(Est. 1902) “Georgia Power is the largest electric subsidiary of Southern Company (NYSE: SO), America’s premier energy company. Value, Reliability, Customer Service and Stewardship are the cornerstones of the company’s promise to 2.5 million customers in all but four of Georgia’s 159 counties. Committed to delivering clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy at rates below the national average, Georgia Power maintains a diverse, innovative generation mix that includes nuclear, 21st century coal and natural gas, as well as renewables such as solar, hydroelectric and wind. Georgia Power focuses on delivering world-class service to its customers every day and the company is consistently recognized by J.D. Power and Associates as an industry leader in customer satisfaction.”
The new logo features the iconic red triangle alongside new components in an updated color palette, signifying the increasing breadth of the company’s capabilities and commitment to better delivering clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy.
The new logo is designed to unify the full portfolio of Southern Company’s resources. It builds on the equity of the red triangle and and uses light green, light blue and dark blue to convey the addition of gas, growth and innovation in building the future of energy.
Missing, of course, is the lightning bolt that has played a significant role in the company’s logo for the past 40 years. Also absent is the “A Southern Company” tagline that has been a part of the Georgia Power logo for the past 20 years. Instead of tagging each operating company as a Southern Company, the logo now relies on the distinct triangle to unify the brand.
The lightning bolt will be missed by many Georgia Power employees, but its absence reinforces the forward momentum the company has gained with the addition of AGL Resources as a sister company.
Images (opinion after)
The old logo had a brutalist aesthetic with the crooked, oppressive lightning bolt streaking through the triangle paired with a heavy-duty, all uppercase wordmark that I’m admittedly attracted to. It’s the kind of logo that thirty years from now, that generation’s future Aaron Draplin is going to be salivating over. I’m not saying it’s a great logo but it was bold and like it would take bullshit from no one. The new triangle — despite three paragraphs of explanation — is fairly vacuous and generic; the only significant trait being that it’s still a triangle and it still has some red like the old one. It’s not a bad logo but it’s far from great, memorable, or remotely interesting. To its credit, it does a good job in applying to the dozen or so subsidiaries of the parent company. (Side note: I have probably gotten nearly 20 emails total with tips for the different companies and it was confusing so that’s why I am only posting now, after Scott Fuller sent me the PDF with some actual explanation.) The wordmark, or wordmarks, are all competent and decent. Overall, abstract corporateness at its meh-est.
Thanks to Scott Fuller for the tip.