Opinion BY Sam Becker

The Logo Olympics

Olympic Air Logo, Before and After

Olympic Airlines, once the national airline of Greece, has recently been sold by the Greek government to a private investment group. The new logo and name (now shortened in the 1980s fashion to Olympic Air) are supposed to signal a change in the company’s culture and offering. To that end the company has held a grand logo contest in the Olympic tradition of competition. Read on to see who took home the silver and bronze.

These two runners up received 4,992 and 2,472 votes respectively; the winning logo received 11,652 votes

At this point, logo contests are about as novel as air travel itself. If anyone has an excuse to put one on I suppose it’s a company with ‘Olympic’ in the name. What makes this contest unique though — and the result so underwhelming — is that it’s really more of a refinement contest. It’s one thing for a company to invite their customers to help shape the future of a brand. But can you really expect a crowd of people to refine something? Would you hold a contest to restore a painting? Here’s the criteria, direct from the source:

[The Olympic Air logo] Should retain the circle motif used in the old Olympic logo.
Could be designed using any font and any colors.
Should “give a nod” to the old logo, showing the development as well as the tradition of the airline.
Should be flexible and recognizable.
Should be modern, without being extreme.
Should not show its age.
Should be usable in all media, and in color as well as in black and white.

Not much to go by. Branding (the art and science behind logo development) is often more complicated than it seems. A project like Olympic Air raises a lot of important questions. As noted in the brief, the new logo must signal the precise amount of change (i.e., this is the same company you know and trust, but now we are different and better). It should respect or at least consider the company’s brand equities and ensure legible reproduction across a range of media. Most importantly perhaps, the mark needs to be considered in the context of a larger system (how is it expressed on the web site? what does the livery look like?). These are hard issues to settle in a contest setting.

The winning logo designer and proud recipient of €20,000, Panos Triantafyllopoulos (aided by art director Aris Papathanasiou), had this to say about his work,

For the design of Olympic Air’s logo, we chose the difficult path of updating the existing one. We did so not only with respect to the company’s history but also to its future prospects. Letter by letter, we designed a more aerodynamic, modern version of the logo in deep blue. We replaced the black ring color with a dark blue and added the green color that is prevalent in Greek nature. We instilled depth and shine to the colors and surrounded them with a silver metallic outline.

The new design manages to retain the Olympic rings and definitely gives a ‘nod’ to the original logo. Is it modern without being extreme? I guess. Is it easier to produce than the previous mark? Not really. Then again, when people vote for a logo online they don’t typically take those considerations into account. All said, the logo update turned out OK. The letterforms seem to be drawn and kerned a little better. The top serifs have been applied more consistently from letter to letter than the previous ones. The wordmark does seem a little leaner and more ‘aerodynamic.’ The introduction of green is an interesting choice. The rest (the letterform shading, the shadows in the rings, the blue shift and the tracking of the word ‘AIR’) is mostly competent, if forgettable. As it turns out, Olympic Air now uses the negative version of the logo with flat-shaded rings on their web site. This seems to erase much of what differentiated the new mark from the old one—something that could have been mitigated if the designer played a larger role in the process. Will people look at the new home page and realize the brand has changed? Only time will tell.

Detail of the letterform treatment

Ultimately, it’s hard to grade this logo without the benefit of solid criteria. It was created in a vacuum without, I assume, any meaningful communication between the client and the designer. The result is a superficial update that seems to represent change for change’s sake. Good PR, lackluster branding.

Thanks to Nicholas Yatromanolakis for the tip and to Alexandros Plakidas for translation assistance.

DATE: Oct.27.2009CATEGORY: Aviation 58 COMMENTS

Comments › Jump to Most Recent

Nils Geylen’s comment is:

As with the Cadillac example, I don't see this as much of a change for the better. In fact, these newer logos just seem shinier, more complex, and will be - imho - harder to use consistently in different media.
The critique here, however, is balanced and informative as always.

