Blame it on the economy and today’s unemployment figures, but a recent study shows that luxury buyers today don’t want blazing logos, but look for a subtler approach. In other words, they want others like them to know that they know that you know that they know. No logo is better than a big logo. This has always been the case. Sorta. Products sans logos have been the case for style setters secure in their own skin, and don’t need the big, dominant logo to street-sell who they are. If that means people sporting big logos (like the new Polo and Izod and dominant Burberry check) are insecure, maybe that’s not far from the mark. Does that also mean that the bigger the logo, the more insecure the brand? Maybe that's not too far from the mark, either.