New British Gas logo: a sign of the future?

British Gas has a new identity, which will be rolled out in full between now and January. Interestingly, it has been designed by an advertising agency: CHI & Partners, who also look after the energy company’s ad work.

British Gas has a new identity, which will be rolled out in full between now and January. Interestingly, it has been designed by an advertising agency: CHI & Partners, who also look after the energy company’s ad work.

The new logo is an updated version of the previous British Gas logo, shown below, which has been in use for the past 17 years.

 

The flame from the previous logo has been replaced in CHI’s new mark with a more abstract shape, that is in part green, perhaps in an effort to reflect a more environmentally conscious outlook by the company.

CHI won the pitch for the work over design and branding practices Landor, Heavenly, and The Partners.

CHI has previously completed branding projects for RBS and National Express, while Saatchi & Saatchi recently announced the launch of Eighty, an in-house brand design company.

In other parts of the world, ad agencies routinely create brand identities, sometimes, as happens in India, even doing the work virtually for no cost in order to secure other more lucrative areas of a client’s business. Are we about to see a similar shift in the UK?

 

  • G

    Funny this, as I thought it was strange how you felt the need to point out that the brand had been designed ‘by an ad agency’. I think this shift has been going on for years now — in fact everywhere I’ve worked over the last 12 or so years have dabbled in anything creative that looks interesting and brings money in: ad work, design, illustration, branding etc. etc.

    And why not? At the end of the day it’s all about ideas, and all this new fashioned technology makes it extremely easy to use various freelancers if need be, and allows different ‘types’ of creative to manifest their ideas in ways back in the olden days they might not have been able to, due to not having the tools at their fingertips or the skills to use them.

    I think these days you still get agencies selling themselves as ‘advertising’ or ‘branding’ or ‘design’ but then there is another load that work in various disciplines. They might do more of one particular area but are still fully capable of crossover.

    Take Wolff Olins — a client might not hire them to produce advertising, but you couldn’t say that they wouldn’t be more than capable — they sell their offer as ‘brand’ but if you look through their work, every element of it screams ‘campaign’ and their graphic design skills are top notch too. So then how do you define that agency?

    I understand that an ad agency will have a different logistical set up than a graphic design agency, but then that’s where freelancing and collaboration comes in and as I mentioned above, a hell of a lot easier to share ideas and work collaboratively with ‘the internet’ as opposed to way back in the day.

    Having said all of the above, the client still needs to make sure they are hiring a competent agency capable of producing the desired goods no matter what their offer is and the brand on display here in my opinion definitely does the required job, but falls a little short of the mark. For an ad agency, they seemed to have missed the campaignable potential of the brand in a way Wolff Olins wouldn’t have.

  • Don’t like the first one. Second one is okay but not great. That is my opinion.

  • Slight European look. I guess it makes sense considering the fact that its not actually British owned.

  • oh dear.

  • Nothing British about this. Makes sense considering its no longer British owned…

  • Jon

    It looks it’s been done by an ad agency, it lacks finesse and craftsmanship. The positioning of the ‘flame’ disconnects it from the wordmark. No attention has been payed to the negative/internal space of the flame. But this doesn’t surprise me at all, as a former customer of British Gas I came to the conclusion that quality and excellence are not values they believe in.

  • Tom

    “The flame from the previous logo has been replaced in CHI’s new mark with a more abstract shape”

    … nope, it’s still a flame. Just because they send you marketing spiel doesn’t mean you have to repeat it CR.

    I like the new shape, but I don’t like the unusual angle it’s on.
    Also that typography could have been looked at by a designer at some stage?

    Van is cool but not going to judge too much until it’s properly rolled out.

  • I think this is a wonderful example of why there are ad agencies and why there are brand specialists. The result pays no respect to the heritage, timelessness and simplicity of the original identity. It is full of tired trends (gradients, ribbons and crazy customised type) that speaks of nothing but superficiality.

  • Brilliant logo, new one looks best. i liked this flame design really nice gradient used in it.

  • Look! It’s got a bit of green in it!

  • Ben

    Seriously, if you insist on letting amateurs lose on this sort of thing, let a proper designer check it before you pitch it to the client. The type is absolutely horrible.

    Sigh.

  • Eddy Dang

    [deleted by moderator]

  • Not a fan – the type looks like it’s had a lazy curve effect applied to it in illustrator. Plus, it just doesn’t work on the livery – the design is what you see on a cheap corporate letterhead.

    And the strapline, talk about PR spin. ‘Looking after your world’. Hardy. Just taking what’s left of the finite resources we have left on this planet for profit.

    Looks to me like British Gas went with the easy option since they where already doing their ads.

    In my mind, and probably the rest of the design community, The Partners would have done a far better job.

    But what do I know, I’m only a designer.

  • Alex

    The G looks like it is a finger at the top and the r is just, well floppy and the i dots are weird – I could go on…
    Understand why BG would want a leafy-looking gasflame though.
    Overall I think the general public will only notice that it is not so easy to read now.

  • I’m all for a refresh and think it’s about time BG brightened up there colourways, so I like the brighter blue on the livery, but the marque is pretty shoddy.

    I haven’t got a huge problem with the new flame, or the reasons for doing a new flame, but…

    Like Jon said (above) the positioning of the flame is poor, and looks really clumsy/blocky sat next to the old incarnation, which feels fluid and dynamic.

