Opinion BY Armin

A “Thing” as Logo

With a population of roughly 75,000, the town of Burnley, Lancashire in England looks to be a perfectly picturesque English charmer. Not only is Burnley the birthplace of Gandalf but it’s also home to one of the hottest soccer teams of the moment, Burnley F.C., who have been reveling in their return to the premiere league after 33 years of being in the second tier league. All things considered, Burnley seems like the last place where you would find a highly computerized logo as its calling card.

Developed by the Burnley Vision Board, the new logo is meant to convey all the different aspects of Burnley. According to the Lancashire Telegraph, who first reported on the story, some of the meanings are that “The red is supposed to represent the urban part of Burnley, while the green symbolises the rural areas.” In a report [PDF] outlining how Burnley would be spending a £300,000 (US$490,000) grant from the North West Development Agency, the amount spent on the “Burnley Image Brand” is £110,000 (US$180,000) over the next three years. As usual, the media has latched on this number by itself as the cost of the logo.

But on to the logo… Really? That? I’m not trying to be aloof, but it seems such an odd direction not just as a logo for the city of Burnley but as a logo in general. It’s a concept that tries to be everything without being nothing: It represents our people! Our grass! Our soccer team! Our sewers! It’s exciting! It’s new! It’s modern! Oh, and it spins and moves! No, no, no, and nononono. With this kind of thinking, all logos could just be variations on this one. The logo’s sole saving grace is the type choice, it’s kind of cool, but that’s as far as I am able to get in demonstrating any kind of excitement. And then there was another bit in the Telegraph story that jumped out (italics mine):

Coun Gordon Birtwistle, leader of Burnley Council, said he was a fan of the logo, saying it signifies the town’s “intertwining” qualities. He added that the town had beaten stiff competiton from others who had been interested in using the logo.

So someone has been going around the UK, or even Europe, pitching this logo? And, what’s more, they have been competing for it? Sigh.

Thanks to Heather Ciere for the tip.

DATE: Oct.28.2009CATEGORY: Destinations 108 COMMENTS

Josh’s comment is:

animation is kind of sinister...

On Oct.28.2009 at 07:22 AM

jmk’s comment is:

for a logo that's supposed to be animated and exciting, the colors sure are drab and lifeless. also, looking at the reflections and shadows the 3d doesn't look that professional, definitely not for what they paid for it.

On Oct.28.2009 at 07:29 AM

Stirling Cooper’s comment is:

Where's the picture of the logo? Is it behind the ginormous hairball? I can't find it!

On Oct.28.2009 at 07:39 AM

Pamela’s comment is:

Wow! A 3D scribble logo! -_- Not impressed.

On top of that, the typeface doesn't pair well with the 3D scribble.

On Oct.28.2009 at 07:53 AM

Ryan’s comment is:

This is hilarious.

On Oct.28.2009 at 07:59 AM

Robin’s comment is:

It's unusual and doesn't lend itself to a lot of things (like black & white)... But I kinda like it. It's so weird it's eyecatching. It looks like a colorful galaxy.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:07 AM

Måcroskøpp’s comment is:

It's kind of an interesting piece of work but utterly inappropriate for Burnley and I think the fact they have even shown it to other clients underlines the problem; It's not enough to produce a design and then expect someone to buy it. Who were the other interested parties? A vodka bar? Modern dance theatre?
Actually, I blame the brief and a clearly inexperienced client.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:23 AM

Nick’s comment is:

Now don't get me wrong, I'm all for pushing the boundaries of Branding and identity. But this is just off track, it's really seems like someone was playing around with a 3D animation tool and said oooh what if THAT was a logo, and the creator took it to heart.

Of course, I can't help thinking this with the knowledge that the logo was shopped around...

