Great Western Coffee Shop

I'm seeing new logo ideas on Facebook.

The old BR one at Melksham was:
(http://www.wellho.net/pix/br_double.jpg)

Perhaps this should be the new one:
(http://www.wellho.net/pix/br_single.jpg)

If it is going to be Great British Railways it presumably needs some blue in it?

Given that the old BR logo survived all the way through the privatisation years, it will be rather ironic if it changed now we’re moving back towards a more ‘nationalised’ set of arrangements.

Didnt the White Paper see the logo as central to what they are trying to acheive, and to only expect the odd "regional variation" ?

For my part, I have had my suggested GBR logo on my profile for some time now  ;D

I would vote to stick with the arrows of indecision as it is a universally accepted British symbol however, this particular government probably can’t help themselves to do a massive marketing and rebranding exercise with something probably covered in union flags, bulldogs, lions, a red phone box, a black taxi, the Palace of Westminster, tower bridge and other London based things that the world thinks is British to get across their build better British back better tag line. They would want their own mark on it even if it doesn’t make sense. In an ideal world it needs to be uncomplicated, which the arrows already are.

I feel it will have a little done to it as a basic logo, there will be National difference applied and possibly Regions having a variant.  NR Regions will become I suspect will be the GBR Regions   

Does that indicate "Two track Melksham, NOW"  ::)

With due apologies from the originator for perhaps misuse and abuse of their original demand

From The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2021/sep/22/british-rail-logo-designer-appalled-by-green-makeover-mess)

Perish the thought, eh?  ;D

And of course we the taxpayers would be on the hook for financing the replacement of what must be the thousands of signs which carry the original, instantly recognised, design.

WALOB indeed.

If it ain't broke don't try and fix it.

This has to be fake news, surely?

Take one of the most instantly recognisable corporate logos and trash it.  And while you're at it, insult the majority of people who don't need a message that rail travel produces less CO₂ per passenger mile travelled than car travel; they already know it

If it's a variant to be used for a specific advertising campaign, fair enough. If it's meant to be a permanent logo for all situations, it's not good. Too many shades, not bold and cohesive enough. If they really feel a new logo is needed (but at the same time should be based on the original; hmm... ) then at least make it something instantly identifiable against various backgrounds, lighting conditions and so on.

I think the Guardian is manufacturing outrage here. Shapps says they want to update the logo, and the RDG have produced a version for their 'We Mean Green' campaign (see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml2l8DXZNvc). I can't see anything in the story to suggest that this four-colour version is to replace the familiar red and white version.

It is probably a measure of how good Gerry Barney's original logo is that it can be adapted for campaigns without losing its brand recognition. But as others have said, the BR logo is not bust and does not need fixing. We have far better things to spent the money on!

To be fair to the Guardian, they didn't really fake the news themselves - they put the bits next to each other and let people jump to the wrong conclusion for themselves. It's an old journalistic trick, and it obviously still works, given how many people (not just here) fell into the trap. The original Williams Shapps quote is:

So "updated versions", based on that, means updated to be used on new media, as well as new purposes such as this "green" campaign. Of course that does not rule out some GBR marketing types getting carried away in the future.

I agree, the green logo is fine for a specific advertising or promotional purpose.
But the standard logo should remain as is, it remains widely used and understood and should not be updated or modified in any way. Long after the demise of "British rail" it was used to denote national rail services, especially when it was required to distinguish these from say LUL, TFL, or heritage rail operations.

Tut, tut. Corporate branding firms have got to make a living you know!

What a mess.

It seems to me that this logo is specifically to be used for the "green" publicity campaign and is no more likely to replace the original than an image of The Famous Five is destined to replace the current GWR logo.

Both will cost ridiculous amounts of money however.

Ridiculous?

Presumably both GWR and the RDG measure the cost and effectiveness of their campaigns, and decide whether to continue funding them accordingly. GWR must think their 'Famous Five' campaign is worthwhile, or they wouldn't have relaunched it.

I don't imagine National Rail/RDG/whatever next have that big a publicity budget to spend. It's a media campaign, so they have created a web site for it  (https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/uk-rail-industry/we-mean-green.html)and poked a few journos in the ribs.

The launch material said:
So presumably operating companies will do a few tweet-and-headline-targeted "events" on the same theme.

Perhaps they should look back at classic designs to demonstrate how far we have moved on in the modern era:

(https://creativereview.imgix.net/content/uploads/2011/03/page139_britrposter_0.jpg?auto=compress,format&q=60&w=569&h=918)

Then again...

I suggests somebody gets hold of a copy of this - I'll lend them mine if they can't find one......

(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/ww255/PhilWakely/bridentity.jpg)

If only their press release had included the word “ temporarily”, the rail enthusiast’s internet wouldn’t have slowed down at all…  ;D

Paul

Reaction from the professionals in Design Week (https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/20-26-september-2021/national-rail-logo-update/)


But then ... doesn't the very fact it's generated such outrage prove that it's reaching people as intended  :P

Perhaps it's understandable that "design" professionals should react to the design per se, and ignore the words. But even they are not justified (and still less other media) to dismiss it is only greenifying a logo and criticise the campaign as being nothing but the logo-tinkering, or as doing nothing to decarbonise the railways or attract passengers. In a literal sense no campaign ever does anything, it can only entice and prod others. Decrying the campaign for what it doesn't contain, and making it hard to find by not providing a link to it (while there is a link to other advers comment), looks distinctly self-serving.

It's as if they had not looked at the RDG's message (https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/uk-rail-industry/we-mean-green.html) at all! Mind you, the same is true of (almost?) everyone else too. If you do, it's surprising how much of it is pitched to government, to get them to simplify fares (in a particular RDG-preferred way), and start a rolling electrification program.

So, if you are a grouping of businesses which never had much control over how green your railway was, and will have less in the future, and as RDG have limited influence on anything, how do you put over such a message? You could also ask why they are bothering to. But ultimately the message (like most anti-apple-pie campaigns) isn't good news in itself, so any headlines grabbed will be about something else - this logo, a claim too far over the top, or of course "demonstrating" as now understood by the self-righteous.