    Also, I think they’ve tried to make the type more contemporary, but it actually looks old-fashioned – it’s just trying too hard… I imagine withing a year or two the type will be updated.

  • rewski

    The dots on the i’s are a typographic no no

  • K Long

    Looks like a GCSE project!

  • With utility bills increasing by at least 20% a year it’s nice to know that they have found something useful to spend their money on.

    A methane flame burns blue and yellow. Blue and yellow make green. It must be a methane flame, and we all know where methane comes from…

    But to be honest I quite like it. Even though it doesn’t scream ‘British’, but then again the old one doesn’t either. I for one am not going to miss the leaden Helvetica-ish typeface. I much prefer the more contemporary geometry of the new type, even if the ‘flame ends’ feel a bit over designed. But I am going to miss the italic slant. The new one seems a bit static in comparison. Also, the angle of the new flame makes it look like it’s caught in a draught.

    Much as I like the new van. It’s wasteful. Re-liverying the entire fleet like that will cost a fortune – I’d rather have cheaper gas. It also ruins the resale value. Pick a silver van, hopefully with a hybrid engine of some sort, and put a semi-permanent vinyl on the side and, bonnet and rear door. Peel off the graphics when you want to get rid of them, resell for a higher price.

    We’re in an age of austerity. British Gas should show some frugal empathy with it’s customers. The van is a designer extravagance. It’ll look charming in someone’s portfolio mind.

  • I like the mark and think it works well as an updated version of the flame. However I don’t like the type at all in particular the h and G don’t work for me.

  • Nick Stone

    The typeface is horrible in this context, it looks like something from a nineteen-nineties bakery, crossed with an ident for a retro science fiction series. Could quite probably be lovely in other useage, but not here. and the gradients, just yuk really, curiously the shape is quite nice, although it hints at water as much as flame. Just a bit odd.

  • Has the makings of a not bad rebrand, but the flame positioning let’s it down. The typeface has too many ideas in it as well.

  • TH

    Could they not have spent the money on this rebrand on reducing our bills?

  • Poor!

    Generic at best, the van design is truly terrible the logo would be hardly visible on a moving vehicle.

    Another great opportunity wasted

  • Is it me or is it very similar to the work they did for National Express? I think they might have a thing about serifs and pointy corners.

  • Michael

    What an appalling redesign. The choice of font is uninspired. The mark is lazy (ten minutes in illustrator?). The positioning of the mark lacks dynamism. And the strapline is so trite that it must have come out of a marketing dept group ‘workshop’.

    Keep the old identityif that’s the best you can do. And CHI stay out of the identity business.

  • Tom

    A perfect example of mediocrity- boring and very disappointing after 15 years of no change. “Make the flame a leaf” arrrrrghhhh you’ve got to be kidding. Chamfered typography is soooo 2001.

  • Lesley Curtis

    I think if I didn’t know the logos and someone showed me the two together, then asked the question which is the new design, I’d have thought the old one was the new one. Mainly because of the typeface. I do like the new flame though.

  • Unfortunately, most people are only too aware that ‘British Gas’ is synonymous with ‘Taking the Piss’ – a tag that sits just as happily with all the other energy suppliers. As every consumer in the UK gets used to a huge annual hike in a basic service, over which they have no control or powers of negotiation, any rebranding looks inappropriate right now. It will take a lot more than a bit of colouring-in to distract people from how unhappy they feel about something they have little or no choice in paying for. A spectacularly dull own goal. Still, I’m glad someone got paid for it – I’d have done it, if only to pay the gas bill.

  • swagger jacker

    dont like the type either, and the gradient.. meh. no.

  • @TH: it’s possible they didn’t spend any money on it! As suggested by CR above, some ad agencies do this sort of thing for free, just to net the bigger fish.

    However, I like the new flame icon with its colourway and 3D effect. Not sure about the slogan… sounds a bit odd… isn’t our world their world too?

  • Jordan

    I agree with Tom on this one, the flame is at a slightly odd angle amking it feel unbalanced…

    If it aint broke. Don’t fix it

  • All in all, I think the comments are very harsh. When you compare the old logo to the new one, it is undeniably a much fresher approach and definitely an improvement on the old dated brand at first glance. Yes the tag line is a little flat but as a whole I like it and think it looks good on that van.

    As for all those saying ‘I dont like it, it’s not British looking enough!’ Oh please. If gas companies are all that we have to be proud of then we really do have some problems don’t we.

  • Can’t believe the old logo is 17 years old, it did pretty well to last that long, but I do really like the new one so lets hope it also stands the test of time.

  • Time to switch supplier.
    Didn’t they just announce price increases.

  • Neil Q

    If you’re going rebrand a company like British Gas you have to move the design on so that it reflects the new world of energy. This doesn’t do that, nor does not have a consumer friendly feel or reflect the brand values of British Gas. It already looks dated and don’t get me started on the typography!

    Whilst I respect CHI&P for their ad work, I suggest that they should stick to what they do best.

  • I’ve been seeing the new vans driving around Manchester for about 3 or 4 weeks, wondered when anyone was going to mention it. Did the press release get lost in the post?

