Value of good design debate goes public
Value of good design debate goes publicThe Drum is inviting the design industry to defend its profession in the wake of negative comments following the launch of the 2014 Commonwealth Games logo this week.
Much of the sentiment expressed can be summed up in a quote by Member of the Scottish Parliament Margo MacDonald, who is reported in The Scotsman newspaper saying: "I know that when the SNP designed their iconic logo back in the Sixties, it cost them about £12. That would seem to be about the right price. The company that provided this logo deserve a medal for their entrepreneurial flair."
The budget for the new logo and implementation is in the region of £95,000.
Richard Draycott, editor of The Drum, said: "It is obvious that the market still doesn't understand the value of good design and what it can add to the economic performance of a country, event or brand. How can we educate the market to ensure that such puerile and uninformed debate becomes a thing of the past?"
Below is more launch work for the Games created by Marque, the agency responsible for creating the new identity for the 2014 Games.
The Drum will be looking back at previous Commonwealth Games identities in its next issue. To subscribe, click here.
New to The Drum
You will be sent a verification email. Click on the link in the email to post your comment.
Comments
"How can we educate the market to ensure that such puerile and uninformed debate becomes a thing of the past?"
Well, I wouldn't start by reading the comments section on the drum.
Please don't delete this - it's a fair point, especially since you used the words puerile and uninformed.
'The Drum is inviting the design industry to defend its profession in the wake of negative and often uninformed comments following the launch of the 2014 Commonwealth Games logo this week.'
Why do we have to defend the profession - its one companies work not the entire professions..
comments
I'll defend it, I've been doing so already! We're not all negative cave-dwellers in Scotland. It's all about educating people on the power of good brands, not examining a logo in microdetail!
You could point them here:
http://www.designfactfinder.co.uk/
But let's face it, the "my 9 year old could better" comments will never go away in cases like this. Just deal with it, and get on with delighting your clients not Daily Mail readers.
How about we give the public Victor Brierley as a sacrificial offering?
They could savagely tear him apart limb by limb, satisfying their outrage. And we get a bit of peace and quiet for a while. It's a win-win solution.
Why do I feel like I'm being given a row for not liking this? If I was being asked to defend my profession I wouldn't use the Commonwealth Games logo to do it.
Victor, you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk you talk and talk and talk and talk and talk
comments
How about starting off by splitting out the real logo design cost from the implementation costs, then we might not see ill informed headlines talking about a £95,000 logo.
Journalists out there defend your profession.
comments
Margo McDonald's advice to MP’s on saving money:
"make your own office curtains, shop at supermarkets after 5pm when food is often reduced, and using garden furniture in offices. They could further cut costs by reading newspapers online, rinsing out teabags, and buying the fabric for curtains in the sales."
Enough said. This from a women who’s boss looks like toad of toad hall, and who is a embarrassment in much the same way as your old uncle dancing at a party.
The entire World will be watching Scotland in the run up to these games. The social and heath benefits of the games should be aimed at getting our child obesity rate down. I think we’re 2nd in the World at the moment, still in with a shout of winning that league. Why don't politicians stick to something they're good at and run the country.
Oh that mess belongs to them...
'the main reason it's getting slated is that there's an almost exact replica on Marques website, the fact that they didn't see fit to shift that before the launch was staggeringly stupid.
and they're an american company'
- correct this is the only reason for the debate or slagging. END OF!!!
However I'm sure Victor will have something to say as always, maybe we could have a debate on what Victor does all day?
This happens whenever there's a high profile branding job - especially when there's public money involved. Your average man on the street is pretty uninterested in design (as the comments on that Scotsman story show...) until he sees some stirring story basically saying "100k of your money pissed away on a logo", at which point he becomes an arbiter of design excellence.
comments
Gordon Young Wed 10 Mar 2010 15:50
This issue is about more than the Marque logo. Its about reminding the market about what good design really can add; to an economy, to corporate bottom lines, to asset values, to competitiveness. And of course what it can add in creating jobs. Its frustrating that all the focus is on the logo itself - with hardly any comment on how this identity will be deployed and implemented. That's the hard part of the equation. If the team get it right, then this identity is cheap at treble the price.
Yip, the problem is that its not that the public in this instance are philistines , its just that it does not answer the brief, pure and simple. It does not inspire.
We can say, oh well wait till you see it implemented. Rubbish. It should work from the off, as in get set go!!!
"I'll defend it, I've been doing so already! We're not all negative cave-dwellers in Scotland. It's all about educating people on the power of good brands, not examining a logo in microdetail!"