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:31 AM

Jzzsun17’s comment is:

It looks like a hair ball that's feeding upon itself. The website doesn't even bring in any elements of the logo into the site except for the color. Bottom line: it doesn't make me want to go there for my next vacation.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:38 AM

Soda & Candy’s comment is:

Terrible, on so many levels.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:40 AM

Matt’s comment is:

I think this is one step closer to the death of logos... in a good way.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:43 AM

J. Aron’s comment is:

Hmmm.... To be fair the urban areas shown in the website seem a bit more modern than I would have guessed by the description. But that doesn't stop the animated logo from looking like some sort of sinister tentacles.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:45 AM

Chris R. ’s comment is:

Looks to me to be a pretty original interpretation on growth and movement. It's expressive and eye-catching. The amorphous nature of it obviously lends itself to video being the best medium for it, but you can let the other elements do the heavy lifting on a fax sheet or pen or embroidered polo shirt. Colors could be more friendly, but overall I like it.

The competition aspect is indeed strange.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:53 AM

eaglegrl’s comment is:

reminds me of a campaign i recently heard about.

http://www.tangibleinteraction.com/gallery/olympic_oval_branding

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:06 AM

AbsuRd’s comment is:

Burnley looks like a mess!

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:06 AM

Marcello’s comment is:

At first glance, I thought it was really cool. On second glance, it's REALLY cool. Burnley +1, cognoscenti fail!

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:11 AM

jonathan’s comment is:

I think they made a Windows screensaver like this in the late 80s. This isn't a logo.

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:14 AM

Derek’s comment is:

I personally kinda like it. It has potential for lots of uses. Reminds me of work from guys like Matt Pyke (Universal Everything), Karsten Schmidt (Postspectacular), and Marius Watz (Generator.x).

It also looks like a coloured in version of the Canadian Nuit Blanche branding: http://www.scotiabanknuitblanche.ca/

A black and white version could be just a silhoutte of the shape. I like it. It's more creative than a glossy, 3D bubble emblem. Or some tightly kerned helvetica.

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:14 AM

Tomaz’s comment is:

What the ...? Somebody had a bad day or something?

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:19 AM

David’s comment is:

Wow! Great! Clap clap clap!

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:20 AM

Matt’s comment is:

The logo is just too vague. I think the site and font choice are OK, decent even.

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:21 AM

Mr. Kim’s comment is:

I'm all for pushing the boundaries and redefining what a logo is... But the biggest problem with this approach is the fundamental thinking or lack there of. As a language, no one is going to relate this mark with urban or rural... This is an expressive mark so it should have been presented as such... In which case the question are; what is it expressing and is it the right expression for Burnley?

This mark was probably sold on the "cool" factor which I'm not in disagreement with but to me, it's just another "scribble" mark that's been rendered and animated.

However, the reason it fails is the same reason that is common to many other failed logos... which is: it lacks of clarity... therefore it's B.S.!

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:23 AM

ray’s comment is:

it's a small town that isn't techy. this direction is so far off target.

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:31 AM

ibarra’s comment is:

that animation makes me nervous.
i never want to go to Burnley... (i would if i could)

On Oct.28.2009 at 09:35 AM

Trent Walton’s comment is:

This can't be happening. I just finished a project with almost the exact same approach: http://bit.ly/4AbcWT What do I do now?!?

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:05 AM

Kevin McCann’s comment is:

Do they have a single colour version?

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:05 AM

thomas’s comment is:

But from the point of view of "the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about at all", who would have ever thought Burnley would get into Brand New and its ilk? I'm quite touched.

As a logo, it's messy-ish, unclear and overly theoretical, but full of activity and intent (albeit unfocused intent)... a bit like a bee-hive without the honey or the queen, it's still exciting to stand near.

And in the wake of things like Anthony Gormley's The Angel Of The North, why not make one of these sculptural reminders that there is culture north of the Watford Gap function in the virtual realm as well?