    For what it’s worth I quite like the new design. Obviously I have some reservations but the comments above are so over the top I don’t see any point airing them. “Looks like a GSCE project”? Really? I thought there’d been some soul-searching regarding pointlessly critical CR Blog comments recently – how did that turn out?

  • Andrew

    Speechless…The mind boggles.

    SHOCKER!!

  • Love the new logo! Lots of bitchy, bitter branding designers on here though arent there?

  • n/a

    Are British Gas doing mobile phones now ?

  • Refresh, develop and inject life into the brand, yes, but change the iconic logo, hell no! A good brand agency would know this.

    Not a great move by British Gas… Their iconic/recognised/timeless gas flame has been extinguished by a water droplet gradient ribbon…

  • Rachy

    I’m not loving or hating it but I get a ‘feel’ from it which reminds me of ocean liners for some reason! When I first looked at it and the words which sprung into my mind were “Stena Line”. I do like the van wrap. It is strong you have to admit! But (if anyone knows of this company) you can’t beat the old ‘Dyno Rod’ vans/trucks on the roads! You can see them from the horizon!

  • Like the flame part, but might confuse as to what it is in isolation. Type looks a bit like facebook to me and certainly won’t last 17 years but we can’t keep our obsession for Helvetica forever can we?

  • Personally, I like the new typography. It’s balanced, has a bit of personality and if nothing else, surely it’s more engaging than the previous effort?

    As far as the gradient / ribbon / flame goes, I’m not as keen but interested to see the brand rolled out and what they do with it.

    To say it’s not an improvement seems a bit reactionary to me. It’s an update of a trued and tested logo which stood the test of time remarkably well.

  • Adam

    I deplore trolling and the endless negativity that often seems to greet creative work but in this instance I stumped to find a single redeeming feature or to comment in a constructive manner. It is an ill thought and poorly crafted piece, appalling typography, terrible balance, a very bad piece of work.

    Sorry

  • Matt

    Is it just me, or does the G look a little angry?

  • Rich Palmer

    Dreadful typography, I dont think any of the letter-forms have a particularly nice relationship with each other. At all. The strapline looks plonked on and far to big in relationship to the main logo. For a company who deal fact to face with the public and need to work hard to give a friendly, approachable outlook, this does the opposite – spiky and angular, not very friendly at all! The flame is just jumping on the bandwagon i’m afraid, we’ve seen this approach and this logo should be – again reflective of the company’s approach, innovative and forward thinking. In the words of Simon Cowe… sorry Gary Barlow, “It’s a no from me”

    I wish I could be more positive about this, as Im sure I’ll be seeing lots of it. Unfortunately!

  • Ian

    [deleted by moderator]

  • I’m not keen on this at all.

    Yes the old type needed looking at, but as for the flame icon, I wouldn’t have completely redesigned it. I think the old flame is a charming mark, and just cleaning it up a bit would have been enough.
    The new one doesn’t feel as fluid as it should. The colours are nice, but the shape is uncomfortable.

    It would be brilliant to see what ideas The Partners, Heavenly and Landor put forward, whether it was a brand refresh, a bit of tidying up, or a complete overhaul.

  • neil

    It’s good. My friend is a British Gas van driver, and he loves the new look. Well done to CHI.

    Shame the majority of comments on here reflect the bitterness that is currently seeping through the British creative industry. Everyone seems keen to pass judgement, but not so keen to actually get stuck in and do some work.

  • Anfieldjon

    Think Adams summed it up

  • Rich Palmer

    Neil There is no bitterness, we are all creative people. We obviously just think we could have done better! And last time looked, freedom of speech is still legal in our society. I personally stick by my comments, I give credit where its due, but this would have been a good starting point – not a finished article though!

  • Ohara

    At the end of the day ‘everyone’ is a graphic designer! It is what it is now so why keep over analysing? I’d have done this, I’d have done that… Well maybe if you got the contract you would have

  • Joe

    I think the first comment (G) is spot on, there is certainly no reason why an ad agency cant do branding, and a branding agency do advertising, I work for a branding consultancy and we are often getting involved in campaigns and brands that make good campaigns. But as you can tell from most of the comments on here, there is something not really ‘of the standard’ that would be achieved with a professional branding agency. Therefore in my opinion, ad agencies should do advertising and the occasional lower level brand, and branding agencies should stick to branding, and how brands effect campaigns.

    The real issue is that branding needs ‘honed’ skills for branding, such as the intricacies of type, the need for ‘core’ differentiators and an understanding of application issues. This mark is an ok version, but the trained eye can see the holes and in my opinion, is a shame that such an iconic brand, with a great time to make amazing headway, has missed the target entirely.

    But as I say, good attempt by an ad agency, clap, clap.

  • I quite like this new logo.

  • It’s always difficult to be too judgemental as we haven’t seen the brief BUT…

    Wasn’t an ad agency responsible for the GAP debacle last year?

    The development of the flame works better in use than on a white background, but surely with the issues Shell have experienced wouldn’t energy companies shy away from the use of green?

    “Looking after your world” is just advertising waffle, no brand meaning.

    Typeface? I liked the original more and I feel this one is trying to be modern but will probably look dated in a few years time.

    In situ it looks better than just on a white background but to be honest it lacks that spark

  • With utility bills increasing by at least 20% a year it’s nice to know that they have found something useful to spend their money on.

