Why logo-less advertising works

Hey, I’m Isaac 👋 I founded Pistachio, where we’ve worked with brands like BuzzFeed and Clay to understand their audience, build trust and deliver measurable outcomes through content-led growth.

If you want to chat about your own strategy, book a free call here.

Presented by Athyna

The new $100K visa fee is shaking up U.S. hiring.

For enterprises relying on global talent, it means higher costs, slower hiring, and growing skill gaps. The smartest teams are adapting fast, building distributed squads across Latin America that match U.S. quality, align on time zones, and skip visa friction.

The H-1B Talent Crunch 2025 report breaks down what’s changing, who’s most affected, and how to stay ahead with smarter global hiring.

Interested in sponsoring these emails? See our partnership options here.

In January 2025, Heinz launched a billboard campaign across the UK. They spent millions securing premium outdoor sites, but they also did something most brands would consider sabotage.

They removed their logo entirely from the ads.

Instead of the familiar Heinz name, the ads showed only closeups of their products paired with the name of their classic combinations. Beans with toast. Ketchup with fries. Soup with bread. The tagline "It Has to Be" appeared, but the thing that famously completes that sentence, the Heinz brand name, was nowhere to be found.

For 99% of companies, this would be a disaster. But people remembered these ads more than traditional campaigns plastered with logos.

This isn't just about brand confidence. It's about cognitive psychology. These brands are leveraging a well-documented memory principle, we remember things we complete ourselves. So the secret isn't removing the logo, it's creating the split-second where your brain does the work to fill in the blank.

In 1978, researchers Norman Slamecka and Peter Graf ran an experiment at the University of Toronto. They showed students 100 cards with word pairs. Half the students saw complete pairs like "rapid-fast" and just read them. The other half saw partial pairs like "rapid-f___" and had to generate the missing word themselves.

The students who generated words themselves remembered them 15% better than those who simply read complete pairs. This became known as the generation effect, information sticks better when we actively create it rather than passively receive it.

You can see where I’m going with this.

When you see Heinz beans without the logo, your brain completes the puzzle. "That's Heinz." That micro-moment of recognition, even though it happens faster than conscious thought, creates cognitive investment. You feel clever for "getting it" and that flash of satisfaction cements the memory.

The act of completion, no matter how brief, makes information your own. Logo-less advertising isn't removing information, it's making you find it, which makes you remember it.

There’s a catch. The generation effect only works within an incredibly narrow window.

Too much friction and people walk away. Too little and there's no memory benefit. This is what psychologist Robert Bjork calls "desirable difficulty", challenges that enhance retention without overwhelming the learner.

Most marketing research will say "make everything easier" because ease feels good and builds positive associations. But these brands are doing the opposite. They're deliberately making recognition harder.

The distinction is important. They're adding conceptual friction (you do the work to recognise the brand) while maintaining perceptual fluency (the recognition itself happens instantly). Your brain works, but doesn't realise it's working. The effort is invisible.

British Airways' Windows campaign is a perfect example. Extreme close-ups of passengers looking out aircraft windows. Only tiny fragments of the BA logo visible on the plane's exterior. The images dominated outdoor sites across London, Edinburgh, and Manchester. Nils Leonard, creative director of Uncommon Creative Studio (who created the ad) said "only truly iconic brands can say less."

McDonald's breakfast campaign used macro food photography so close you could see the texture of the egg. Zero McDonald's branding anywhere. The food itself does all the work.

Specsavers cut their tagline and logo in half on the southern hemisphere’s largest billboard.

Each created that split-second of completion. Just enough cognitive participation to trigger the generation effect without creating genuine difficulty.

Data from effectiveness experts System1 shows exactly how narrow this window is. Heinz's "It Has to Be Toast" poster, featuring their iconic beans, scored well in the fluency category, meaning strong brand recognition. But "It Has to Be Fries," which spotlighted ketchup, received a lower fluency rating. Same brand. Same campaign. Different product. Different effectiveness.

The difference was that Heinz beans are more instantly and uniquely recognisable than a pool of ketchup. If the asset isn't distinctive enough, the ad doesn't complete in that critical window. It just confuses. That's why only certain brands (and certain products) can pull this off.

Logo-less advertising isn't a creative technique anyone can use. It's a litmus test that reveals distinctive asset strength.

Heinz can remove their logo because they've spent 70 years making those beans instantly recognisable. McDonald's breakfast muffins are globally recognised even in extreme close-up or partial view. British Airways' exterior logos became distinctive through decades of consistency.

These brands compressed years of investment into assets so strong that recognition happens before conscious thought. The ability to go logo-less is diagnostic. It reveals whether you've actually built distinctive brand assets or not.

You need assets recognisable enough that completion happens in 200 milliseconds, not two seconds. That's the minuscule gap between productive friction and a frustrating puzzle.

Consistency compounds to build that friction. Colours become shortcuts (Tiffany blue, Cadbury purple). Characters become proxies (Tony the Tiger, the Michelin Man). Packaging shapes become signatures (Coca-Cola bottle, Toblerone triangle). Sonic signatures create instant recognition (Netflix "ta-dum", Intel's five-note melody). Tone of voice builds distinctiveness (Oatly's conversational copy, Liquid Death's irreverent edge).

Each of these works because brands protected them passionately and used them consistently across years or decades.

The opportunity comes from the investment. Not from the creative brief.

The real insight here isn't about logos. It's about cognitive participation.

Every marketer is in the memory business, but not all memory is created equal. Passive exposure creates familiarity. Active participation creates ownership.

These ads makes you think just enough to care, without making you think so much you quit.

The principle extends beyond outdoor advertising. Interactive content that requires micro-decisions. Narratives that let audiences connect dots themselves rather than explaining everything. Brand worlds that reward insider knowledge.

Supreme built an empire on knowledge friction. Information about drops spreads through community channels rather than press releases. You have to be connected to know what's happening. That insider knowledge becomes valuable currency that makes customers feel special.

The pattern is consistent across categories, small amounts of cognitive work create disproportionate memory benefits, but only when you've built the foundation that makes that work feel effortless.

We started with a paradox. Brands spending millions to hide their names on billboards.

But now the mechanism is clear. They're not hiding anything. They're making you find it.

That split-second of finding creates memory through the generation effect. The small amount of cognitive friction, so small you don't even notice it, triggers deeper processing than passive exposure ever could. This is desirable difficulty in its purest form. Difficulty so small you don't notice it, yet powerful enough to cement memory.

Most brands aren't ready for this approach because they haven't built the distinctive asset foundation. The real lesson isn't "remove your logo". It's "build other brand assets so strong that you could".

Heinz can afford the ambiguity. Their beans have been recognisable for 70 years. McDonald's golden arches are embedded in global consciousness. British Airways' logo on the side of the plane has become distinctive through decades of consistent use. The brands pulling off logo-less advertising aren't brave. They're just reaping the rewards of work they started decades ago.

The cognitive trick behind their campaigns isn't the logo removal. It's the asset strength that makes removal possible.

If you enjoyed this post or know someone who may find it useful, please share it with them and encourage them to subscribe: brandchemistry.co/p/why-logo-less-advertising-works

The Modern Media Masterclass walks you through how to use organic content channels to build your brand and business.

Get the clarity and direction you need to turn content into a growth engine that drives brand trust and business results. Flat fee. No contracts. No lock-ins.

I’ve worked with brands like BuzzFeed and Clay to launch, grow and monetise organic content channels that drive real business results. Book a call today and lets see how I could help you.