I don't get a "techy" feel from the top one. I like the simplicity of the letters and the spacing. It sits nicely with me. Even though it may be a bit boring, I like the top one better. To me the tail on the "n" just doesn't fit.

Thanks pennANDink. I especially appreciate that you don't think it's techy.

I would round the top join (and possibly the bottom join?) of the "P," as it doesn't seem to fit with the rounded angles of the "A" and "N."

Good call on the "P". I like the top "N", feels modern but not overly techy. The bottom one doesn't work for me, just seems a bit awkward.

What exactly is the identity for?

Thanks for your helpful comments. Here's an update. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions.

The identity is for a local retailer. I'd prefer to have this critiqued as though it was a font (albeit a limited quantity of letters) so I can improve letter drawing.

I do like the lower one. The tail adds a bit of flair.
But since it has no purpose, I would loose it too.

Both are not techy, this probaly due to the spacing between the letters.
It has a basic feel to me.

Rounding the corners is a good comment.

Looks like kerning is slightly off between AN.

Nice type!

Nice work and I enjoy seeing how this has developed and will progress.
But I am wondering why you are modulating the stroke width on the 'C' -
or maybe it just my eyes playing tricks on me?

No your eyes are not playing tricks, I guess. I see it too.
But it seems that the C is a result of the O in which the stroke width is adjusted.

I see that this is not the case in the P where you would also expect the same treatment.

There is a slight adjustment in widths. For example, the bowl of the P modulates a little (maybe it needs a little more), as does the with of the right leg of the A.