The new logo will span both the Olympic and Paralympic Games for the first time. London 2012 Chairman Sebastian Coe said the logo would inspire everyone to be involved with the Games and would act as ‘reminder of our promise to use the Olympic spirit to inspire everyone and reach out to young people around the world'.
The emblem will also provide the symbol for a national ‘pledge' campaign, which will encourage people to make a positive change in their daily lives and set themselves challenges. The concept will be promoted through a 2012 Summer Roadshow, which starts on 15 June in Greenwich, and will go on a ten week tour of the UK.
The new logo, designed by Wolff Olins, took more than a year to devise and replaces the Candidate City logo unveiled in November 2003. The London 2012 bid team put the future of young athletes at the heart of its bid two years ago and consulted with children during the creation of the new logo.
Click here to read the editor's blog
Comments
I think it is awful. Just dreadful in every possible way.
What were they thinking???
Devastatingly naff. Wollf Olins should realise that the nu-rave aesthetic isn't going to be relevant by 2012. Surely the previous logo had much more of the feel of a classic. This is just the abysmal result of trying to be down with the kids.
It's vile. Here's some previous Olympic logos to compare against...
http://www.mansized.co.uk/post290601
And the video launching the logo...
http://www.london2012.com/about-newlook-video.html
Tom, spot on. Nu-rave + Klaxons + Olympic contract + fuddyduddy design agency = 2012 logo. I spoke this morning on BBC radio London that it should polarise, but I meant that it should appeal to some at least.
Also, the launch (to be fair I have only heard it on the radio) was cringey. I think Seb Coe is a legend, but his references to blogospheres, being seen and used on mobiles and engaging the youth sounds like a 50yr old copywriter who has just heard of YouTube. Sorry guys, Im not being critical for the sake of it, tough job ith all the stakeholders but I just think we should look to build the London Brand and the olympic brand, not try this hard.
and what about Olympic colours? They are not relevant any more?
It's shockingly bad, massively surprised given London 2012's logo for their Olympic bid proposal, which not only incorporated the Olympic colours but also the river Thames shaped ribbon which moved through the typography. I agree with the above, the first thing I thought was Nu-Rave, Kaxons, CSS, oh how very TopShop lets get Madonna and Kate Moss to release some Olympic limited edition sports clothing! As the Olympics are cool and groovy man . . .(If thats what you kids are saying these days). AWFUL!! It's the Olympic games, its the pinnacle of sport and if a gaudy neon logo is an effort to embrace the facebooker and myspacers of the World it won't work, these cats are cleverer than that. Naomi Klien will have a field day....
Or, in the words of Seb Coe (who judging by his uncomfortableness had this written for him, poor fella).
"The new emblem aims to be dynamic, modern and flexible reflecting a brand savvy world where people, especially young people, no longer relate to static logos but respond to a dynamic brand that works with new technology and across traditional and new media networks".
Jesus.
My eyes, they are burning!
The shape around the Olympic rings looks like bloody Australia!
A DIAZ - 05/06/2007
Looks like a game of Tetris gone wrong
Where has all our talent gone?
Not to be crude, but since someone mentioned that it looks like Lisa Simpson sucking someone off, I really can't look at it differently..
Poor, just very very poor...
Agree with Duncan & Tom. This whole 80's 'nu-rave' neon revival will burn out so quicklyl. God knows how dated and embarassing it will look in 5 years time. You can barely make out 2012 as well.
What a bad example of some fuddy duddies attempting to capture the 'yoof' market. Its up there with Richard Madely in the Ali G costume
Oh dear oh dear OH DEAR!
As soon as I heard they had launched the logo I, like many of us in ‘the trade’ googled to find it and OH the disappointment – but I’m not really all that surprised. I’ve been in this game long enough to know that a big budget doesn’t necessarily buy you the best design, or any taste for that matter. Many MANY years ago I worked on some Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle merchandise before they hit over here and spent the entire time not believing they would take off so what do I know?!. But…
Firstly there is the issue of the fee. Playing devils advocate just for a second, when ever these things are splashed across the media the numbers that appear are usually hugely inaccurate and what no body seems to mention is that ‘that fee’ is probably for the entire project, implementation and development – which, as we all know when you have a project that is designed by committee, with everybody having an opinion, can blow a budget out of the water completely. Not that I am completely defending what seems like a colossal waste of money, I just think it’s important that we take in the whole picture. If Joe Public thinks us ‘creatives’ charge those sort of fees for what they see to be an end product like this it really is doing the industry an injustice. We’d all take on a couple of jobs like this and retire.
