Fit-and-finish is great, but I'm not sure about them conceptually.
Actually, I'm not sure about very much--including the saturation of iconic logos in the direct mail publishing field at all--perhaps iconic representations of direct mail are hackneyed... or perhaps they are so beyond the concept of those in the business that they are avoided altogether. Is your direct customer a b2b marketing company that already knows a lot about direct marketing stuff? This could all factor in to the final critique, and before I go and say that they are bland and arbitrary, without much iconic resonance, I would probably have to factor this in. Not all industries have the room for icons; FedEx has the hidden arrow denoting movement (conveying shipment, directness, speed, forwardness, future-looking, etc), but there are only 3 big third-party shippers. Maybe your industry has hundreds of competing companies and you must go abstract or even non-iconic to hope to get recognition? Just guessing here.
The first one has, as I said, a lovely finish, and without the treatments, it does have good juxtaposition of typefaces, weight given to the brand and emphasis in caps given to the product suffix, and yet it's tied together by the angled ends of the "T" characters. But without the tagline, I don't know what TitanDirect is. To me it sounds like a new division of TigerDirect or something, but that's another example of a brand that I only have a clue about because of my existing relationship with them. More information about how much of their business is repeat business, how well they rate with potential new customers, and what their goal is with the new corporate identity (enhanced customer loyalty/confidence vs. attracting lots of new customers) would illustrate whether or not this is an effective approach. A small nitpick: the "i" bothers me with how close the body is with the upper part, but I enjoy the static distance between the left and top sides of the "i" character and the "T" character.. perhaps lop off some of the middle... because if the logo were any smaller it would look capital, and weird.
Anyway, the second is a little busier (maybe it's the close tracking/linespace and the large whitespace on the inside of the type that makes it difficult to read.. artistically beautiful however), but it does at least have some pseudo-graphic communication with the speech bubble and the "x" variable differentiated by typeface to give probably the closest thing to an icon for this particular nature of business.
Overall really good though, most of my ponderance is theoretical more than technical.
