BY Christian Palino

Auckland Sets Sail into the Abstract

In and around Auckland, New Zealand there is a lot of controversy surrounding not only the Auckland City Council logo, but also other ratepayer-owned organizations such as Metrowater and the Auckland Regional Council. Criticism of the cost of the logos has been very central to the argument. The Auckland City Council logo was originally announced to have cost NZ$25,000/US$18,840 (which may have been accurate for the cost of the logo development alone) which then inflated to NZ$1 million/US$753,600 (which included market research, staff hours, consultant fees and some signage applications). The cost of the Metrowater logo was noted at NZ$20,000/US$15,072 — without implementation fees (in their defense they claim that the savings on printing in two colors rather than four will easily cover the cost of the new logo). While the Auckland Regional Council logo will cost NZ$165,000/US$124,344 to develop. Meanwhile, Triangle Television is claiming that the new Auckland City Council logo infringes on their intellectual property rights. Of course amidst the cost controversy, Triangle is also proudly noting that their logo “was designed 12 years ago by a student from Whitecliffe College of Arts and Design and cost about NZ$500/$376,” which is not surprising (yikes!). But setting aside the fiscal and IP controversy…

The Auckland City Council is a local government headed by a mayor and nineteen elected council members. The council describes itself as follows: Auckland City Council is required under the local government legislation to deliver essential services and facilities to the city, and under the Resource Management Act to sustainably manage the city’s natural environment, including land, water, soil, resources and the coast. Auckland City Council also ensures the health and safety of the residents — including dog control, liquor licensing and building inspection.

The logo was developed by Auckland City chief executive David Rankin and his executive team in conjunction with Ogilvy Metro. The motivation for developing the new brand — spurred by a general discontentment with the council (9 out of 10 residents surveyed agree!) — was to develop a more legible mark that makes it easier for ratepayers to identify the facilities and services provided.

The shift to this new logo has some merits and some losses. The previous mark worked in one color, was well conceived to represent yachts on the water — appropriate for a destination nicknamed “City of Sails” — with the volcanic island of Rangitoto as a backdrop and had a more flexible wordmark (albeit a bit cold in its typographic choice). In the new logo we get a much more abstract representation of anything from an “A” to a sail on the water, or perhaps a pointier Rangitoto — much more open for interpretation. The new logo likely has better legibility at increased distances, though only when printed in color (which of course could have been solved if the logomark had been rendered differently to include negative space between each of the three parts). As for the new typography, while the choice of typeface isn’t bad, the lockup and use of dropcaps seems overly quirky and limits the flexibility of the visual system.

Overall the new logo does seem a bit more of-the-moment with its use of shifting blues and abstracted simple shape — but this also means that it risks becoming easily dated. It is an elegant and subject-appropriate take on the standing triangle logo, but its rendering (always multi-color solution) and typographic lockup hold it back from having more timeless appeal.

The previous logo is beautifully executed and clear in its visual communication, though perhaps not spot-on for representing a city council. It could have easily been improved slightly to aid in legibility and soften the typography and then stood the test of time through good usage… Maybe its the NZ$165,000/US$124,344 saving logo they’re looking for to update the Auckland Regional Council!

[Editor’s Note: We would like to welcome Christian Palino as our most recent contributor to Brand New]

\n\nIn and around Auckland, New Zealand there is a lot of controversy surrounding not only the Auckland City Council logo, but also other ratepayer-owned organizations such as Metrowater and the Auckland Regional Council. Criticism of the cost of the logos has been very central to the argument. The Auckland City Council logo was originally announced to have cost NZ\$25,000/US\$18,840 (which may have been accurate for the cost of the logo development alone) which then inflated to NZ\$1 million/US\$753,600 (which included market research, staff hours, consultant fees and some signage applications). The cost of the Metrowater logo was noted at NZ\$20,000/US\$15,072 — without implementation fees (in their defense they claim that the savings on printing in two colors rather than four will easily cover the cost of the new logo). While the Auckland Regional Council logo will cost NZ\$165,000/US\$124,344 to develop. Meanwhile, Triangle Television is claiming that the new Auckland City Council logo infringes on their intellectual property rights. Of course amidst the cost controversy, Triangle is also proudly noting that their logo \"was designed 12 years ago by a student from Whitecliffe College of Arts and Design and cost about NZ\$500/\$376,\" which is not surprising (yikes!). But setting aside the fiscal and IP controversy…

Many thanks to our ADV @ UnderConsideration Partners