It’s not a logo.
As a DomPost correspondent has written online:
The new ‘design’ doesn’t contain any design elements at all. Its just text in a row.
This is what the council first accepted last November, at a cost which the DomPost says was $24,000.
There was much criticism of the cross. Was it a religious icon? Or an Easter hot cross bun?
The cross is now gone. And the council has added its name, making a five-word slogan (or nine words?) instead of the memorable (whether you liked them or not) original three words.
But no design elements at all, apart from the choice of typeface, which is a reminder of the house style of the Guardian newspaper in London. Hardly relevant to a city which keeps telling us that it’s cool.
Where’s the council communications department when it’s needed? Not a word has been issued by Richard MacLean or any of his colleagues, to explain the relevance or significance of the new design. What’s going on between the council and its design advisors. Are there any design advisors?
The only explanation to be found so far comes from Cr Coughlan, quoted by the DomPost and sounding defensive:
“There seemed to be a hue and cry about the logo with the plus on it. If there’s an additional cost associated with [removing it] that’s what happens. At the end of the day I think it’s a reasonable price tag for a reinvigorated brand.”