    A methane flame burns blue and yellow. Blue and yellow make green. It must be a methane flame, and we all know where methane comes from…

    But to be honest I quite like it. Even though it doesn’t scream ‘British’, but then again the old one doesn’t either. I for one am not going to miss the leaden Helvetica-ish typeface. I much prefer the more contemporary geometry of the new type, even if the ‘flame ends’ feel a bit over designed. But I am going to miss the italic slant. The new one seems a bit static in comparison. Also, the angle of the new flame makes it look like it’s caught in a draught.

    Much as I like the new van. It’s wasteful. Re-liverying the entire fleet like that will cost a fortune – I’d rather have cheaper gas. It also ruins the resale value. Pick a silver van, hopefully with a hybrid engine of some sort, and put a semi-permanent vinyl on the side and, bonnet and rear door. Peel off the graphics when you want to get rid of them, resell for a higher price.

    We’re in an age of austerity. British Gas should show some frugal empathy with it’s customers. The van is a designer extravagance. It’ll look charming in someone’s portfolio mind.

  • Forgot to say, like the van livery. Minus the logo. Thats still horrible.

  • I think Gary Marshall has summed it up well.

    “I feel this one is trying to be modern but will probably look dated in a few years time” – architects are often guilty of this

  • It looks like the as flame is getting closer to being blown out.

    I’m unsure on the intentions behind the extra slant on the flame. It’d be great to hear what the new logo is trying to say. I like what Gary said.

  • I like the update.

  • Ian

    Neil, get back to work. There’s no bitterness involved. It’s just simply awful. The typography is misplaced and lacks any cohesion with the ‘message’. The logo itself, although thoughtful, lacks refinement. A case of the wrong people for the job. Not quite a ‘GAP logo’, but close.

  • I’m speechless. (Not in a good way).

  • Neil Q

    If you’re going rebrand a company like British Gas you have to move the design on so that it reflects the new world of energy. This doesn’t do that, nor does not have a consumer friendly feel or reflect the brand values of British Gas. It already looks dated and don’t get me started on the typography!

    Whilst I respect CHI&P for their ad work, I suggest that they should stick to what they do best.

  • bland!

  • Obvious and tacky. Add green, friendlier typeface. inclusive and benevolent tagline.
    Retain household name with a cuddly regional accent for ad narration (no need to get rid of Timothy Spall, he does a good brummy). Champagne anyone?

    Mind you, at least they didn’t do that ‘make it out of grass, make it out of cake’ thing 😉

  • I don’t mind the type so much (although the dotted ‘i’s look odd) but the leaf/ribbon/flame looks awful.

  • Thank you Derek.

    Cheers Doug

  • steve

    As said before, that flame is about to blow out. Not too keen on the typeface either, nor the positioning. Actually it seems I don’t like anythign about it.

  • Michael

    What an appalling redesign. The choice of font is uninspired. The mark is lazy (ten minutes in illustrator?). The positioning of the mark lacks dynamism. And the strapline is so trite that it must have come out of a marketing dept group ‘workshop’.

    Keep the old identityif that’s the best you can do. And CHI stay out of the identity business.

  • On first sight, I’m not a fan. The flame looks a bit floaty. It lacks any real attachment to the brand for me. Currently. Things could change as I see it more. But first impressions of mine aren’t great. Just a bit … meh. Bland?

  • gordon thompson

    Don’t understand what all the fuss is about. It’s only a logo. The ‘bear’ ad for France’s Canal TV (see other CR ‘topic’) is far more interesting and worthy of comment.

  • the types wishy washy and the flame looks like its guttering or being blown around. It lacks the solidity of the original. BG is a British marque and even though its foreign owned they should be transmitting a brand WE can rely upon and invest ourselves in.

    Also, like others have pointed out, the trends evident in the logo are about 5 years out of date. Its like the designer tried to tick as many boxes as possible!

    Waste of money. Id have done a better job for 250 notes in a tenth of the time.

  • I rather like the flame: it’s obvious that it’s still a flame, the blue matches the colour of a gas flame and, as was pointed out in the article, the green lends an “environmental” touch.

    But the typeface is terrible. It looks as if it’s trying to be trendy simply for the sake of it, and will very quickly date. It came as no surprise that the agency that designed it also created the National Express logo, which uses a similar typeface.

    Interestingly, when I scrolled down and looked at the old BG logo, it suddenly looked very dated.

  • Clem

    All looks a bit Barclaycard to me.

  • I feel like I should jump in here, if only because I used to work at CHI & Partners. Dan Beckett runs the design side of things there and is certainly one of the best designers I’ve ever worked under and who taught me a lot. Whether you like the finished piece or not – and I actually don’t, but that’s moot, I like very few giant corporate logos – this will have been through a LOT of revisions and given as much time and care as any pure branding agency would have given it.

    The job was pitched for, awarded and completed to the clients satisfaction, it’s as simple as that. Please stop trying to draw imaginary lines through industry that don’t need to exist.

  • clive taylor

    James – Since when has British Gas not been a British company?

  • Oliver

    In situ it looks better than just on a white background but to be honest it lacks that spark

    Gary Marshall
    2011-10-13 14:43:28

    I see what you did there..

  • Neil

    Terrible. Any of the named brand & design agencies would have done a far better job. A case of the brand not being valued and understood I think.

