Jump to content

dubone

Truist - New HQ (BB&T-SunTrust Merger)

Recommended Posts


4 hours ago, Urban Cowboy said:

So far, no one with any “influence” will share the petition. No one will even touch it - they’re worried about the potential business ramifications. Too worried about ruffling feathers - this is the South after all. Or "it's just business." Let’s not poke the bear.

When ad dollars, career, or business opportunities could potentially be impacted...There’s no such thing as a free "press."

I get it. And I can’t blame them. We just need more eyes on this petition somehow. I was hoping its existence would be newsworthy in itself and get picked up. But everyone is worried about offending the company that chose Charlotte without incentives. Which is why this signage was approved.

https://www.change.org/remove_truist_signs

If we all go quietly into the night then the signs stay. It unfortunately has to become uncomfortable for Truist in order for any action to occur. We're already over 100 signatures and that's with zero publicity. 

My thoughts exactly. There’s the petition and funny Twitter account gaining traction. But it’s clear that no one of any major influence has the courage to join in or at least promote those two things. Someone with a name needs to step up because it needs to reach all audiences of Charlotte for any potential change to occur. Let’s not just sweep this under the rug. We all hate this thing. Charlotte influencers have gone after far more controversial topics. At least share or write about the movement. It needs a light shown on it and some people that hate the sign have that spotlight available and aren’t using it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Urban Cowboy said:

...Too worried about ruffling feathers - this is the South after all. Or "it's just business." Let’s not poke the bear...

I get it. And I can’t blame them. We just need more eyes on this petition somehow. I was hoping its existence would be newsworthy in itself and get picked up. But everyone is worried about offending the company that chose Charlotte without incentives...

I'll bite...

Makes sense to me.  I'd like to say one of Charlotte's main competitive advantages is pro-business attitude and with that comes the lack of trying to regulate really trivial things.

This...is a sign.  On a building they paid > $400mm for and pay property taxes on.  They will employ many thousand jobs paying above market salaries.  They could have chosen to locate anywhere, but chose Charlotte with no incentives...

Is it ugly?  Sure. 

It's a mentality though, where we decide if we are "entitled" to a group think view of good aesthetics, or if we reserve rights to those that have earned them (by buying the building).

I'd rather the message be we pro-business rather than petty.

Lastly, as a company that stated years ago after the US supreme court case decided in favor of New Haven on the landmark eminent domain case, that they would never lend on any project with acquisition via eminent domain, they are probably about as unconcerned about people's views on what they do with their property as a company can be. 

That said, I enjoy all sorts of IG feeds of ugly architecture, so I look forward to this making the rounds.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@atlrvr It's a very trivial thing to get worked up about, I get that.  And I agree with your sentiments. But damn! these signs look terrible. I fully expect them to be there for at least the next 10-15 years. I just think they could have designed them so much better... Removing the backing and floating them in the same spot would be a marked improvement. Just an unnecessary vanity project executed in the worst possible way.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Urban Cowboy said:

@atlrvr It's a very trivial thing to get worked up about, I get that.  And I agree with your sentiments. But damn! these signs look terrible. I fully expect them to be there for at least the next 10-15 years. I just think they could have designed them so much better... Removing the backing and floating them in the same spot would be a marked improvement. Just an unnecessary vanity project executed in the worst possible way.

Floating letters without the backing would be a HUGE improvement. I think they went with the backing color they did to try to match the color of the building. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one showed up for the public meeting about this rezoning for the signage. Nobody.  Here is the final staff analysis. 

2020_064_Final_Staff_DONE.pdf (charlottenc.gov)

Now the Zoning committee was more split on this approving it 4-3 however there was a dissent opinion.  

2020_064_ZC_Reco_DONE.pdf (charlottenc.gov)

when this signage was announced it was announced a rezoning was required and noted in articles about it.  

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kind of reminds me a TRUMP tower

-----

Is white on beige their corporate colors?

On their website, the logo is Purple.

I think it's a different font too!

Edited by joenc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I highly doubt the  petition will make a difference. It's a private company, so they can do whatever they want. The best solution is to vote with your dollars. Personally, I was planning to open an account and move my $ away from my current bank. Not sure what I'll do now except to say I won't be moving to Truist because they destroyed my favorite building with shit lights and signage.

TBH, I'm more concerned that this set s precedent for larger signage across the rest of the skyline. All the buildings are getting signs these days, so the question is how much larger can they go? The LU1 people wanted a much larger sign than they got, and the new Duke Power Tower wanted a fairly large sign too.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the order of branding and real estate procurement had happened differently, then perhaps they could have used a stylized silhouette of the tower as part of their logo, a la TransAmerica, instead of the double Ts.  Then they wouldn’t have needed to brand the building because the building would have been their brand.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Spartan said:

I highly doubt the  petition will make a difference. It's a private company, so they can do whatever they want. The best solution is to vote with your dollars. Personally, I was planning to open an account and move my $ away from my current bank. Not sure what I'll do now except to say I won't be moving to Truist because they destroyed my favorite building with crap lights and signage.

TBH, I'm more concerned that this set s precedent for larger signage across the rest of the skyline. All the buildings are getting signs these days, so the question is how much larger can they go? The LU1 people wanted a much larger sign than they got, and the new Duke Power Tower wanted a fairly large sign too.

I actually didn’t mind the signage in the Duke tower as I thought it was appropriately placed. Was it denied? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2020 at 2:12 PM, RugbyPike#11 said:
On 11/23/2020 at 9:53 AM, navigator319 said:


Agreed but should have kept SunTrust name. Either would have been better.

Truist still has not gotten any better to me after all this time. Still horrible.

I would have kept SunTrust, which is a great name for primarily southern bank. Or split the difference and go with Sun Bank & Trust (SBT), and adopt SunTrust’s better logo and color scheme. I was never a fan of BB&T’s brownish red.

They really have botched every conceivable step of their rebranding.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.