Well, I'm afraid you don't have to examine this logo in micro-detail to appreciate it's poor execution, blatant plagiarism and truly forgettable branding.
I bet London agencies are laughing their nuts off at this.
£95k? Just think how much it would've cost if it was original!!!
Makes me very sad.
The 'G' in circles is good - but what is all that mass of crap all around it? Everyone should learn from this poor effort.
You defend it. It's a storm of your making.
Gordon, good design of course can add massive value to a company. However that has to be rooted in good thinking. The problem here is that the thinking behind the brand is seriously undermined by the very, very similar work that Marque has displayed in their portfolio.
That's what's making the market sceptical of the brand and of the fee associated with it. Can you blame them?
comments
Well said, William.
comments
What i think is funny is that people are so busy slagging the logo off, they have failed to see that they have forgotten to insert the numbers into the space left by the 'XX'!
Boom boom.
comments
Really nice video. How's that for a change of subject?
Have you seen this, it's an outrage.
http://www.lundgrenlindqvist.se/creative-collective-effect/
All this talk of brand and similarities to other logos is a load of rot.
It's just been launched so give it time - it's not as if you can change it by bitching. It's the general public who'll decide and whether or not we think they know best is besides the point. STV are running a poll on their site just now and the majority of people like it:
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-central/162614-glasgow-2014-commonwealt...
I really don't see what the issue is here - must be a slow news week.
The games will be a success based on the athletes attending and the overall event itself - i really don't think the logo will make any difference - and i'm speaking as a non-designer here so don't flame me with comments about things I don't understand. please.
Has anyone asked the Queen what she thinks.
If people are moaning about the price - did Edinburgh not pay £800k for that Inspiring Capital nonsense... which looked a bit like the trajectory diagram on the back of Max-Fli golfballs...
Is it not about time The Drum came up with new stories? This has been the headline for 3 days in the trot. Maybe come up with latest news!
comments
Gordon, the spotlight on this issue is because of a particularly high profile design project that has, frankly, exposed an agency to cynicism and shouts of malpractice. So it's hardly surprising that the focus of this discussion thread revolves around the logo. I am not especially interested in discussing the merits of the design of the logo - if the commitee thought it met the brief, then that's good enough for me. I have my own opinions.
Scotland offers unrivalled value for money from a design perspective - you only need to look at average daily rates and the size of budget afforded to Scottish agencies. Scotland is cheap. Really cheap.
So, I can't speak for the rest of the UK, but I for one, will not be trying to justify the value of design north of the border, especially when I see agencies busting a gut to win a 66 agency pitch. Did I say pitch? Sorry, lottery.
Personally, I think the spotlight should be on our shocking Gov tender system, not the design industry. Maybe if public sector design buyers made the effort to review/vet and investigate agencies more thoroughly and appoint accordingly, then issues like this would be limited. And maybe then value would prevail.
The logo is average. Making it bigger would make it outstanding.
comments
Totally agree with Anon 18:08.
I can't believe we're still harping on about this story when, in the meantime, Manchester advertising legend Michel Huet has passed away with absolutely no mention from The Drum.
This is all a bit lame. I bet The Drum are loving this nonsense. 1,000 extra hits a day!
The brand works OK. Does anyone really care that much anyway? It seems to me that Scotland and most sub par designers just want their own 2012 crap logo to fuss over.
As for Victor. Who?
Victor, GO TO SLEEP!
comments
Cracking video. Might dust off the Reeboks this weekend.
comments
"The logo is average. Making it bigger would make it outstanding."
That actually made me laugh out loud!
That's the best comment I've read for a long time - you've made my morning. You should have put your name to that, because it's pure comedy gold!
You've pretty much summed-up how a lot of people gauge the value of logo design:
"For £95k I would've expected a much bigger logo – it's only 2cm high on MY screen..."
I just wonder how many of the anonymouse comments on here that are defending the logo are from The Marque.
Look, here's how it happened.
Open on CD's office at The Marque, design agency par excellence. CD shouts at designer, "You've only got three logos to show the Commies?! Three logos?!?!? They're paying us £100k and you've only got three logos?!??!?!?!?!!? Well you need to pull another one out your rabbithole by lunchtime sunshine or you're for the dole queue. You'll wish you were Ramsay Whatsisname by the time I'm finished with you!"
Five minutes later.