On Oct.27.2009 at 06:54 AM

Ryan’s comment is:

The tracked out 'air' looks awful. It should be integrated into the 'Olympic' wordmark like with the other entries. I don't get the icon either; why are the rings split like that? doesn't kinda defeat the point?

On Oct.27.2009 at 07:11 AM

Ivan’s comment is:

Bevels??? Do they have a calendar to see what year is now???

On Oct.27.2009 at 07:18 AM

jessica’s comment is:

i like the first runner up better... i don't get it..

On Oct.27.2009 at 07:30 AM

Kostas’s comment is:

I would prefer the "bronze" winner.
As for the icon, it was designed in the 60s when Onassis started the company. He wanted to have the olympic circles, but the International Olympic Commitee (C.I.O) would allow it, so they added a sixth circle, rotated to vertical and split the circles strategically to avoid copyright infringement.

PS: The link in the first and fourth paragraph is pointing to the old website, which is down. The new one is olympicair ('lines' short).

On Oct.27.2009 at 07:34 AM

awesomerobot’s comment is:

Garbage in, garbage out.

On Oct.27.2009 at 07:46 AM

Matthew’s comment is:

Well, you get what you pay for. And when is a logo contest a better option than hiring a traditional designer? Come on people...

On Oct.27.2009 at 07:49 AM

Chris Thorpe’s comment is:

It's a close call for me between the Bronze and the Silver for the real winner—there's a lightness to the Silver that's quite charming, and I find the type a little cumbersome on the Bronze. But it's close! Oh so close.

Logo contests seem to be all the rage these days—they're a very quick way for companies to create a logo with little outlay. They're not really a great idea. As Armin said, the finessing of a brand, and all the work that goes into it, cannot really be done in a contest environment.

Having said that, I can imagine certain situations where the contest would be appropriate: local sporting groups, etc. What the contest does do, however, is undermine the role of the designer. It enables people to say "Look what my 7yr old kid did! It's better than that $20,000 one!"

Overall, I think this is a missed opportunity: the new logo is so similar to the old one as to make the update, and outlay, pointless. Also, for me, second place was the real winner.

On Oct.27.2009 at 07:50 AM

ScottyM’s comment is:

Good PR? Please define "good" ...?! This is most certainly NOT good public relations. By-the-book, trite "PR," perhaps.

There's nothing good about this whole project. It's a missed opportunity across the board, even with the resulting logo.

On Oct.27.2009 at 08:17 AM

Adam Bestwick’s comment is:

Why bother?
An opportunity for a 'rebrand' has been passed up in favour of a retrograde 'refresh'.

The word 'air' is shocking - so overly character-spaced you simply miss it.
The text highlights are unnecessary and the rings way too clumsy.

Silver and bronze designs have their merits and are both typographically superior IMO.
I would liked to have seen a different execution of the rings explored – possibly fewer than the standard olympic 5 to rationalise it even further (3 maybe)?
The lighter feel to the rings in runner-up design goes some way towards this.

Is anyone else comfortable with the way the 'air' flies past the OLYMPIC namestyle?
Overall, the whole thing doesn't hang well together.
Real shame.

On Oct.27.2009 at 08:52 AM

Alvin’s comment is:

I can't believe there are so many votes for "sometimes logo contests are a good idea."

On Oct.27.2009 at 08:56 AM

Adam Bestwick’s comment is:

LOL Alvin...you're spot on ;-)

On Oct.27.2009 at 09:03 AM

Dale Campbell’s comment is:

Logo voting contests are for the birds. Funnily enough, one of my clients right now is insisting on having one for a logo I am developing.

It truly does break my heart to subject the creative process to a crowd of people, who for the most part could care less about the fundamentals of design and pick something because it's a pretty color...

I don't think you win with voting contests - ever. And I too was shocked to see so many votes for the "Sometimes logo contests are a good idea" option.

