Je ne sais pas--Probably me, too, except in certain circumstances.
Jenni NZ--I think a lot of people feel the way you do. And myself...I would consider designer logos if I had the money. But I think it would be on a case-by-case basis. I like some obvious ones, like the LV pattern on its bags, as I was saying to Janet. But others, like the large gold icon of a Michael Kors or Coach purse...I'd really have to think about it. And largely because you need to build an entire Elle Woods wardrobe around it, and I don't know how many of us actually are that person.

My bag collection has structured leathers like Angie’s but in warm colors and mostly gold hardware. I actually find the gold trim cheery, and don’t mind a logo if I can get the color and shape I want. I do pull off extraneous fobs and stuff, not because I am snobby about the label, but because I don’t like things that can catch and snag a sweater. I am similarly agnostic about shoe logos; only a few shoe brands fit me, and if the color I want arrives with a logo, I am not going to balk.

Overall I tend to avoid flashy logos. I didn't buy my two Chanel bags because of the logos. I bought them because I fell in love with the style 20 years earlier. (40 years now.) Other logos not so much--I think the flashier ones have been overdone. There are certain brands I will never wear because of the flashy logos.

So my answer is: it all depends.

It's ironic that so many people who say they'd never wear flashy logos still wear the three Adidas stripes, or the Nike swoosh, or the Polo symbol. Just because those things don't cost thousands doesn't mean they aren't logoed. And for those who know bags, a Bottega Veneta, a Balenciaga, a Miu Miu or a Burberry are just as flashy as the LV logo.

I say it depends. Whereas this may not be a logo per se, I frequently wear McQueen skull scarves, and I wear the larger skull design of Zadig and Voltaire. If a piece with a logo appeals to me, I will happily buy it and wear it (I do favor the Adidas stripes). I'd venture a guess that most people have preferred brands, and many of those brands have something recognizable about them, whether that's a logo, symbol, design, leather work, etc. For most people, to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

I don't like to sport logos but I'm like @cat2 in that I won't let it stop me if *everything* else about the item ticks my boxes. But I also don't 'make up' for it with the 'it bag' or other designer items of the season that she mentions.

Provided the logo isn't too noticeable I may let it slide for items where it's ubiquitous (e.g. sport logos/ symbols @echo mentioned). Still, I prefer the most unobtrusive versions - my Adidas trainers have the 3 stripes stitched in the same colour & fabric as the leather upper, & my Under Armours only state the brand name on the undersoles. Seasalt Cornwall has a small anchor tag on some pieces, or otherwise a cute message (like 'Thanks for wearing me'!)

You can't win them all, though - I have also had to make sacrifices in the name of practicality!

I am a fan of some logoed items. For me, generally if it is over-the-top or irreverent, it suits my style. Where logos are more subtle, I don't even notice them and it does not factor into my buying decision at all. These are loud logoed items that I wear all the time:
- Moschino platform sneakers;
- Oversized Gucci belt (buckle is about 10cm/2.5 inches in height) and just adds a bit of fun to a simple dress or skirt.

What you are saying Echo is what I was trying to say, probably not very well. I would not choose to wear the Adidas, Nike, Skechers logos if I could avoid them being obvious but over the decades some of those brands have had really comfortable or functional items which I am wearing for that reason rather than that they are specifically branded. I can’t avoid logos altogether therefore but am not wearing them in order to show the logos off, if that makes any sense?
I don’t feel that’s “pretending otherwise?”

Echo, there’s a difference between a logo and a design motif — although a logo can be used as a design motif! I like the McQueen skulls and the Z&V too, and I have those in my wardrobe. I also have a couple of things that are recognizable designer motifs — the Bao Bao, which has been copied so much, for example. So just clarifying for my behalf that I don’t mind wearing a signature recognizable design. But I don’t love wearing letter- or name-based logos — I’ve never loved the idea of a LV bag for me (they’re not my style anyway), or a Gucci G-logo belt for me. I don’t even like a lot of Michael Kors because that Mk logo is so ubiquitous.

Nike swooshes, UnderArmour logos, and Adidas stripes, etc, don’t bother me. Sporty attire gets a pass from me. Even the little Lululemon icon is ok.

