McCann Erickson won the account in April after beating WPP to the account.
Today, Brett Gosper, the chief executive of McCann Worldgroup, was asked by the Financial Times if he liked the logo.
He told the paper: "For us, it’s irrelevant whether we like it or not. My personal opinion is not that relevant."
The logo caused a storm of controversy when it was released by the design agency Wolff Olins in 2007.
However, Gosper did say that the logo had had a huge impact and had garnered a lot of publicity for the Games.
Comments
Hmmm... I thought we'd gone beyond 'any news is good news' in the world of marketing...
I notice he's using the royal 'we' ...
He could have added, it's irrelevant whether it works or not, it's possibly the last time a major brand identity will be created by vain, arrogant designers who think they know best and that impact is everything
FP - 17/11/2009
This is a very bizarre relationship anyway. McCanns are paying to be the 2012 agency so the whole client/agency thing is topsy-turvy. Wolff Olins got paid very well for the branding, although I doubt it was all fees for the concept but probably 90% spent on the onerous style guide and multimedia applications. McCanns are Interpublic, Wolff Olins is Omnicom so no love lost there .... lots of reasons why Brett felt on pretty safe ground by not overtly backing the branding. But actually, he's totally wrong. The branding is what it is in as much that by the time the event happens, the population will have caught up with the vision of the organisers and it will summarise the event brand perfectly. If Brett and his guys think they can ignore the most concentrated summary of the brand promise and head off in a different direction then LOCOG have got a big problem.
Is this really news, does anyone really care whether Brett likes it or not?
This is shite reporting. BrettGosper politely sidestepped the question and said nothing onthe subject and then it is reported as if he had.
I agree with Mark P. Us ad guys always get handed dodgy logos. We sometimes produce dodgy ads, but we can also produce great thoughts and ideas that give the logo a little more meaning and worth. Let's just hope that we don't have a shite Games which would eclipse the shite logo
I wouldn't endorse it, it's a camel of a design and a total wast of taxpayers funds. The king is naked, the 2012 Olympic's logo is an insult to British design & creativity. God knows how much damage it's done to us across the world.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall during the development of the ID, wonder what the committee process for choosing it was like?
Jonathan, I was a fly on the wall.
The Committee who decided upon the logo can't be named for 'security' reasons but, I've never clung to the wall of a room with so many guide dogs before.
It's crap. End of. We will not grow to love it as it is rolled out because we will witness the genius of it. It will not be viewed retrospectively as an iconic piece of design. It is not representative of British Design at its best. It is unfit for purpose. It is a monumental illustration of what happens when people believe their own hype and then manage to sell that hype to others. It is a disgrace and it makes me wince every time I see it.
@ Sue Turner
Can't quite figure if you like it or not, Sue. Would you be so kind as to state your position a little more clearly?
Of course he doesn't like it, but I'm sure he can work with it. And of course it's rubbish: any combination of tiny type and oral sex was never gonna look great!
Sure Grilla. It's not quite my cuppa.
Grilla – sadly, you've confirmed my suspicions.
Many thanks.
This logo shouldn't even recieve the pewter medal. To think they thought they had "superbrand"
However, Some thought may have gone into this design
http://www.flickr.com/photos/outadbox/4145529399
Please view this and the previous post I believe this is more than coincidence.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/outadbox/4149449430/sizes/o/
check entire photosstream
Comments
Stef Brown - 17/11/2009
Hmmm... I thought we'd gone beyond 'any news is good news' in the world of marketing...
kevin mclean - 17/11/2009
I notice he's using the royal 'we' ... He could have added, it's irrelevant whether it works or not, it's possibly the last time a major brand identity will be created by vain, arrogant designers who think they know best and that impact is everything
FP - 17/11/2009
This is a very bizarre relationship anyway. McCanns are paying to be the 2012 agency so the whole client/agency thing is topsy-turvy. Wolff Olins got paid very well for the branding, although I doubt it was all fees for the concept but probably 90% spent on the onerous style guide and multimedia applications. McCanns are Interpublic, Wolff Olins is Omnicom so no love lost there .... lots of reasons why Brett felt on pretty safe ground by not overtly backing the branding. But actually, he's totally wrong. The branding is what it is in as much that by the time the event happens, the population will have caught up with the vision of the organisers and it will summarise the event brand perfectly. If Brett and his guys think they can ignore the most concentrated summary of the brand promise and head off in a different direction then LOCOG have got a big problem.
mark stringer - 17/11/2009
Is this really news, does anyone really care whether Brett likes it or not?
Mark Palmer - 17/11/2009
This is shite reporting. BrettGosper politely sidestepped the question and said nothing onthe subject and then it is reported as if he had.
Rollie Fingers - 17/11/2009
I agree with Mark P. Us ad guys always get handed dodgy logos. We sometimes produce dodgy ads, but we can also produce great thoughts and ideas that give the logo a little more meaning and worth. Let's just hope that we don't have a shite Games which would eclipse the shite logo
Chris Arnold - 17/11/2009
I wouldn't endorse it, it's a camel of a design and a total wast of taxpayers funds. The king is naked, the 2012 Olympic's logo is an insult to British design & creativity. God knows how much damage it's done to us across the world.
Jonathan Waring - 18/11/2009
I'd love to be a fly on the wall during the development of the ID, wonder what the committee process for choosing it was like?
Grilla Login - 19/11/2009
Jonathan, I was a fly on the wall. The Committee who decided upon the logo can't be named for 'security' reasons but, I've never clung to the wall of a room with so many guide dogs before.
Sue Turner - 20/11/2009
It's crap. End of. We will not grow to love it as it is rolled out because we will witness the genius of it. It will not be viewed retrospectively as an iconic piece of design. It is not representative of British Design at its best. It is unfit for purpose. It is a monumental illustration of what happens when people believe their own hype and then manage to sell that hype to others. It is a disgrace and it makes me wince every time I see it.
Grilla Login - 20/11/2009
@ Sue Turner Can't quite figure if you like it or not, Sue. Would you be so kind as to state your position a little more clearly?
Jason Hunt - 20/11/2009
Of course he doesn't like it, but I'm sure he can work with it. And of course it's rubbish: any combination of tiny type and oral sex was never gonna look great!
Sue Turner - 24/11/2009
Sure Grilla. It's not quite my cuppa.
Jonathan Waring - 24/11/2009
Grilla – sadly, you've confirmed my suspicions. Many thanks.
B Comens - 01/12/2009
This logo shouldn't even recieve the pewter medal. To think they thought they had "superbrand" However, Some thought may have gone into this design http://www.flickr.com/photos/outadbox/4145529399
B Comens - 01/12/2009
Please view this and the previous post I believe this is more than coincidence. http://www.flickr.com/photos/outadbox/4149449430/sizes/o/ check entire photosstream