Opinions are so subjective. Personally I thought the BA tail fins were OK – now that was a bold thing to do. The difference between that and this is the execution. The BA tails at least were done with a bit of style. Mr Coe and co. (sorry about that!) can use all the marketing speak they like, it just shows they have spent too long holed up in a room with people who do too much ‘blue sky thinking – out of the box’ and like to ‘float a concept down the ideas river’ a little too often.
Sitting back on the fence again, the identity for the Olympic games must be one of the toughest briefs to answer. It needs to do so many things, please so many people – everyone in fact. It needs to represent the host nation and still appeal to all others, all ages… it’s a tough one.
Back off the fence – there is so much wrong with this it’s difficult to pin down anywhere it can be redeemed. It’s clunky and honestly looks like a very early concept that made it through to approval. Press coverage almost gives the impression that it will develop between now 2012. If that’s the case, why reveal it now? The 2012 ribbon ID that was used in the run up to the London pitch, although simple, was a league apart from this. Couldn’t that have been developed? And call me old fashioned but ‘London’ with a lower case ‘L’?! C’mon!
The biggest problem with this is that no one, apparently, involved in making the final decision was brave enough to say ‘Hmm. Y’know, I’m not so sure’. It would be great if someone on the inside came out and admitted ‘Actually, I don’t like it’. Don’t get me wrong, it’s no good just saying you don’t like it. You need to back it up with some validation but there must have been someone… surely. Look at the public response. I can’t believe that all the people that think this is OK are employed by the 2012 Committee, as convenient as that might be.
I agree with all the comments so far – it probably does suffer from trying too hard and yes the client ultimately makes the final decision but the fault of the agency here is that it doesn’t appear to have guided the client in the right direction. A creative agency should be employed to answer the client brief yes but ultimately they are employed for their know-how and experience and should guide and educate the client along the way. Someone should have been brave enough to take control of a project like this. It looks like none of this has happened.
But who am I? I’m just a freelance creative with a bit of an agency background. Hell, I liked the BA tail fins and thought TMNT were rubbish.
I think it captures the spirit of the Nation perfectly: Neurotic and disjointed.
Well done Mr.O et. al. for yet another piece of stunning graphic insightfulness.
Why this support of the National Front? Swastikas and the SS thunderflashes go to origami land.
I seem to remember a documentary about Wolff Olins: pre-1982 when it showed Steadtler the pencil Baron becoming very pleased with WO's efforts about a new logo. Then he asked: How did it look when it was small? Reduced to the size it would be on an actual pencil? Very bad all agreed.Including Meesrs Wolff and Olins- so it was back to ze drawing board, mein herr.
Imagine the "logo" actual size on a pen or pencil- it'll look like a goober.
By the way, whatever happened to the old system whereby
you PITCHED? This was just given to the design house, without a shot being fired. Bad design is bad design, but this also says another piece of Labour cronyism and toadying- which makes it all the more unpalatable on top of one incompetency after another. (Blairaq, Health Service fiascos, Dr Kelly, Hutton, Roads, Crime, Prisons, Rail, Immigration, Education,Peerages, Dentists- one mess after another).
With Labour, you get WHO you pay for.
Event branding isn't about a static mark, how it lives through the application and branded environments is what will be remembered. How it will all work in five years is an issue, but it also has to attract sponsors and invest interest today.
Steve Ferrier, Senior Design Consultant, SCG London
steve@scglondon.uk.com
AWFUL! I Keep thinking it's the 1st of April for some reason. If only was, we could sigh with relief.
However you cut it, it's a terrible logo. Let's just hope the message and the importance of the games masks just how weak this terrible attempt really is.
Someone at WO should probably resign over this. And Lord Coe... please don't put this is the same league as Mexico etc. That was great design.
This isn't even bad design.
It looks like the winner from a school competition to design a logo for the Olympics.
I bet this doesn't end up in anyone's portfolio... apart from maybe Billy Smith, age 6, Art and Design Primary School, East London.
Lets just be honest here, this logo is exactly what happens when the client doesnt have the cojones to just say no lest they appear "un-hip"
I can't believe this is actually going to be used! Its embarassing! The Beijing 2008 logo stands way above ours!
I'd like to see the ones that got away. Who's idea was this anyway?