Shame about the bid/competition.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:07 AM

Matt’s comment is:

I know this isn't a popular opinion, but I absolutely love it. Why not try something different? Why not try to use this object and animation to represent the interconnectedness of the community? This Burnley object as logo is different from the boring shit and aesthetic nightmares we've been seeing lately. In my opinion, this is a win.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:07 AM

Malcolm’s comment is:

Really? The most damning thing is to hear the logo was shopped around. Shouldn't a logo be created in response to a demand, in reaction to a place or thing or concept? This is back-asswards. "Hey, who wants this shiny logo? Any bidders?"
Typically, a design firm commissioned to create a logo that represents a place would go there, spend time, research, speak to residents, etc., and then design something in response, an image that spoke to the findings of that research.
This logo doesn't say anything about Burnley because it wasn't designed to.
If the logo you're buying was created beforehand and shopped around, then you can't expect that it offers up anything genuine about you, no matter how you try to spin it. ("The incomplete strands represent our future, our potential... the blue our municipal waterworks..." What crap.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:09 AM

Marcus’s comment is:

I think it's not a bad idea at all. It could be good. But it isn't.
It's too scary

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:12 AM

Courtny Cotten’s comment is:

Aesthetically it is cool to look at but it doesn't really speak to me as being representative of anything at all. And especially not a city. I could justify it if this mark was for say, a creative firm or such but even then it is far too weak.

Forcing the viewer to infer all of these connotations to a bunch of colored ribbons isn't too design conscious in my opinion.

And what ever happened to the logo being something that can be adapted to a variety of formats (teeny tiny photo copies to huge billboards, for example?). I don't see this mark transitioning well for one color prints or smaller modes of communication.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:19 AM

Philip’s comment is:

It's not a "soccer" team, it's a football team.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:31 AM

Ainsley’s comment is:

I wonder if there's any significance to the way it moves - the arms extending in a circular pattern, reaching outward then drawing back inward. It appears to shrink at some point, then loop again. Any ideas? (I don't want to give them too much credit... the whole thing seems like an impractical mess, IMO.)

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:45 AM

BWJ’s comment is:

Wow. This is fantastic for a number of reasons, but foremost because it shows guts.

It questions the conventions of what a logo should be, and even more so for "a perfectly picturesque English charmer." They obviously have more life and character in them than some Dickens-esque village, or at least they want to be perceived as such.

I don't care how it will fax and I'm not sold on the execution of the animation, but I would like to visit Burnley now. And I bet that was one of the objectives in the brief.

Whether it lasts or not, time will tell. But it's pushing city branding to a new level the way Melbourne has.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:49 AM

Jason Laughlin’s comment is:

Why can't this logo represent everything about the city? Why can't it be urban and rural? Football and industry? Metaphorically it does a great job of suggesting all the things that intertwine to make a community. With a heavy base in manufacturing (particularly textile) the woven element seems entirely appropriate. I have never heard of Burnley (I guess I'm part of the geographically challenged American contingent), so this makes a quite a statement to me.

However, if Burnley is doing nothing to achieve the reality this logo and its application indicates (I really quite like the site), that's where it will fail. The leadership of Burnley needs to back up the progressive rhetoric and look. But this certainly seems to work well to separate Burnley from what I'm sure are very similar cities in the region.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:53 AM

Racine accident attorney’s comment is:

Not really sure what's going on there. I would have appreciated a more straight forward logo that represented an idea in a little less abstract way.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:07 AM

jason’s comment is:

most people i know either don't know or could care less about their town's logo. so if these dudes in Burnley have have a logo that people are actually talking about, maybe it's not a bad thing. and even though it may not represent them at the moment. perhaps they can live into the ideas of this mark. and maybe they got it from a door-to-door logo salesman. who cares. maybe he's a magic man.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:12 AM

Andrea’s comment is:

But when I first saw it, I thought it was a bunch of rubber bands, and that it was for an office supply store. That's maybe where they should have "shopped" it around at.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:14 AM

Morag’s comment is:

I quite like the 'thing' as an interesting design element. As a destination brand though it is, as the blog has said, just all wrong, and doesn't say anything distinctive or unique about the place. There is no relationship at all between the 'thing' and the word Burnley - it would be interesting to see how they intend to apply it in reality.