  • I would agree in essence with Craig Ward, the thoroughness will have been the same as any brand agency.

    But having worked in both advertising and brand agencies though there are differences, not in terms of pride towards the work but the approach and understanding of requirements and some of what is needed and where a brand agency could probably guide the client more through the understanding of “brand” rather than an identity refresh. Which are different.

    But like I’ve mentioned earlier, as we are not privy to the brief we can only have opinions, rightly or wrongly.

  • Lee Davies

    Don’t really see a problem.

    Just one dull logo replaced with another. Both use awful typography. And both have shockingly drawn flame shapes.

    But this has been around for a while. A British Gas man/woman near me has had a van liveried like the picture above for a fair few months now.

    CHI should stick to ad’s. I actually quite like the Blur themed ‘Your world’ adds.

    But really the fault lies with the Marketing dept. at BG for not getting a real consultancy in.

  • Chris

    Flame shape is nice. They’re not kidding anyone about being more green – they extract and sell fossil fuels, so not green at all. The strap line is AWFUL. They are looking after their shareholders, as any company should, but looking after any one else’s world is just bluster and weasel words.

  • Ross Pichler

    But Craig, even the typeface is bad. I hardly think the client would have specified a typeface with wacky i’s. Don’t show a client something and they can’t be influenced. That’s what I’ve learned.

  • Neil

    An image of a gasman mugging a pensioner would of been a more apt logo. British Gas – Robbing Your Pension.

  • I’d like to follow Craig Ward in here. I too used to work at CHI. I think kudos to Dan and the team for getting a job of this type through the door of an ad agency and out the other side.

    Also I think the earlier point about WO making their brand work campaign ready is true, but let’s not forget the strap line ‘looking after your world’ has been running on CHI ads for a long while now so I think the argument that a brand agency would have done better doesn’t hold much weight here when clearly campaign work can set up a rebrand and not the other way around.

  • Eddie Dang

    I don’t like it. No thanks not for me. Looks like it’s been designed by a committee of hairy gibbons!

  • Freelance Jan

    I too find it interesting that there is a distinction between Graphic Design and Advertising. After 23 years an Art Director I’m not sure when the two became divorced.

    Call me old fashioned but surely creating an ad needs design and corporate identity needs an idea.

    As for British Gas the logo has been moved on, but the original looks like it belonged in the 80s not the 90s…so not too difficult to update then.

    The award for subtle successful evolvement of a logo design goes to Coca Cola, 124 years later and you know it’s never been anywhere near an over enthusiastic graphic designer. And the logo was designed to work with the advertising!

    Oh how the advertising industry has moved on.

  • jez

    I would hardly hold up the coca cola logo as a shining example of a great logo.
    The branding of coca cola, on the other hand, has been more successful.

    In my opinion the new British Gas logo is a horrible mess that will be dated within 6 months.
    A work colleague sitting next to me thinks it’s modern, colourful, fun and way more memorable than the previous one.

    Does it matter that the gradation etc might not print that well in a newspaper, when 99% of customers/potential customers will see it on the tv, laptop, in an app?

    We’ll see how successful it becomes in application I guess.

  • andy

    i like it especially the tyepface.

    but the mark is practically the same as:

    Tüpras’ (by Chermayeff + Geismar ) http://tuprasrefinery.com

  • RE Ross Pichler, Like I said I don’t like it either! :) I just don’t like to hear people saying that a logo that comes from an ad agency is bad because it comes out of an ad agency.

  • Tim

    This is a brilliant case study for why ad agencies should stick to advertising. With the recent trend (10 years or so) in ‘fully-integrated’ agencies – it seems some of the bigger players have become ‘jack of all trades’ and master of none. It’s a shame really as this is a missed opportunity for a specialist brand agency who might have created a piece to last another 17 years. Unfortunately the new piece is already dated as it relies on tired ‘off the shelf’ design cliches rather than considered process and rationale.

  • I bookmarked this earlier to come back and re-evaluate it…. I still don’t like it. I mean… it’s doesn’t even look like a flame anymore for a start, so the whole meaning behind the energy of the gas is lost.

    Theres been too many poor rebrands recently such as GAP, MY ______ and now this!

  • Thank you for considered comment from G at the very top of this string. It’s too easy to haul off on a tirade when you didn’t work on the project yourself. We’re all crossing boundaries these days and in any case whether it’s branding, marketing, graphics or advertising it’s all visual communication. They’ve done a good job, let’s see how it embeds first before we all tear it apart.

  • I actually quite like the logo … Though it has an eighties swish to it rather than the ‘modern’ contemporary feel it is professing to reflect. Does it really matter? Of course it does! Customers get very upset when established brands are meddled with – I have sympathy however with British Gas because they’re pretty much damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. Good luck with winning hearts and minds …

  • TH

    @bluepigcreative I do realise that agencies do that. However from what I know– CHI & Partners have been working along side British Gas for quite some time and also running the ‘Looking after your world’ too.

  • [deleted by moderator]

  • Mark

    [deleted by moderator]

  • WOW 90 comments.

    Type seems unfinished, flame just isn’t righ it feels too big.

    I don’t like it. I don’t care who did it.

  • Fred

    Perhaps it should have a bit o black to remember the oil….