Designer to artworker, "Hey, hold on a minute... didn't we do a logo with a G in it ages ago for some tiny wee organisation no-one's ever heard of since? Dig it out off the backup and drop that on top of that torchy thing they told us to use... and thrown in the colour pallete from the Colourlover Channel 4 homage page and no one will look twice at it. It'll be cannonfodder for that nice Mackintosh-with-a-twist one I came up... yeah let's do that."
comments
Anonymous Wed 20:00, I'm not convinced there are many here who pitched for the project. We didn't, and probably never will for such projects until the tender/pitch systems are reviewed. It sounds to me like the detractors here are genuinely putting forward their views.
http://www.makemylogobiggercream.com/t-shirt.html
comments
Although it is major plagiarism of the covent garden logo, we still need to stick up for the industry or we will all be advertising on GUMTREE... logo designed, posters designed, leaflets designed... all for £20, check these out, bloody annoying. That's the way it's going to go, if we don't stick up for each other.
The Covent Garden logo is vastly superior.
Well excuse me Mr Carroll, opinions often are subjective. Strange that. My opinion is that the Covent Carden is vastly superior. Doesn't need me to read a 100-page rationale or seek to find out how it's been implemented across umpteen pieces of collateral.
The Covent Garden is clean, precise, well-crafted and single-minded – everything the Games logo is not. That's my opinion, you have yours, and we'll go our seperate ways.
We were one of the agencies who went in for the initial stage but didn't get any further than that....thankfully, by the sounds of it!!
During the feedback process I was told the criteria that would probably be used to decide who got the work. There were some London based agencies and some Scottish ones got through to the final 10 and I was told that there was every likelyhood that it would go to London agency as Westminster is supply a large part of the funding for the games and would want the perceived kudos of a London agency doing the design work. So from that perspective, Marque fits the bill perfectly, having a presence in London as well as Glasgow.
I'm not a fan of the logo particularly but I'm sure it will grow on me, like the 2012 one has.
What I'd like to see are the other concepts and ideas they came with. After all, they had to get this logo past several different committees both in Government and the Games themselves so I wonder if this might be either a diluted version of an earlier concept or the 'safer' of three or four ideas.
The reason the design industry is having to defend itself AGAIN over costs is because some rent-a-gob in parliament, with no clue about the creative process and how its implemented, has seen fit to open her mouth and talk shite about the costs and what a waste of public money it is! Mind you, thats what they get paid for!! Would they want to try and portray Scotland as a modern, cosmopolitan country to visit using a logo designed by an 8 year old in a colouring competition? Doubt it!! These politicians should shut the hell up and get back to figuring out how the Edinburgh tram fiasco is now going to drag on for ANOTHER three years!!
I'm posting this anonymously as the info at the top was told to me off the record and I don't want to drop anyone in the shit!
Well done Adrian for finally adding some sense to this whole situation, and indeed putting your name to your comment. I'm not going to put my name to this comment as I don't really exist.
I think the brand will prove to be very powerfull and effective in the comming months and years. The standards that Marque seem to have will demand this.
I have one small problem. I agree with all that Adrian has said and I too am disgusted by some of the media comments made politicians and the winging letter writers in the Herald and Scotsman. That said, I can't understanding how someone in an agency of Marques calibre didn't spot the similarities in the Id design, and knowing the profile of the project and indeed the role of design ambassadors that I believe this job brings, were brave enough to speak out against that route.
No matter how good the idea, or indeed the overall application of the brand, we still have to remember the audience and context of a brand. It is not just the end user, it is internal & external stakeholders, oposition politicians, fellow designers, the media etc, Not all these parties understand what a brand really is. We must remember that.
?
comments
In another article the Drum ask us to defend the design industry. But how can we defend the indefensible.
The Marque display both logos on their website, that is either very honest or very naive in a week where journalist will be crawling all over this story because there is public money involved. How could they think they could get away with it? These clients may be in different sectors but they are in the same city and are both part funded by Glasgow City Council.
I am assuming that the Games organisers want to sell official merchandise, this may be tricky with a logo that could be hard to trademark with a twin across town, not an identical twin but at least an incestuous second cousin. Who wants to build a brand out of a logo they may not even own. Who do the Marquee assign copyright to or are they retaining it to sell to a third party.
Come on Marque Design, give us your side of the story, or have you lost the art of communication?
Also Journalists; this is not a £95k logo, that is the budget for design and implementation, so can one of you correctly identify how that is split. Otherwise its just more screaming headlines, come on Journalists defend your profession!
Write Your Comment