How deeply depressing if it's been touted about too. Is that what we're reduced to now?

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:23 AM

Darrel’s comment is:

I know nothing of the town/village. But based on the logo, I'd figure it to be an aloof commune of motion graphics professionals and creative directors who still believe 3-D Flash is how the web should be built.

And, if that's the case, then the logo is highly appropriate.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:47 AM

Kim Siever’s comment is:

Well, it certainly is bold.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:55 AM

tetra’s comment is:

I'm try to take this Illustrator Effects > 3D thing seriously but it's really the typeface that's throwing me off more than the terrible animation. The name itself looks fine but the links on the site look awful in that font. I'm also hoping the colors were more vibrant when they weren't filtered, and I'd be interested in seeing it without the highlights, shadows, etc.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:58 AM

joaquin’s comment is:

Don't you see a 50?

On Oct.28.2009 at 12:40 PM

Malcolm’s comment is:

Yeah, the animation is cool. But I still don't know what it has to do with Burnely and perhaps that is the point. I wrote earlier that the fact this wasn't created specifically with Burnley in mind seemed counter to what a designer traditionally does. But maybe that's just old school thinking.
So, designers, you are now free to duck into your basement or slide up to the cluttered desk in your family's den, shutter the blinds and grind out logo after logo. Keep in mind these important trendy concepts and churn out metaphors as fast as your clicky little mouse will let you: forward-looking, innovative, interconnected, with a reverence toward tradition, sustainable, etc., etc., etc. For inspiration, look to the wadded up ball of rubber bands on your desk or perhaps the intertwined chain of paper clips. Now get going. Because maybe someone out there is going to think your design is all about them.

On Oct.28.2009 at 12:44 PM

Nathan McKinney’s comment is:

Is it really April 1 already? Seems like only a few months ago that...

Wait? It's November?

Ok, so I gotta give them credit for this much...

What is Branding and or logo design if it isn't a unique style or mark that every time you see it, it makes you go, 'I know that, it's .....' Thinking about logos as a three dimensional object is a very interesting and creative leap. That's a little like saying 'the new logo for the Guggenheim is, well, the Guggenheim.' In this new day and age of digital media, are we really that far off from saying that logos can be more than a flat rendering of some design? This seems like a bizarre attempt to break that ground.

Unfortunately, it also looks like an exploded slinky which has NO relevance whatsoever to it's location. It's a bit distinguishable and recognizable I guess. But so are dog turds. I'm not saying this is THAT bad, but it lacks some critical thinking.

In the end, if I saw this without knowing what Burnley was, I think I would say: "It looks like a reject idea for Adobe Creative Suite 16."

On Oct.28.2009 at 01:01 PM

Javier’s comment is:

¡A la pucha! (Oh my god!)

On Oct.28.2009 at 01:02 PM

David Airey’s comment is:

It looks like something my cat just pulled from under the washing machine.

On Oct.28.2009 at 01:14 PM

Doug Bartow’s comment is:

The next time I can't unravel a tangled extension cord... I will think of you, Burnley...

On Oct.28.2009 at 01:26 PM

Gabrielle’s comment is:

okay okay, so the graphic doesn't make much sense. But lets be honest, there a quite a few logos out there that have graphics that don't make ANY sense. So i've accepted the use of scribbly-animated ribbons that sorta look like that old windows screen saver i had as a kid—the real issue here, is the typography. I mean i can't believe that even got this far! who allowed this? when did typography get pushed to the back burner? or worse, completely pushed off the design table? *sigh*

On Oct.28.2009 at 01:29 PM

Rico’s comment is:

It will look great embroidered.

On Oct.28.2009 at 01:37 PM

yael’s comment is:

the main question is, is it appropriate for the client/application?

the answer seems to me (after checking their website out), to be a resounding 'no'.

it doesn't sell the personality of Burnley to me at all.