  • Is a safe not innovative gitch almost- yes some “modern” type- vivid colors- and stupid claim- only a “capable of everything” ad agency can do – there is logo – but it could be brand

  • Jayesh Ghadiali

    Actually we should not write on anyone’s creation. But authority should think on their reputation and brand value. I think contemporary appearance should not spoil the corporate image.

  • jordi massip

    very bad, and worse the application.

  • If this is by an ad agency, where are the mexican dwarves?

    The type is awful; if anything, it should be slightly italicised. The mark will date, badly. I give it 17 months before it changes or breaks.

    I bet i can ‘friend in’ the new BG logo on Facebook already. *yawn*. Bad design and bad ideas are usually driven by bad marcomms departments. Bad approaches are usually from bad strategy or no strategy, from horrible horrible companies. Their adverts are cheap and annoying – so this possibly bang on brand?

    A subtle update was required or possibly a complete rebrand/ remake. The old one was neutral, monolithic, but recognisable. it wasnt really broke. BG’s problems arent going to be resolved with a new logo. If anything a simpler bill design, friendlier language and plain talking and trust building are where their design and marketing stratgy should start. Not ‘some adverts’.

    Dont mind the green at all, but those grads and additions of colours, could make it more expensive to produce and therefore probably a mistake. To Joe Public it will look more ‘expensive’ and bling. Funny how bling can cheapen stuff though.

    Waiting to see what those ‘opinion formers’ ‘The Sun and ‘Daily Mail’ make of it…

  • cb
  • I know lets make the van blue to hide the new logo!…perfect

  • Ed

    Should the tag line be ‘Looking after your money’ as they seem to have all mine due to the high bills.

    Very poor typography, uninteresting. Done by an ad agency who let the client probably design it instead of telling the client what looks right.

    Just so boring.

  • Rob

    The only thing that is really startling for me is how controversial this seems to have become. British Gas is a huge corporation, they have had a re-brand to “update” them and make them look slick and “green”. It’s not great design, it’s not particularly shit re-branding. It’s fine. Nothing more, nothing less. Was the previous logo beloved by households up and down the nation?

  • I’ve been trying to remember what I thought when I first saw the van (sometime ago). I’m pretty sure that I thought the adaptation of the flame to what I perceived as a band or ribbon or loop was a fair attempt to convey a wider range of services. The fact that it’s a pretty obvious idea can only work in its favour. British Gas isn’t my energy supplier (they supply gas *and* electricity) but we do have some sort of boiler and central heating service contract/insurance with them, the house is literally covered by their brand. Really, this logo does what it should do whether you like it or not…

    Or whether you like the company or not… The huge hike in energy supplier profitability, which is today’s headline news story, underscores the big deal behind this rebrand. As I said earlier announcing the rebrand in anything like a timely fashion hasn’t been a priority for either British Gas or CHI. Why? Well it reminds us that this company that provides essential services is a voraciously competitive beast. Spending money on design that could have been spent on price cuts? Yes of course, British Gas is not a state-owned company anymore, it’s a money-making machine – CHI & Partners are simply oiling the machine. Thanks to Margaret Thatcher its Britishness has been reduced to a heritage detail, Britishness is no longer an important brand value and CHI are right to ignore it.

    Switching tariffs between numerous, more or less anonymous, suppliers is a bit like betting on horses – most of us would rather not get involved or make an amateurish punt once a year. Making sure you stand out in relation to EDF, npower, first:utility, Scottish Power and others is obviously *the* strategic goal. The design is not for CR readers its for your mum or your brother-in-law or your neighbour or the weird bloke down the road. The vans will get noticed, the “Welcome Back” pack will look friendly, the quarterly bill will look refreshed, consumers may well switch. Job done.

  • al

    It seems a bit of a shame that the ‘Britishness’ has been taken out of the identity a bit. Did they really need a re-brand? I would agree that some of their communications could have been re-thought in terms of branding but the actual logo itself was comfy, something that feels kind of safe in your home, British.

  • OH

    If we think this is about design agencies v ad agencies then we’re missing the point. Like the best design agencies, the best ad agencies always have been able to create great brand-building creative work – just think of DDB’s groundbreaking and memorable campaigns for Volkswagen or how innovative advertising has helped Ikea carve out a unique space.

    That’s because brand isn’t just about a logo (or just about advertising). It’s about defining your clear purpose – what you’re in the world to do – and delivering it to your customers in inspiring and useful ways, across everything you do, in a way that only you can do. If only British Gas could claim that.

    It’s as much about the vision and scope of the brief as the skill of the agency – if you think you can create a strong brand by simply making your logo (or your vans, or any of your communications) more friendly and modern then you’re quite likely to get the kind of predictable, ugly and quick-to-date design that British Gas have opted for here. And I’m afraid design agencies are just as capable of doing that as ad agencies.

  • PatrickBurgoyne

    It seems as though CHI’s involvement has certainly touched a nerve. This is a topic that we will be returning to, particularly in terms of what ad agencies can offer clients when working on projects such as this that design consultancies cannot and why clients find that attractive.
    Don’t forget, there were three very well-respected design consultancies that pitched for this work but British Gas chose to go with CHI.
    As for the alleged technical deficiencies of the mark, plenty of people are attributing those to the fact that it came from an ad agency and yet there have been very many identities posted here that were done by branding or design firms that have been criticised in precisely the same terms.

