a separate question from whether either studio is any good at the work itself.
The line that costs the most is rarely the drawing
Clients tend to assume a quote is mostly paying for the finished artwork. In practice, the hours that separate a 3,000 pound identity from a 12,000 pound one are usually spent before a single logo concept is sketched: interviewing stakeholders, reviewing competitors, arguing over what the brand should refuse to look like. A studio that skips that stage can produce a logo faster and cheaper, but it is pricing a different, smaller job, not offering a discount on the same one.
Guidelines work the same way. A one page cheat sheet and a full brand guidelines document both count as "guidelines" on a proposal, but only one of them lets a printer, a web developer or a future in-house designer use the identity correctly without asking the original studio every time. That difference rarely appears as a line item, and it is one of the more expensive things to add back in later.
Rights are a deliverable too, and an easy one to miss
A quote that hands over files without a written transfer of rights is, functionally, cheaper to produce than one that includes a proper assignment, because the second one involves paperwork the first one skips. Ownership defaults are unhelpful for a client here: under UK law, commissioning a design does not automatically transfer copyright to the person paying for it, a point GOV.UK's guidance on ownership of copyright works states directly. Whether a quote includes a written assignment, not just a handover of exported files, is worth asking about before comparing two totals. The same question comes up once a project ends, covered separately in who owns the logo, files and domain after a project ends.
One question that exposes the gap
Rather than asking "why is this quote higher," a more useful question is "what exactly do I receive at each price, itemised." The Design Business Association's guidance on writing a design brief makes a related point about comparing proposals fairly: disclosing a budget range to every studio in a pitch means the panel ends up "comparing apples with apples" rather than three unrelated scopes. The same logic runs the other way. A client who asks each studio to itemise discovery, strategy, design and guidelines separately will usually find that the 800 pound quote and the 12,000 pound quote were never competing for the same job in the first place.
Three questions worth asking before comparing totals
- Does this figure include strategy and research, or design time only?
- What does the guidelines document actually contain, and could someone else work from it?
- Is a written transfer of rights included, or only the exported files?
None of this makes the cheaper quote wrong or the expensive one better. A one page logo brief genuinely does not need a strategy phase, and a business rebuilding its entire market position genuinely does. The mistake is comparing the two totals as though they describe the same piece of work. They rarely do, and the proposal itself rarely says so. More on what a studio abroad can and cannot offer within that spread is covered in what actually changes when your studio is abroad, and other notes like this one sit in the wider blog.
Common questions
Why do branding quotes vary so much for what sounds like the same job?
Because "branding" covers wildly different scopes. A quote for a logo alone and a quote for research, strategy, a full identity system and guidelines will always land far apart, even when both are described as "brand identity."
Does a higher quote always mean better quality?
Not necessarily. It usually means more is included, more research, more design directions, a fuller guidelines document, a written transfer of rights. Quality within a given scope can vary at any price point.
What should a branding quote itemise?
At minimum, whether discovery and strategy are included, how many design directions and revisions are covered, what the guidelines document contains, and whether rights and source files transfer in writing.
Is a strategy phase worth paying for separately?
It depends on the brief. A small business refreshing a dated logo may not need one. A company repositioning itself in a crowded market usually gets more value from the identity once the strategy behind it has been worked out first.
How can I compare two branding quotes fairly?
Ask each studio to itemise the same categories: discovery, strategy, design, guidelines and rights. Comparing itemised lists side by side is far more useful than comparing two lump sums.
What happens if a quote doesn't mention usage rights or file ownership?
It is worth asking directly before signing. Without a written transfer, ownership of a commissioned design does not automatically pass to the client under UK law, regardless of who paid the invoice.
Louis Denis, Orbe Studio
Back to the blog