On Oct.28.2009 at 01:55 PM

Carlo’s comment is:

I wonder what the people of Burnley (not some self-important council/board) would think of this logo? If they start painting it on their store windows and farm carts then it's a success!

On Oct.28.2009 at 02:07 PM

David Sanchez’s comment is:

Impressive (without sarcasm) Experimental Branding.

On Oct.28.2009 at 02:48 PM

m. kingsley’s comment is:

Personally, I think it's fucking awesome.
And audacious.

Good for them.

On Oct.28.2009 at 03:00 PM

Michael Barron’s comment is:

Strange as it may be, I kinda like it. Its certainly memorable. The website is breathtakingly simple for a regional brand as well.

On Oct.28.2009 at 03:09 PM

couchideas’s comment is:

I like it....

On Oct.28.2009 at 03:22 PM

Rory’s comment is:

Oh, wow. That's just horrible.

I live near Burnley, and unfortunately it's a pretty good representation of the town (at the moment - if they're regenerating, I hope it's successful). The type treatment quite plainly consisted of someone asking for a 'computer-y font' to suggest that Burnley is a centre of IT excellence. Bleugh.

The County as a whole recently underwent a rebrand: http://www.lancashire.gov.uk - which, whilst nothing like the Burnley logo, is still awful.

On Oct.28.2009 at 03:46 PM

Tony Spaeth’s comment is:

Can a mark be designed to be an event, and not necessarily an identity? This one is surely an event, highly appropriate for a town with The Singing Ringing Tree. And it is a hot bridge to an identity yet to be resolved, and to a mark whose design I anticipate with pleasure.

On Oct.28.2009 at 04:20 PM

BenjaminV’s comment is:

I love it. I am a bit confused why there is so much cynicism over this. Have all of you dissenters forgotten that design is a sub-sect of art, and inherent in art is the need to visually please? You can brush off this creative attempt at branding as a 'screensaver', but I know full well Windows never produced something this good looking.

Let's embrace the strange/vague/beautiful art that surrounds us. There is certainly a lot of crap these days, but this isn't part of it. This is a thoughtful, if abstract, exploration of color and form, and I give them big kudos.

On Oct.28.2009 at 04:29 PM

Samantha’s comment is:

Agreed about the font being the saving grace. The colors are actually somewhat intriguing and instead of a mishmash of colored lines, they could've achieved the same messaged of Burnley possessing all of these elements with a knot. Tie a fashionably, neat knot with those colors and you might have yourself a nicer logo.

On Oct.28.2009 at 04:53 PM

Paul Corrigan’s comment is:

I think it's great. It's beautiful. And it's ugly. And it's beautiful in its ugliness. Just like every town, city or countryside I've ever visited. Given that, even the cheap ambient 3D thing works.

On Oct.28.2009 at 05:56 PM

JoshuaNTaylor’s comment is:

Ok. All points taken. However, for a small(er) city, this identity is somewhat interesting. If you look at comparable cities (at least the ones in my mind), they are so much more mundane and "safe" than this. Yes, it may have some problems, but I think it stands out in a sea of same-ness... something I would give them credit for if it weren't for the whole multiple city bid process part. That was just a little strange.
Overall though, when I take a step back, I don't hate this.

On Oct.28.2009 at 05:56 PM

elisa’s comment is:

W-o-w

On Oct.28.2009 at 06:15 PM

Bobco85’s comment is:

They must make really cool Windows screensavers!

The logo makes me think of a symbiote from Spiderman.

If they were going for absolutely no direction with the logo, they sure got it.

On Oct.28.2009 at 08:39 PM

kim’s comment is:

Grandma called, she wants her leftover yarn back.

On Oct.28.2009 at 10:36 PM

Drew’s comment is:

@ Philip
"It's not a "soccer" team, it's a football team."