Comments
Jennifer Whitehead - 04/06/2007
I think it is awful. Just dreadful in every possible way.
Daniel Bartosik - 04/06/2007
What were they thinking???
Tom Lancaster - 04/06/2007
Devastatingly naff. Wollf Olins should realise that the nu-rave aesthetic isn't going to be relevant by 2012. Surely the previous logo had much more of the feel of a classic. This is just the abysmal result of trying to be down with the kids.
Will Callaghan - 04/06/2007
It's vile. Here's some previous Olympic logos to compare against... http://www.mansized.co.uk/post290601 And the video launching the logo... http://www.london2012.com/about-newlook-video.html
Duncan James - 04/06/2007
Tom, spot on. Nu-rave + Klaxons + Olympic contract + fuddyduddy design agency = 2012 logo. I spoke this morning on BBC radio London that it should polarise, but I meant that it should appeal to some at least. Also, the launch (to be fair I have only heard it on the radio) was cringey. I think Seb Coe is a legend, but his references to blogospheres, being seen and used on mobiles and engaging the youth sounds like a 50yr old copywriter who has just heard of YouTube. Sorry guys, Im not being critical for the sake of it, tough job ith all the stakeholders but I just think we should look to build the London Brand and the olympic brand, not try this hard.
Nenad Bogojevic - 04/06/2007
and what about Olympic colours? They are not relevant any more?
Gary McQuaid - 04/06/2007
It's shockingly bad, massively surprised given London 2012's logo for their Olympic bid proposal, which not only incorporated the Olympic colours but also the river Thames shaped ribbon which moved through the typography. I agree with the above, the first thing I thought was Nu-Rave, Kaxons, CSS, oh how very TopShop lets get Madonna and Kate Moss to release some Olympic limited edition sports clothing! As the Olympics are cool and groovy man . . .(If thats what you kids are saying these days). AWFUL!! It's the Olympic games, its the pinnacle of sport and if a gaudy neon logo is an effort to embrace the facebooker and myspacers of the World it won't work, these cats are cleverer than that. Naomi Klien will have a field day....
Duncan James - 04/06/2007
Or, in the words of Seb Coe (who judging by his uncomfortableness had this written for him, poor fella). "The new emblem aims to be dynamic, modern and flexible reflecting a brand savvy world where people, especially young people, no longer relate to static logos but respond to a dynamic brand that works with new technology and across traditional and new media networks". Jesus.
Police Chief Wiggum - 04/06/2007
My eyes, they are burning! The shape around the Olympic rings looks like bloody Australia!
A DIAZ - 05/06/2007
Looks like a game of Tetris gone wrong
Richard Scott-Clark - 05/06/2007
Where has all our talent gone?
TIm Rooke - 05/06/2007
Not to be crude, but since someone mentioned that it looks like Lisa Simpson sucking someone off, I really can't look at it differently.. Poor, just very very poor...
simon atkins - 05/06/2007
Agree with Duncan & Tom. This whole 80's 'nu-rave' neon revival will burn out so quicklyl. God knows how dated and embarassing it will look in 5 years time. You can barely make out 2012 as well. What a bad example of some fuddy duddies attempting to capture the 'yoof' market. Its up there with Richard Madely in the Ali G costume
Stephen Connolly - 05/06/2007
Oh dear oh dear OH DEAR! As soon as I heard they had launched the logo I, like many of us in ‘the trade’ googled to find it and OH the disappointment – but I’m not really all that surprised. I’ve been in this game long enough to know that a big budget doesn’t necessarily buy you the best design, or any taste for that matter. Many MANY years ago I worked on some Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle merchandise before they hit over here and spent the entire time not believing they would take off so what do I know?!. But… Firstly there is the issue of the fee. Playing devils advocate just for a second, when ever these things are splashed across the media the numbers that appear are usually hugely inaccurate and what no body seems to mention is that ‘that fee’ is probably for the entire project, implementation and development – which, as we all know when you have a project that is designed by committee, with everybody having an opinion, can blow a budget out of the water completely. Not that I am completely defending what seems like a colossal waste of money, I just think it’s important that we take in the whole picture. If Joe Public thinks us ‘creatives’ charge those sort of fees for what they see to be an end product like this it really is doing the industry an injustice. We’d all take on a couple of jobs like this and retire. Opinions are so subjective. Personally I thought the BA tail fins were OK – now that was a bold thing to do. The difference between that and this is the execution. The BA tails at least were done with a bit of style. Mr Coe and co. (sorry