  • A bit more information on the brands relaunch objective and the strategy would have been more helpful than stressing the fact, that ad agencies try to conquer brand agencies’ territory. And true, this trend is not new – one comment at least mentioned it.

    Ad agencies are more clever in expanding their working area than the branding specialists are. Why don’t we see the Landors, Interbrands, Wolff Olins, etc. striking back by occupying ad agencies’ territory? Now, don’t tell me, this will be uninteresting or unprofessional.

    And even more interesting – what does the whole role-out of British Gas’ relaunch look like. A logo is not not a brand…

  • Tom

    Can I ask the CR bloggership why people have been compelled to post 108 comments on a logo design?
    And yet posts containing truly creative work get 1 or 2?

    Why are designers so compelled to critique a fucking logo every time one is brought to their attention.
    This is nothing new, look back at the most highly commented CR blog posts and it’s always about a logo.

    As soon as one is created people come out from under the woodwork claiming they loved the old one, that it was classic and they had an affinity with it. No you didn’t, you just like to think you can do better.

    CR – going back to an earlier popular post about how to raise the standard of conversation…
    I suggest you trial not featuring posts like this which show just a logo on white and one or two examples of it being used. I know this means some work is then seen as being censored but seriously, how many of these 108 comments are constructive? Ive counted 0.

    Design world – get over yourselves…
    A truly wonderful example of fickleness within the creative world.

  • James

    @ jez
    2011-10-13 18:26:34

    I’m just dying to know why you “would hardly hold up the coca cola logo as a shining example of a great logo”?

    Given that it’s one of the world’s most iconic logos that looks like no other, has been around for 125 years with minimal change and is recognised in every country…

    rsvp

  • PatrickBurgoyne

    @ Georg
    It would indeed. Unfortunately CHI have told us that they are not allowed to talk about the project, nor could they supply any additional examples of its application.

    @Tom
    There is something about logos and identity schemes that make them, above all other areas of visual communications, the most contentious. Debate is a major part of the appeal of this site.
    It would be great to be able to feature more applications than we have shown here but, as I mentioned above, that’s not always possible. Besides, we thought that the most interesting part of this was not the form of the work itself but the people behind it and what that might mean for the visual communications world in the future. As I said, that’s a topic we will return to in more depth in the printed magazine

  • jez

    I would hardly hold up the coca cola logo as a shining example of a great logo.
    The branding of coca cola, on the other hand, has been more successful.

    In my opinion the new British Gas logo is a horrible mess that will be dated within 6 months.
    A work colleague sitting next to me thinks it’s modern, colourful, fun and way more memorable than the previous one.

    Does it matter that the gradation etc might not print that well in a newspaper, when 99% of customers/potential customers will see it on the tv, laptop, in an app?

    We’ll see how successful it becomes in application I guess.

  • Bonj

    Should have been done in Dubly.

  • I have to say that if I had to choose between the new logo and tne old logo I would definitely go for the old one. Not that I think that the old logo is brilliant, but it dose have a more timeless feeling towards it. When it comes to the typeface – hmmm its a mismatch!

  • The ‘i’s look very similar to the ‘i’ in the Lorraine logo, which is unfortunate. #toomuchdaytimetvisbad

  • Nick

    well, kick me if you wish, but i quite like it! not keen on the typography or the strapline but overall, it looks ok. a logo on it’s own is not a brand and i’m sure it will be suitably applied to strengthen their brand.

  • jez

    Sorry, I have no idea why my post has appeared again!

    @James:
    That is purely my opinion regarding the coca cola logo.
    IMO it’s dated and has no particular relevance to the product it is describing.
    The fact that it has remained unchanged for 125 years and is recognised worldwide is more due to the branding, ie the logo itself is supported by the colours, multi billion dollar advertising, product packaging, sponsorship deals…
    Only my opinion of course.

  • Char

    Comparing to the old one, i think the new one is much better for the type,the color and the logo’s more abstract shape.

    But i’m not really in to the logo. the curve, the angle and the proportion look all wierd to me.

    and i think the worst thing is that this logo is just so closed to many other new logos changed recently. i’m not sure if it is a trend of the type and the blue-and-green colour, but i promise i’ve too much of this.

  • “…is in part green, perhaps in an effort to reflect a more environmentally conscious outlook by the company.”

    BURNING THE ENVIRONMENT?

    personally I thought the old one was unbalanced in composition and the new one does little better. It looks more modern if that was the brief but also less timeless and I doubt it will have a lifespan like the previous one. A bit fed up with all these gradients too.

    Not a bitter designer, I just don’t really see it as an improvement.

  • I have found the comments on this piece really interesting. We are working in a moment when new relationships between disciplines are being drawn up. But we should strive to separate protecting ‘our’ slice of the cake from objective appraisals of creative.

    There are great design skills within the ad world. And great communicators in design. The best of them have probably already transcended the debate of who should do what.

    A personal observation – our agency keeps getting projects that rub up against advertising. The trick to managing them (and i have had great and awful experiences) seems to be a bit of respect, and not allowing oneself to become a battering ram wielded by a frustrated client. Funnily, i don’t see the ad industry being quite as concerned over this relationship – perhaps they assume they are above it?

    We banged on about this more here: http://www.jkr.co.uk/design-gazette/advertising-vs-design/

  • Joel

    Through the magic of google I’ve found out that British Gas is actually still British owned, unlike most of the other suppliers.