Oh yeah?
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~pstone/why.html

@kim
"Grandma called, she wants her leftover yarn back."

Now that's what I was thinking. Well said. Ugh.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:24 PM

John Mindiola III’s comment is:

Disturbing.

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:57 PM

rich’s comment is:

windows media player visualizer ca. 2001

what?

On Oct.29.2009 at 12:57 AM

Martyn Reding’s comment is:

If I were given the task of rebranding the home of the BNP, or as some like to call it "the most racist city in Britain", I think I would want to try something radical.

Frankly I think considering the place they are trying to brand, they have done a good job. It's not often you see public money spent with such bravery.

On Oct.29.2009 at 03:52 AM

John Lyle’s comment is:

I wanted to hate this but it is quite a bit more attractive than Burnley itself and anything that gets this many people talking about what you're doing as a city in a design sense has to be positive.

The moving object isn't the logo, it's a moving icon. The logotype bit is very traditional and just involves the word Burnley. You could very easily argue that this shows a balance of modern and traditional.

But the idea of things as logos is hardly new, we've got one here with our WISE campaign where we actually made the icon in the shape of an owl. http://bit.ly/3pG0kz

Overall, it does look a bit 'screensaver' but I like it.

On Oct.29.2009 at 04:00 AM

Chuck Spidell’s comment is:

Cool fullscreen site. Too bad Flash is wasted, as the animation effects could have been created with jQuery and easing. Still, I want to spin the Burnley world.

Any guesses on the brand font?

On Oct.29.2009 at 04:44 AM

Roth’s comment is:

As a designer I think it's rubbish; but the seven year old in me loves it.

On Oct.29.2009 at 06:02 AM

Kieran’s comment is:

@ Chuck Spidell
Its Foundry Gridnik, based on a design by Wim Crouwel
http://www.foundrytypes.co.uk/

Anyone know who actually designed the logo?

On Oct.29.2009 at 06:30 AM

T’s comment is:

A) It's not a logo;

B) It's not possible to describe everthing about a brand with a logo anyway;

C) I wont be going to Burnley. Looks like a trendy mess.

On Oct.29.2009 at 07:50 AM

Måcroskøpp’s comment is:

Anyone know who did it?

On Oct.29.2009 at 09:00 AM

marboleda’s comment is:

wow, too much noisy

On Oct.29.2009 at 11:14 AM

Maya’s comment is:

I don't think this should be considered a logo.

On Oct.29.2009 at 11:37 AM

Amanda’s comment is:

Wow with sarcasm.

Rubber band ball meets atomic bomb. That's all I see.

On Oct.29.2009 at 12:31 PM

Alex P.’s comment is:

I hope I don't get stoned for saying this but I think this would have been a good solution for the Olympics in London - don't you think?

On Oct.29.2009 at 01:20 PM

Michael’s comment is:

How is it going to look on the town's letterhead?

On Oct.29.2009 at 03:37 PM

Gareth Coxon - Dot Design’s comment is:

I'd imagine that designers who need to apply this to print material etc are going to be tearing their hair out, what a mess!

On Oct.29.2009 at 04:52 PM

kathryn’s comment is:

I feel the same way about this logo as I do cheesy horror films from the 1950's... it's so bad, it's good.

On Oct.30.2009 at 12:32 AM

Neil’s comment is:

I'll start by saying that I grew up a few miles away from Burnley in a neighbouring town (not the one with which it has a huge rivalry) and for me the real reason this logo fails is that it is in not one way representative of the town. The linked to Flickr set paints a very flattering picture - in reality the town itself is a provincial small northern town which is hugely run down in many parts.

With the renaissance of the football team, the surrounding Pennine district and some nice outlying villages there are things to be positive about and many angles to come at this opportunity from other than an sludgy, random squiggle. I'm no fan of squiggles as logos but the recently featured Telcom squiggle knocks this dirge into a cocked hat.