On Oct.27.2009 at 09:08 AM

Ryan’s comment is:

Really? I mean... realllllly? This is just such a bizarre thing to do! I can understand a logo competition more than a logo refresh competition. It just smacks of laziness!

On Oct.27.2009 at 09:16 AM

Nate B’s comment is:

The only thing going for this new logo is the serifs. Let's have another logo contest for everything else!

On Oct.27.2009 at 09:44 AM

Brandon’s comment is:

I don't get why they insist that their logo resemble that of the Olympic Games. Are they trying to piggyback on the games' international popularity? I don't see why the International Olympic Committee isn't smacking down on this airline company for infringing on their logo.

Here in Washington, we have the Olympic mountain range, and companies there use "Olympic" in their names all the time. The IOC often tells them to stop using their name. Why aren't they telling Greek companies to do the same?

On Oct.27.2009 at 10:03 AM

Chris Rugen’s comment is:

This is a step backward and, ironically, it seems to ignore 3 major project requirements:

"Should be modern, without being extreme." It's not. Though what "modern" means is not clear.

"Should not show its age." It does, by not looking much different than the "old" logo.

"Should be usable in all media, and in color as well as in black and white." It cannot (not effectively, at any rate). I bet those rings are a mess in B&W or, say, stamped into a surface at 2 inches across.

This appears to be a classic example of someone at the executive level wanting to say "I chose from the best." rather than "I worked with the best." The results are exactly what you'd expect: underwhelming, timid, surface-only changes.

Bonus criticism: was AIR tracked to pieces because someone wanted it to have "more air"? The word looks incomplete at best, and at worst it breaks apart into visual noise.

On Oct.27.2009 at 10:07 AM

NatalieB’s comment is:

Those rings are a complicated mess and are you serious with those added highlights? They need to stop kidding themselves and ditch the rings if they are in no way affiliated with the Olympics. It's false advertising and likely copyright infringement.

On Oct.27.2009 at 10:28 AM

Shea’s comment is:

Really? "Oo, let's make it shiny!" is the best solution? Doesn't even really seem to meet the criteria of the contest. How is that mark going to be "flexible"? *sigh and shake head*
Such a great opportunity wasted.

On Oct.27.2009 at 10:45 AM

jason Parry’s comment is:

Their server is under maintenance. Armin, did you drive the most traffic ever to their website because of this post??

On Oct.27.2009 at 10:50 AM

Leonidas’s comment is:

This logo was the result of an open
contest from MIG (the Olympic Air's new owners).

The terms of the contest stated clearly
that the circles should remain as part
of the logo. So the only thing they were
asking for was a change of typeface.

I have to tell you that the majority
of the design community in Greece
is very disappointed from this result.

The same majority is also disappointed from the
terms and conditions of the contest
which at first gave the contestants
10 days to complete the project.
For a branding project this big that deadline
was...funny.

The pretty short deadline (along with
other reasons like the fact that the
company never announced who the
critics were--obviously there weren't any
designers in the comity)
forced many designers not to participate.

I have to point out that the
Greek Graphic Designers Association
issued a letter of complain asking
the company to restate the contest
under new terms. The result was that
MIG offered the contestants more
time but did not change anything else.

So after all that the result was THAT.
They can enjoy it.

Oh... i mustn't forget that now, the bevel comes and goes as it pleases from the logo for no reason in particular. (on the tv spot there is no bevel on the logo at the end)

PS The typeface in the Bronze is the same one as the British Airways. Another beautiful detail.

Well I can go on and on but there is no point. The whole story is hilarious.

On Oct.27.2009 at 10:52 AM

grubedoo’s comment is:

You get what you pay for.

On Oct.27.2009 at 10:57 AM

samantha’s comment is:

Whoever voted on this new logo clearly lacks a background in design with a focus on typography. As mentioned earlier, not only does AIR look incredibly awkward jutting out to the right, but the kerning doesn't seem to have any correlation to other elements of the design. Also, the segmented colors in the circles seems to make it look more archaic. Of the ones voted on, I like the runner up with the lowercase "air."

