According to their website this saved them a lot of money, plus they also made a documentary about making the font which is content for Nebula.

Where did the savings come from? Maybe they were licensing a paid font? I doubt saved them more money than using a free font.

	▲	cleech a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		They were licensing Whitney SSm, they switched to a Source Sans derived typeface to save those costs but forked and adjusted it to more closely match Whitney SSm to minimize brand disruption.
	▲	t098i3 a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		In the documentary video, their CCO explained if they used a different existing font they would have had to rework a lot of their media for the different font metrics, while making their own allowed them to have a drop-in replacement.

ChrisRR 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Saved them money on licensing their existing font, so why didn't they just move to another cheaper or free font?

	▲	t098i3 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Because those fonts have different metrics, so they wouldn't have been drop-in replacements, they would have had to re-do all of their branded media. Loose programming analogy: The free replacements had a slightly different "API" (metrics) that would have required adjusting hundreds or thousands of "call sites" (media using the font), so instead they made their own "API-compatible" (metrically compatible) replacement that dropped straight in. This is all covered in the documentary short about the font.