Using Gridnik as the font suggests forward thinking, tech focused industries and innovation - this is simply not Burnley. The website is poorly done and the animation is insipid and uninspired and I can only imagine with undiluted dread at how the mark will be shoehorned into the printed material.

To use a Lancashire say "It's proper shite".

On Oct.30.2009 at 04:46 AM

Michele | Logo Branding’s comment is:

The logo, to be fair, is somewhat interesting but it negates the factors that needed consideration when making logos - it should be simple, easily identified and bears the characteristics of the company itself.

On Oct.30.2009 at 06:54 AM

Pennine Lad’s comment is:

@Josh: "kind of sinister"

That's putting it mildly; looks like a case for professor Quatermass to me.

@T: "I wont be going to Burnley. Looks like a trendy mess."

You're half right, but Burnley may be the least trendy place on earth.

@Martyn Reding: to call Burnley the home of the BNP is rather unfair. (For the Americans: the BNP is a contemptible, but very minor fascist / "rights for whites" / anti-Islam party in the UK. If you haven't heard of them don't worry, for once there's no reason you should have, they're an utterly irrelevant joke.) They have a small presence in a number of formerly industrial areas that have suffered terminal decline. Burnley is not particularly unusual in this respect.

Burnley is most definitely not "the most racist city in Britain", if only because it is not a city, but a town, and a fairly small town at that.

That said, as until the recent revival of the football team, Burnley had precisely nothing going for it, the town's association with the BNP was probably the first thing that would come to mind for most British people, which was always going to make any re-branding exercise challenging.

Burnley's real problem is simply that it is painfully poor and desperately in need of investment. If this logo can help attract such investment then it has to be welcomed, no matter how ludicrous it is. I'm sceptical myself, but I can understand why those charged with the re-branding might have felt the need for an unusual and entirely abstract design.

Oh, and BTW, it is definitely football, not soccer.

On Oct.30.2009 at 01:00 PM

Paulinho’s comment is:

Seriously, this logo is absolutely mingin!

It reminds me of a 90s tech school. The colours are dull and animation is boring as hell... I think they should take away the 3d/shading and give the shapes a flat look. The logo could still rotate and move in a 3d space.

Regardless, the logo would most likely remain mingin. 1/10

On Oct.30.2009 at 01:31 PM

Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:

WTF is that? Looks like a floating piece of space junk. Not very inspiring or aspirational.

On Nov.01.2009 at 07:15 AM

Woot Design’s comment is:

Looks like the result of a middle manager being let loose on a 3D rendering program. This is not the first time I have seen a UK town unsuccessfully try to brand itself. Why do towns even need logos anyway? Local councils: pick a nice typeface and signature colour for your communications, but leave the graphic logo out of it; you might think it is what you want, but it probably isn't.

I wonder if it is really possible to visually represent a city or town in a meaningful way by using a logomark? Cities are too multi-faceted to hang a logo on and in trying to express everything you end up expressing nothing.

On Nov.02.2009 at 07:44 AM

Erin’s comment is:

Looks like a modern art rendition of PigPen from Charlie Brown.

On Nov.02.2009 at 12:42 PM

Nathan Driskell’s comment is:

This is a disaster.

I've seen this algorithm-defined "thing" logo concept in a few comps from aspiring "designers" recently, both in England. Wonder if it's a British thing?

On Nov.03.2009 at 10:57 AM

David Timmerman’s comment is:

This logo COULD work, and I emphasize could, if it is meant to be utilized as animation in web and TV ads - I can see this logo moving on screen, then you zoom into one of the color ribbons, and start traveling down them to then see that aspect of Burnley. Like down the red to downtown. After some clips of that section, you back out of the logo to a full shot of the logo with contact info on the screen below or above the logo.....

As a static logo, maybe one of the ribbons flows offscreen, then back on below, larger due to perspective, once again highlighting one aspect.....

