"BT unveils new logo after years of work – its name in a circle"
serious shade in that headline.
the guardian (while great) are known for clickbait shite when it comes to new logos being 'unveiled'
I think it's unfair to judge the amount of work that went into this redesign on just the one visual that has come out. These large organisations often have a lot of stakeholders, and a big part of the design process in managing and aligning them.
Also, I'm sure we'll see other visuals based on this logo soon.. for example:
you're in the wrong place if you want people with balanced opinions on branding
It's so bad though.
It's simple, and you could fault it for that... but there's nothing wrong with it. It's solid, well-spaced, and nicely-weighted.
I wonder how much money was spent on that logo.
I mean the logo works, and will eventually grow on us once it becomes familiar. It's not special or unique at all though but lately it's about the marketing and usage that goes with them.
What I'm interested in is how does one convince a client that two letters in a circle should be their logo, for that amount of money? (which I'm guessing it's a lot)
That's what I want to know.
Like at least one stakeholder surely thought to themselves (meh I can do this myself in a word doc)