On Oct.27.2009 at 11:16 AM

Hearing Aids’s comment is:

It's the same logo. Well at least the closest you can be without being the same logo. I'll give them points for trying with such restrictive rules but I'm not sure that I can really give a nod to creativity on this one.

On Oct.27.2009 at 11:30 AM

tetra’s comment is:

I voted "Sometimes logo contests are a good idea," because I wouldn't want to get a client that, at the end of all my sketches and ideas, chose the one with just a bevel and some awful spacing. Let someone else's first-try laziness do that.

On Oct.27.2009 at 11:31 AM

steve’s comment is:

Good point regarding the "air" treatment on the winning logo Ryan/Samantha. I see they agree with you at Olympic Air because they dropped it on their website header. The website link is actually www.olympicair.com

On Oct.27.2009 at 11:55 AM

Marcus’s comment is:

I believe logo contests can be a good idea if the brand itself is based on community involvement such as for instance an open source project of sorts. But with a brand such as this, forget it! Sometimes I think that the point of these branding contests are not necessarily the end result, but rather raising brand awareness through the competition itself.

On Oct.27.2009 at 12:37 PM

Mauro Longoni’s comment is:

The original was bad.......The new one is even worse.....

On Oct.27.2009 at 12:41 PM

Diogo’s comment is:

Sam, maybe you where to nice with this one... and you know what, i think that the serifs redesign is the worst part of it...

On Oct.27.2009 at 01:07 PM

Rico’s comment is:

There's way too much air in "air".

On Oct.27.2009 at 01:27 PM

lyndi parrett’s comment is:

appreciate the attempt but fails on really refreshing it...i think the rings look like children's toys - maybe shrinking them slightly so the real focus is on the word mark which actually is a nicer improvement. i think this company could of benefited from a complete redo.

On Oct.27.2009 at 01:36 PM

Michael Barron’s comment is:

My favourite airline logo, ruined!

On Oct.27.2009 at 02:45 PM

Artémis (TheMem) Psathas’s comment is:

the rebranding and relaunching of Olympic Air was a big deal here in Greece, however, I think they should've gone with something more drastic, in terms of "change"... I mean, the typography is practically a worse version of the previous. Also, what's with the awkward "air" alignment, positioning and kerning? The bronze would make a much fresher and efficient "change" sense, and couls/would push Olympic Air(lines) much further than this pseudo-facelift...

On Oct.27.2009 at 05:25 PM

Michael Sam’s comment is:

Greetings from Greece.

There has been a lot of discussion here on Olympic Air logo redesigning.
Most people like the fact that it's similar to the old one.
Most graphic designers hate the fact that an easy-made redesigning of the old logo won €20000.

I have to say that there is a lot of mystery and coincidence regarding the winners (designers hired by the investment group some years ago) and the fact that the new aircrafts already had the new livery long before the contest was announced. The green colour that was added to the circles is strongly compared to the investment group's former logo. Greek nature is not obviously so dark green. Besides, they finally decided to delete those ugly bevels, bringing the logo even closer back to its old form. In case you don't know, they ran another contest regarding the new crew costumes. The winners designed fresh new clothing in white, dark blue and -of course- green colour.

PR has done a good -for the owners- work. Using the phrase "Greece flying high" they try to convince people it's their own air carrier; new, safe and better than the old one.

They have rejuvenated Olympic Airlines; it's true. But this logo is not just what rejuvenation stands for.

On Oct.27.2009 at 05:42 PM

Marianne Blackburn’s comment is:

Of the three choices shown, I think the "silver" one takes home the gold for me in this specific exercise, although I believe this whole premise of a logo redesign contest is a bit insulting. It dismisses all the research and process and endless hours of work a design team puts into developing even a decent logo into this weird "quickfire challenge" (sorry Top Chef) premise that doesn't seem sincerely thought-out or too serious on the company's behalf. Even the money prize doesn't help legitimize the company's desire for a serious refresh in this case. It cheapens the process. And to actually launch with it -- I don't know if brave is the word...Look, even the "air" wants to run away from this whole crazy thing!