On Nov.03.2009 at 12:11 PM

Dan Pacey’s comment is:

This reminds me of hundreds of splash pages back in the late 90s and early 00's. It seems incredibly out of date to me. I can see how the dynamic shape and the colours could be well utilised across many mediums, but overall the mark is ugly, messy, poorly executed. You can even see the polygon edges - which could be very cool, if it was done deliberately, but it surely was not.

Typeface. Weak, terrible kerning, uncomfortable. In fact I think that sums this up - uncomfortable.

On Nov.04.2009 at 09:11 PM

brandsimplicity’s comment is:

What the...?

On Nov.05.2009 at 03:42 PM

LeMel’s comment is:

Conceptually, I like it - I like it a lot. I love variable identities. I'll freely admit I am biased toward variability.

But...I wonder if it really fits the town, though. Does it tell the town's story or represent on face view what the town *is*? I'm suspecting maybe not (unless it's aspirational in the widest sense).

On Nov.05.2009 at 04:25 PM

Renato Forster’s comment is:

"Un-believeble."

On Nov.07.2009 at 10:56 PM

Clinton’s comment is:

I remember feeling a similar way the first time I saw the 2012 olympics logo - I was confused.

Don't know if i like or hate it.

The website is kinda cool, once you get past the homepage with the logo, the approach to photography is kinda nice, and the type, while very trendy, is nice enough.

The only opinion I can muster is it's a brand visual in need of a logo.

On Nov.08.2009 at 12:42 AM

Q’s comment is:

less is more

On Nov.08.2009 at 08:09 AM

SonHouse’s comment is:

I can't stop thinking of John Carpenter's "The Thing" when i see the logo animating.
Cool concept - but i don't think it's appropriate for the client.

On Nov.09.2009 at 10:51 AM

SonHouse’s comment is:

One thing i will say is - this logo, misbegotten as it is - has certainly achieved something in that we are now much more aware of this small town in Lancashire.

On Nov.09.2009 at 10:57 AM

Levinson & Axelrod’s comment is:

I'll give it to sonhouse, no one is arguing that it's great but we are much more aware of this logo.

On Nov.09.2009 at 01:05 PM

richard dempster’s comment is:

Looks dated already!

On Nov.12.2009 at 03:47 AM

Mark’s comment is:

It's different that's for sure.

It be a pain to embroider though.

On Nov.15.2009 at 10:30 PM

Jonathan Price’s comment is:

I'm half way between really hating it and then kinda seeing an interesting idea in there. When you think about developing a new approach to format in place branding, it is actually really complex.

I think this identity is a bad execution of an interesting idea.

rebrandtasmania.com

On Nov.19.2009 at 04:29 PM

Rob’s comment is:

What a disaster. Who the hell made this? Made me spit up on my shirt. How could this be used as a logo? What the hell. Speechless.

On Nov.20.2009 at 06:09 PM

Michael Kozakewich’s comment is:

It looks like the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

On Nov.24.2009 at 05:10 PM

nintendo dsi r4’s comment is:

The logo is definitely awesome. The write up and concept for the logo would be also equally interesting.

On Dec.15.2009 at 01:02 AM

Ray Chan’s comment is:

For something that is meant to look vibrant and energetic its pretty drab and lifeless. You are right about the nice typeface though but as a whole - completely innaproriate for Burnley! The people who chose it were probably thinking they were rebranding Manchester, even then its a really bad logo design. The use of colours to represent Burnley's geography is completely pointless and lost in the fussiness of the logo. How many people are going to see this logo and 'get it'?

In response to Sonhouse - LOL

On Jan.05.2010 at 03:43 PM

Samm’s comment is:

I really like the logo it especially works when you see it insitue on billboards and on the website.

Not sure about the comment about it being 'shopped around' though. I went to a lecture given by the design agency and they said that it was developed specifically to illustrate the idea of creating connections, I'm pretty sure that that comment is a mistake as that's just not how things work (thank god)

On Jan.20.2010 at 09:54 AM