> When Nebula found itself facing exorbitant fees to license the font it relied on for all of its branding, the company decided to find a new font that would work just as well.
> When Nebula found itself facing exorbitant fees to license the font it relied on for all of its branding, the company decided to find a new font that would work just as well.
So if the goal was to save money, wouldn't the smart move be to use Source Sans for $0, instead of paying the designer of Source Sans to make some very minor tweaks to end up with another SIL font?
They wanted something that could be a drop-in replacement for Whitney with the same letter sizes and spacing, so that they could put it into all of their products without needing any other redesign.
They couldn't find anything like that available off the shelf, and fonts they found that were close to Whitney in appearance were still also somewhat expensive, so their alternative was to take Source Sans, which has a free license, and make some quite significant but semi-automated modifications to it.
Making changes to just the typeface was presumably cheaper than making changes to all of their other designs.
The result is not as good as what they had before, and not as good as it would have been if they hired a professional to design a new font from scratch, but it was cheap and solved their problem.
Fonts are weird voodoo. Good and bad choices can both make a measurable difference to ROI.
So I'm not convinced this is going to be the profit booster they hope.