Bob Dunning: Shedding light on the wayward UC logo

LET THERE BE LIGHT … contrary to popular opinion, our friends at the University of California did their homework before unveiling that snappy new logo that was eventually rejected in favor of the tried and true version from long ago … “I was asked about the new logo,” reports Tony at sbcglobal.net without a hint of bragging … “Back in June, I received a survey from an outfit named SimpsonScarborough. The survey was targeted at UC alumni and was mostly about our opinions concerning our UC experience and our interest in remaining connected to our alma mater, probably in hopes of finding hooks to generate continuing alumni contributions.” …

Oddly, I had the opposite experience … not only was I not asked about the proposed new logo, I was actually paid handsomely to remain silent about my UC experience, lest high school seniors get the idea that UC lets just about anybody attend one of its many campuses …

Adds Tony: “At the end of the on-line survey was a special segment asking for comments regarding the proposed new logo, which was shown in several different versions, but all featuring the abstract U with the embedded C (usually fading, but not always). I did my best to give an honest appraisal, using such adjectives as ‘dull, trite, insipid, unnecessary.’ Naturally, my feelings were hurt when the university rolled it out anyway. They could have saved themselves so much trouble if they had just listened to me.” … exactly my feelings, Tony … if only the UC brass would listen to the commoners, what a better world it would be …

SCHOOL DAZE … Eric at yahoo.com asks if “anyone has considered the impact upon schools when our water rates go up five times or whatever they end up being.” … don’t think that’s been part of the discussion, my friend … “If I’m worried that my yard may cost me an extra grand, I can’t imagine what it would be for all those fields. To my knowledge, the school district has not weighed in, and if we have to lay off 70 teachers to pay for grass, this should be in the current dialogue.” … indeed … we have many issues to discuss before ballots are mailed out early next month …

NO MORE “SHARING” … my friend Steve notes that the “Wall Street Journal took over a year longer than you to conclude that ‘Zipcar may call its business car-sharing, but really it is just another car rental company.’ ” … I think we knew that all along … “I wonder if the City Council has included in its most recent contract that the favored nation terms will automatically expire upon Zipcar’s acquisition by a traditional for-profit rental company. Since Zipcar has been a publicly traded, for-profit company since its IPO in 2011, there has been no rational basis for favoring it over its for-profit competitors.” …

I think there was just something about that word “sharing” that made the council take leave of its senses and give Zipcar an unfair advantage over other Davis car rental businesses … “Is the council now going to give Avis a sweetheart deal once it completes its acquisition of Zipcar? Or if a tobacco company jumps into a bidding war for Zipcar and prevails, will Davis continue to give Zipcar preferred terms?” … as long as they promise to share, Steve, they’ll get whatever they want …

GO AGS … John on the Island Street, noting a recent news story that claims Stanford’s football success was due in part to a “friendlier climate for admissions,” wonders if the new UC Davis football regime will be similarly favored … “Will our new football coach be able to recruit players so UCD will play in the Rose Bowl?” … only time will tell, John, but let’s just say the best chance for the Aggies to play in the Rose Bowl in the near future will be to schedule a regular-season game at UCLA …

— Reach Bob Dunning at bdunning@davisenterprise.net