On Oct.27.2009 at 05:49 PM

Maya’s comment is:

This is why I don't think graphic design should be a democracy.

On Oct.27.2009 at 06:42 PM

Michael L’s comment is:

The new logo's rings remind me of the water ring toss toy.

Typographically, the winner's is the best out of the three, but those rings... I want to just put them in the toy where they belong.

On Oct.27.2009 at 06:54 PM

Giedrius’s comment is:

Hello, I’m writing an article and have an interesting question, maybe you can help me by figuring out an answer.

How many possible forms there are from_the_circle_to_the_nike_swoosh symbol?

Can you figure out the way of counting the possibilities?

On Oct.28.2009 at 05:13 AM

thedesignermike’s comment is:

if it ain't broke....

On Oct.28.2009 at 04:43 PM

izzy’s comment is:

i am loving this story! a large part of my current job involves working on branding projects with a marketing team in Paris -- and i can't help but hear their voice as i'm reading through the contest guidelines... working with this bunch has got to be one of the most thankless and demoralizing jobs i've ever had -- their level of sophistication when it comes to branding is shockingly pedestrian. is it fair to say that, in general, the US is ahead of EU when it comes to understanding and embracing branding/design as a legitimate business elements??

On Oct.28.2009 at 11:30 PM

Adam Bestwick’s comment is:

"is it fair to say that, in general, the US is ahead of EU when it comes to understanding and embracing branding/design as a legitimate business elements??"

No Izzy, I don't think you can use this one example as a basis for that argument.

As Leonidas states earlier:
"the majority of the design community in Greece is very disappointed from this result".

On Oct.29.2009 at 05:53 AM

Leonidas’s comment is:

Hello all...

Michael Sam brought up the uniform contest.

The uniform contest was made BEFORE the logotype contest.
The voting for the uniform took place between May 22. and June 7.
and the voting for the logo took place between June 22. and June 28.

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

On Oct.29.2009 at 07:30 AM

John John’s comment is:

Hello everybody.

I just wanted to add a few more information, thoughts and questions to those that have been posted previously.

1) How would you describe a competition which does not exclude certain people that are employed by an advertising agency with which MIG (Marfin Investment Group - the new Olympic Air owner) is currently doing business?
The winner of the competition works for this agency (which now handles the media account of Olympic Air) and MIG used to be its main shareholder as well.

2) How would you comment the fact that all the participants in order to be valid, they had to sign a statement (ok so far...) that forbids them to show, distribute or reproduce their designs for a period of 5 years even if they are not in the top 3 winners? (!!!)
Hundreds of people who have participated in the 'competition', are not allowed to show their work.

3) How valid can a competition be, since the winning logo does not comply with the qualifications initially required: "To be applicable in many forms and formats".
The name of the airline is 'Olympic Air' and yet in the new aircraft livery, the word 'Air' is missing (!), along with the ridiculous 90's bevel from the word 'Olympic'.
The bevel is also missing from the TV commercial.

4) Is it okay for the bronze winner to be receive a prize, with a logo that copies the font 'Mylius', designed exclusively by Monotype for British Airways?

And finally, why make all the fuss with a 'competition' like this? Olympic Air is now a private airline company, and by commissioning the new corporate identity to experienced branding proffessionals to Greece or internationally, nobody would complain.
Probably showing a social image costs a lot less than getting an airline logo for only 20.000 Euros.

On Oct.29.2009 at 11:01 AM

Gareth Coxon - Dot Design’s comment is:

Nothing really to comment on here, but I will anyway! :-)

On Oct.29.2009 at 04:56 PM

Todd Zakk’s comment is:

They did a nice job with the logo. The runner up logos were nice too. Thankfully with the advancement in technology beveling is more common today than it was years ago. It also adds more dept for a realistic look. I'm sure an alternate solid logo was created as well.