about that!) can use all the marketing speak they like, it just shows they have spent too long holed up in a room with people who do too much ‘blue sky thinking – out of the box’ and like to ‘float a concept down the ideas river’ a little too often. Sitting back on the fence again, the identity for the Olympic games must be one of the toughest briefs to answer. It needs to do so many things, please so many people – everyone in fact. It needs to represent the host nation and still appeal to all others, all ages… it’s a tough one. Back off the fence – there is so much wrong with this it’s difficult to pin down anywhere it can be redeemed. It’s clunky and honestly looks like a very early concept that made it through to approval. Press coverage almost gives the impression that it will develop between now 2012. If that’s the case, why reveal it now? The 2012 ribbon ID that was used in the run up to the London pitch, although simple, was a league apart from this. Couldn’t that have been developed? And call me old fashioned but ‘London’ with a lower case ‘L’?! C’mon! The biggest problem with this is that no one, apparently, involved in making the final decision was brave enough to say ‘Hmm. Y’know, I’m not so sure’. It would be great if someone on the inside came out and admitted ‘Actually, I don’t like it’. Don’t get me wrong, it’s no good just saying you don’t like it. You need to back it up with some validation but there must have been someone… surely. Look at the public response. I can’t believe that all the people that think this is OK are employed by the 2012 Committee, as convenient as that might be. I agree with all the comments so far – it probably does suffer from trying too hard and yes the client ultimately makes the final decision but the fault of the agency here is that it doesn’t appear to have guided the client in the right direction. A creative agency should be employed to answer the client brief yes but ultimately they are employed for their know-how and experience and should guide and educate the client along the way. Someone should have been brave enough to take control of a project like this. It looks like none of this has happened. But who am I? I’m just a freelance creative with a bit of an agency background. Hell, I liked the BA tail fins and thought TMNT were rubbish.
Vic Hazeldine - 05/06/2007
I think it captures the spirit of the Nation perfectly: Neurotic and disjointed. Well done Mr.O et. al. for yet another piece of stunning graphic insightfulness.
Nic Niewart - 05/06/2007
Why this support of the National Front? Swastikas and the SS thunderflashes go to origami land. I seem to remember a documentary about Wolff Olins: pre-1982 when it showed Steadtler the pencil Baron becoming very pleased with WO's efforts about a new logo. Then he asked: How did it look when it was small? Reduced to the size it would be on an actual pencil? Very bad all agreed.Including Meesrs Wolff and Olins- so it was back to ze drawing board, mein herr. Imagine the "logo" actual size on a pen or pencil- it'll look like a goober. By the way, whatever happened to the old system whereby you PITCHED? This was just given to the design house, without a shot being fired. Bad design is bad design, but this also says another piece of Labour cronyism and toadying- which makes it all the more unpalatable on top of one incompetency after another. (Blairaq, Health Service fiascos, Dr Kelly, Hutton, Roads, Crime, Prisons, Rail, Immigration, Education,Peerages, Dentists- one mess after another). With Labour, you get WHO you pay for.
JAN COMER - 05/06/2007
Event branding isn't about a static mark, how it lives through the application and branded environments is what will be remembered. How it will all work in five years is an issue, but it also has to attract sponsors and invest interest today. Steve Ferrier, Senior Design Consultant, SCG London steve@scglondon.uk.com
GRAHAM WEST - 05/06/2007
AWFUL! I Keep thinking it's the 1st of April for some reason. If only was, we could sigh with relief.
Gellan Watt - 05/06/2007
However you cut it, it's a terrible logo. Let's just hope the message and the importance of the games masks just how weak this terrible attempt really is. Someone at WO should probably resign over this. And Lord Coe... please don't put this is the same league as Mexico etc. That was great design. This isn't even bad design. It looks like the winner from a school competition to design a logo for the Olympics. I bet this doesn't end up in anyone's portfolio... apart from maybe Billy Smith, age 6, Art and Design Primary School, East London.
Michael Hodgetts - 06/06/2007
Lets just be honest here, this logo is exactly what happens when the client doesnt have the cojones to just say no lest they appear "un-hip"
Phan Tu - 06/06/2007
I can't believe this is actually going to be used! Its embarassing! The Beijing 2008 logo stands way above ours!
steve Myall - 07/06/2007
I'd like to see the ones that got away. Who's idea was this anyway?