I was trying to figure out what it is about this discussion that bugs me so much, and I finally figured it out. I grew up with my mom’s rules in my head: nice girls don’t dye their hair, nice girls don’t wear makeup, blah blah blah. The no logo thing just feels like another arbitrary rule I am going to ignore if I feel like it. At the end of the day I don’t GAF if someone thinks I am too loud when I laugh, wear too much makeup or jewelry or have a soft spot for shiny things.

I wear Marimekko because I love their prints. I don’t care if anyone else knows it is a brand or not.
it’s design that matters for me. If a logo is big or prominent, it distracts one from the design or absolutely unnecessary. Gap or Celine in huge letters across a tshirt is not my taste despite the price difference. I don’t have any problem wearing Gap jeans or would be happy to carry a Celine bag of my choice. Logos on those items are not huge.

What Angie said!

To cat2's point ... While some logo disdain maybe is about not wanting to be a walking advertisement or not liking the look, I agree some of it is not wanting the "lower classes" to have the same nice things as the "elites" ... I.e. the exact same thing someone who insists on a designer logo because they would never wear non-designer is doing! That is something I have no time for!

Generally speaking, I am supportive of people doing what makes them happy providing that doesn't involve judging or looking down on anyone else!

It really depends. Generally, I like logos that are artistic representations of animals or mythological creatures. The Versace Medusa, Kurt Geiger bird head on some pieces I own, for example. But they’re smaller and to scale.

Lettering or words are different. There are subtle logos on some of my vintage designer pieces, but you have look hard to see it.

Huh. If I think about it, I much prefer subtlety for myself. Tone on tone, for example. However, I certainly wear exceptions.

My son has thrifted me sweatshirts that are hilarious (official brown UPS employee hoodie, a Supreme logo sweatshirt with Eustace Tilley) and I have more hoodies that are cozy, sentimental faves with (Cape May, The School in Rose Valley). My Kipling crossbodies have a logo patch on the front.

FWIW, I notice that brands with more and less expensive lines tend to go increasingly subtle with branding on their more expensive lines.

Good point about sneaker logos, Bonnie. I generally don’t like logos, especially when they’re used to make an overall pattern. My one exception is if they’re giant. Like the massive oversized Polo one. That, that is hilarious and self-aware of Ralph Lauren

While I wouldn't buy something because it has a logo, I wouldn't refuse myself something of quality that has a brand name in a noticeable place, provided the detail doesn't dominate the overall appearance.

cat2--Logo agnosticity--I love it. I see what you mean about "purse fobs." First of all, they're loud, second, they get in the way.
MsMaven--there really is something about good design on its own, regardless of logo. I'm sure those Chanel bags were a sight to behold.
Echo--totally interesting. I myself am one of those people who would brake for a classic sports logo. A nice Adidas sweatshirt or beanie...it's true that certain things look iconic, even if it's the design, and not the logo that is noticeable.
Zaeobi--it sounds like you really do like a plain look as opposed to a logo, no matter how famous the brand may be. It is true that these days, everyone from Target to Chanel is putting little logos here and there.
Bijou--these are super-fun items, and I can see the appeal. Did you show your Barbie movie outfit last summer? I feel like I saw this belt.

Jenni NZ--some sports-type items I adore for the identity--Converse, Pumas, etc. But then there are those items people get just for quality--a solid pair of REI hiking boots, etc. I think sports logos bring to mind so many things: hip hop, DJs, skating, youth, etc. that it is more fun to play with these than with designer logos.
Janet--another sports logo lover! In terms of the more "blingy" logos...I think you've got to wear it very obviously, and only if it's your style.
cat2--there's that, too. If you don't like rules/arbitrary rules. I myself like too much makeup, too long nails type stuff, a look some people find trashy, but people like Gwen Stefani and Rihanna pull off beautifully. If I had the money, I'd wear the logos--I wouldn't care. In my present state and wardrobe, it would be awkward.
Irina--great design is great design. Incidentally, I saw a fashion video on YouTube recently where the host went over Vogue's "it" items. One was a pair of plain black flip flops, $1,000. No logo!