>>459597 (OP)
I think the bottom head is better general, but you should use both teeth. Top teeth for regular use/sizing of the logo, bottom teeth for reduced size use. If you have to pick just one: bottom one.

Also, i like the lettering, but i think the waves should have more thought than just to apply a stroke. This bottom part is a good example: we have this waves, then there is some very subtle waves at the bottom of IRD mainly.

Thanks a lot!

>>459597 (OP)
Bottom I think. Less is more. I think the wave type is distracting from the head which should be the focus.

>>459597 (OP)
The outline around the letters being larger than the stroke of the letters themselves almost never looks good; at that point you may as well just make a contrasting rectangular background and lose all the squiggles.
This is especially true when the outline of the head (largest graphic element in the composition) has a red border that is *smaller* than the either the red border around the lettering or the stroke of the letters themselves...doing it that way makes no sense in the context of visual weight and balance and how those affect viewer attention.

what about this?

>>459650
In general, i like it a lot. I just think the line weight of the teeth should be a bit lighter, but i am not sure, but I think it should be tested.
Also, don't let these itty bitty small white spots exist.

>>459650
It's better but the circular end curves make no sense and just direct your eyes to the new width discrepancies they introduce between that background and the letter forms.
The beginning and ending letter shapes are actually very conducive to a simple rectangular background banner shape with rounded corners that loosely follow the letter shapes, only one corner deviates significantly from being symmetrical...why add a completely different curve?
One other issue screwing it up is that the letter spacing is way crowded; this not only affects legibility, it also makes the outside border look unbalanced because the border area between the letters is too small by comparison.

Thank you guys! I applied a couple of changes

>>459667
Much, much better...C has the best proportions between the head and the banner; if you continue the line of the banner top edge it hits the head at points that just make sense and appear more deliberate than with the other two.

The only part of C I don't like is that unlike A you've fattened up the border on the ends of the banner and its distracting. Change that detail to how it is on A and it's pretty much what I would have drawn up as an example of the changes suggested.

>>459667
desu the original draft looks much better

The version in the OP looks way better.

>>459675
Agreed. The wiggly letter outlines add a wonderfully weird groove that is much better suited to the eccentric nature of this particular mascot. The advice you got to make everything corporate and smooth works in like 99.99% of brand images nowadays which thrive off of "clean" inoffensive blandness, but this weird fred guy is just the rare exception. He has too much wacky personality and needs something bold and counter-culture. Wiggly words for the win.

>>459681
Holy hell thanks mate. I appreciate your comment!

Thanks everyone for your help!

Tbh I liked where waves swooped in near his head but I feel like the waves around WEIRD and FREDD should be straightened. Gives it a kind of cool tab look.

Any updates on this project?