madcomments

Hmm - there have been other logos that have drawn flak for their expense and apparent irrelevance - for example the BT “piper” logo and recently the Conservative’s “tree” emblem - not to mention plenty of charity rebrands - and in the end the public seems to grudgingly accept them. I think it will be interesting to see how the logo is received in the international community rather than just by the carping, sniping pundits of the UK. Maybe in time it will be a grower.

Yeah but just one look at the Mexico 68 or Moscow 80 branding makes you realise this is absolute rubbish.

Or the Athens 2004 one…..it had a historical feel to it by including the winners olive wreath. It meant something.

Some of those older logos you can practically tell which country it was even without reading it. The Barcelona 92 one for example.

Maybe this one will grow on me…but so far it looks like something my 4 year old niece would draw.

Some suspect it’s a graphical representation of someone being given, er receiving, ‘oral pleasure’ - with the two of the 12 being the suspect appendage… I promise it isn’t just my mind.

The thing is, as someone that communicates to the 16-25 audience (the target generation of 5 years hence?), this attempt has more of teletubbies about it than the multi-platform media savvy web natives demand.

Will it last 5 years in this fast paced communication revolution… it’s already ancient!

Will they want the merchandising, like I say it’s a bit Saturday morning kids.

Will our overseas visitors ponder on it… I bet they couldn’t care less, they’ll be more perplexed at why there’s no transport to the venues.

However I guess I’m somewhat jealous, we all wish we could earn 400k as easy, for a couple of days work. Now that is clever. Way to go WO!

Can anyone at Wolff Olins recommend me to a gullible quango or two?

I was discussing this with my boss, Howard Milton of Smith and Milton who’s a brand guru in his own right. He’s very much in support of the logo because he thinks that the mark has been specifically designed to move and evolve and will evolve from ugly duckling to swan by 2012.

It’s not a corporation mark it’s a campaign mark. It doesn’t need to conform to the usual brand rules of permanence. Change and evolution should be celebrated.

Part of creating an identity is about expressing difference - because this mark doesn’t conform to peoples 20th century values as to what they perceive to be ‘good’ design - doesn’t make it a ‘bad’ identity.

The stated target audience are young. The use of primary colour and basic shapes trigger good recognition amongst a youthful audience.

And as for the cost - why do people think that someone just sits down draws a mark and asks for £400k? Its laughable and naive. Wolff Olins are not mugs - they know whatever they produced will be lampooned and ridiculed. However their thoroughness and experience should not be doubted. The money spent is not for one single mark, it is for the development and production of a scheme that must work on every conceivable format, size, substrate and money. Pointing solely at the logo is like pointing at a brick and ignoring the cost of the rest of the house.

This always helps me get a perspective on the cost of a branding exercise as large as the London Olympics - the £1m bonuses our city boys get on top of their wages.

I really don’t like the new logo for London 2012. It looks cheap, tacky, cold, with no personality and has no connection with the public. I know that everyone perceives brands and images differently yet can behold a unifed message but in this case I think it does neither.

I prefered the London 2012 candidate city brand as it was stylish, warm, modern and fresh. One has to imagine the new logo printed on T’Shirts, pens, banners, posters, cars etc. Will you feel proud when you see the new logo representing your country for this truly prestigious event?

Chris
www.threerooms.com

Drawing controversy to make a brand noticed is a parlor trick. It’s not about creating controversy, its about expressing an Ideal. The Olympic games are an Ideal; that was forgotten here. The reason why the Athens logo was so beautiful was because it spoke of the values that the games stand for. Of course we’ll have to get used to it, I suppose its like getting used to living without an eye: One can, but who wants to. I’m very disappointed in the designer team that did this, they had a brilliant opportunity, but they confused it with opportunism. Rather than serving the ideals of their clients (The Olympic Ideal) they served themselves - Shame