The logo is an age old question in style circles. Polos, button-downs, even trousers have been adorned with logos in various locations, and their presence to many is polarizing.
I think we can all agree that a logo for a logo’s sake is fairly pointless. There is no connection — or contractual obligation — to wear one. If simplicity and authenticity is the goal (and they should be), then there is no point in this type of adornment. You’ll see logos like this on many generic mass produced items looking for some way to stand out.
So if the item is very simple — whether on the very low end or high end of quality — eschew the logo for nothing.
There was a trend on college campuses in the 70s, when Lacoste’s crocodile polos were very popular, to rip the croc off the shirt, resulting in a simple small hole. The hole became a mark of defiance, and a logo in it’s own right.
There was a personal connection to that small hole, which is how a logo should be worn in the first place. Like a golf club that you have played (or play frequently), there is a connection to a particular day or world that you enjoy. The logo you wear on that polo, hat, or belt is more for you than for the company you keep. A certain trip to the Augusta National Golf Club comes to mind, where I spent a small fortune on goods with the iconic mark — I want to remember that place frequently.
Much like a monogram, a logo should increase your enjoyment of an item. If you wear a logo to show off, than your sensibilities are likely as vapid as the logo itself.