Here is the cause of all the flap. I can easily read London, but 2012 is a bit of a stretch, and what the blank is that square in the middle? My 4 year old granddaughter could do better. Many times readers scorned the £400,000 paid to a brand consultancy to produce it.
According to the Times, within moments the first howls of dissent had registered in cyberspace. By lunchtime a petition had been posted calling on the Games’ organising committee “to scrap and change the ridiculous logo unveiled for the London 2012 Olympics” and by 7pm it had more than 8,000 signatures.
Starting to sound like Chicago? Chicago announces CTA ticket hikes, and everybody signs a petition, (which will have zip, nada, zilch effect.)
Paul Deighton, the chief executive of London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games, said: “This is a bold logo. We were a bold bid and this will be a bold Games. We make no apology.”
Doesn't that remind you of a Chicago bureaucrat defending their inept department?
No competition was held for the work.Isn't that a trademark of Chicago, single bids?
The committee selected Wolff Olins, the brand consultancy which has previously produced logos for Sony Ericsson, Unilever and Macmillan Cancer Support. Above all the consultancy was urged to reach out to a younger audience which has become steadily less interested in the Olympic movement over the past 20 years.
Heck, in Chicago, it would be easier just to have the taggers design the logo. They are the ones that would be painting over them as soon as they appeared on buses and rail cars.
“This logo is going to be key to us raising money commercially. All our worldwide sponsors are ecstatic with it. The moment everybody in the team [organising the Games] saw the shape it was a unanimous decision to move on that basis.”That tells me the Olympic sponsors have even worse taste.
Come to think of it, if Chicago does win an Olympics bid, what will their logo look like? I shudder to think.