On Oct.29.2009 at 11:16 PM

izzy’s comment is:

Adam Bestiwick said:

"No Izzy, I don't think you can use this one example as a basis for that argument.

As Leonidas states earlier:
"the majority of the design community in Greece is very disappointed from this result""

1st -- I was not using this one example as a basis, I am basing my argument in my experience working with Marketing professionals on a daily basis.

2nd -- I do not reference the creative community in my argument, who is understandably disturbed by this incident. I was referring to the to a general mindset of the culture where branding is still considered "design" and has yet to be fully accepted as a key business element.

got it now? or are you actually trying to prove my point?? LOL

On Oct.30.2009 at 01:41 AM

Rob Snow’s comment is:

I'm sorry, but is that a joke?

They get €20,000 for adding a highlight line and making the circles fatter.
It's probably a fixed competition like the uniform designs. That actually went to the female designer, who happens to be married to a director on the board at Marfin.
Don't really want to say more, but creativity is dead in the spotlight of nepotism and lack of scope.
The two runners up, like the uniform, were chosen due to their similarity, and therefore gives reason to the fact that there is not that much new in the whole design!!!

On Nov.01.2009 at 06:13 AM

Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:

Should have left it the way it was. All of that polishing (highlights, etc) just makes it look cheap.

On Nov.01.2009 at 07:11 AM

SJ Woods’s comment is:

These people above have comments to make...
all of them pretty well accurate about how dull and negative design by scaremongering can be .."dont make it too different"... try to be radical. and fresh and give it a Look to the future..But dont be too different...
well the old Olympic airlines was not working because it couldnt change, update or be competative.Great image!
This was an ideal chance to rid the old image and give a new fresh dynamic look... it missed on all counts.

Re the uniform comment above: Was it really won by the wife of a director of the company who owns Olympic? should that be allowed?
it says something on web voting also..
Where is the learned team of Judges.
with years of Professional experience who actually know good design when they see it. Steve Woods BA MA Bafta

On Nov.01.2009 at 09:21 AM

Adam Bestwick’s comment is:

Izzy, LOL...I did understand your point. (got it now?)

Branding is design, but not exclusively that, and of course should fall into a strategic model of how a company portrays itself and its products to market.

I still don't think that one poorly executed corporate rebrand justifies the observation that the US is more on-board than the EU in recognising the importance of a holistic brand solution and it's consistent execution in helping to strengthen its position.

I'm sure from a Marketing perspective though you'll over-analyse, throw statistics (and a weighty word presentation) at the argument in an attempt to rationale something which, quite frankly, could have been resolved through strong common-sense creative. But that's OK for a Marketeer. You don't have to bear your soul or ideas to the world, but simply throw your stones and patronise people from behind your statistics.
(nothing against you personally)...LOL

On Nov.01.2009 at 09:34 AM

Rob Snow’s comment is:

@SJWoods

http://rob-p.blogspot.com/2009/06/day-two-hundred-and-sixty-two-some.html

On Nov.01.2009 at 09:57 AM

Rob Snow’s comment is:

Nothing nice about these designs, and nothing new!!!

http://www.oafashion.gr/

On Nov.01.2009 at 10:03 AM

Racine accident lawyer’s comment is:

I really can't say that I liked the original design, and the new one is as close to the old one as possible.

On Nov.02.2009 at 10:13 AM

Hecate’s comment is:

@Brandon’s comment:
"..............
........... Why aren't they telling Greek companies to do the same?"

I couldn't resist LOL. but hey, at least original Olympia is here in Greece. (Along with Athens, Phili, um.. Arcadia, Atlanta, Phoenix-and I stop here before I sound like a jerk LOL (As a matter of fact not too many companies use the 'olympic' adjective here either...So I guess same rules apply)
Greetings to beautiful Wash. anyway.

As for the logo, not much to say either. The "air" thingy hurts my eyes
Alas.. could be worse though!