  • pj

    I understand the article was put up to stimulate debate around advertising agencies getting involved in branding work, but it would have been interesting to read the comments had we not know where it was developed – is bitterness coming through from branding consultants because their territory has been encroached or because they truly think it is a poor identity? Just wonderin’…

  • It’s triggered a good debate if nothing else. It definitely lacks the authority and presence of the original logo.

  • Jay

    Poor type is poor type wether done by an ad agency or a design firm.

  • ron davis

    it definitely misses the mark. the branding references someone i would call to come fix my broken furnace or air conditioning unit. it references an occupation, not a global brand. maybe it works better as a solid color – i’d remove the gradients. the older design looks old (1980-ish) and hasn’t held up so well, so i can see why a change was needed, but i would have stuck with that one before approving the newer look. i’m a designer and not branding specialist so maybe i’m wrong but i cater more to the smaller/est businesses and the new British Gas design isn’t even something i would’ve shown to them – not unless they were being extremely difficult and overly demanding and i was just wanting to cut my losses. but if BG is happy, then i’m happy for them.

  • Comrad

    brandsszzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    CR has become under consideration blog 2, but for all the really uninteresting brands

    and on a side note in the fear of being moderated, ruck British Gash, the rucking ruckers, ruck them in the ear. I hate the company with every fibre of my soul and a bit of said soul is crushed by the fact that such a non brand that rucks so many customers each year, many of whom are elderly and sick has any face time on CR blog, which has gone so far down the pan in recent months.This is such a design to not shout about its untrue.
    In fact ruck this, im off….

  • PatrickBurgoyne

    @ Comrad
    129 comments, thousands of page views – no-one’s interested in this story are they? We’re not ‘shouting about’ it because we think it’s a great piece of work, we’re giving readers the chance to discuss the issues it throws up.
    So far this month we have posted 21 stories on the blog – 3 of them have been about brand identities. As for the site ‘going down the pan’, thankfully the readership stats suggest otherwise.

  • It’s not great, I could pull it apart for all sorts of various different reasons, most of which have been mentioned already. I think the problem isn’t so much Ad Agencies designing brands, as someone mentioned there is enough accessible talent out there to facilitate, manage and deliver any project well.

    To me the problem lies with the client. British Gas in this case. Do they not care? Do they not realise that good design isn’t just important because a designer says it is? Do they not understand that good design or in the case of British Gas, what should have been outstanding design, makes a huge impact on the way their customers perceive the business, the beliefs and most importantly the benefits? I’ll stop there, I could waffle all day about the subject.

    You don’t have to be a designer to see that the new brand isn’t quite right, for the reasons already mentioned. Customers will, without realising it pick up on these visual signals, and will start to question the integrity British Gas.

    So, for me the fault lies with the client, for not expecting more and accepting a design that is not worthy of a global brand that clearly deserves more.

  • The design looks very similar to the BP ultimate branding. I still prefer the old logo, but I am sure we will all get used to it.

    No doubt we will be here in another 17 years discussing another change of branding for British Gas.

  • Nick Stevens

    What’s with the strap line!!

    Why do all brands feel compelled to apply silly messages to their core branding, are they worried that nobody’s going to get it!

    In my opinion the strap line is a distraction to what is a very average ID. The type face is clunky and awkward really not sure about the flame mark, if that is what its meant to be?

  • Deborah Kerby

    More money wasted – is this why energy bills are so high – by paying a fortune to ad agencies to produce more of the same. I doubt anyone will notice or even care about this new logo – its pointless – a waste of money. Will British Gas tell us how much they paid for this slight variation on a theme?

  • All very subjective, but stripping it down to basics – surely the logo on the vehicle livery will hardly be visible on that cyan background. Probably signed off by a big chief in a board room me thinks…

  • An average identity and a complete waste of money.

  • looks better than the old one BUT looks like something in the realms of sky…

  • Looks very like the Ansvar Insurance logo to me…a blue and green ribbon created a year ago by GSBA

    http://www.ansvar.co.uk

  • Robert

    An energy company is now an energy company and the idea of a gas company or an electricity company – but a gas company especially – seems strangely outmoded. I recognise it might be too much moving away from both the British Gas name AND symbol in a single bound but a marginal re hash of the flame logo and type is really just a bit of styling that doesn’t seem to have done much, if any, future thinking. Rather than taking the brand somewhere else or even just opening some new doors it just makes it look a bit fresher and a little bit greener (literally).

    As a result I think it is unlikely to last the 17 years of the last version as change in energy is gathering pace not slowing down.

    The strapline refers to the current advertising. Now I know it’s much easier to change a strapline than a name or a logo but I’d still want it to outlive the current campaign. And then some.

    All in all this doesn’t exactly do a lot to explode the notion that ad agencies aren’t great at playing the long game of branding.

  • The flame with green element is unoriginal and pointless and the type is grim.

    Nice, though, to see now why British Gas doesn’t lower it’s prices when the prices they pay for gas and electricity fall!

    As for being designed by an ad agency, Michael Peters once said (at a talk I went to see) that if you’re creative you’re creative and should be able to turn your hand to anything. I agree with him.

  • Pantone109

    Quite sad this one, type is all wrong!, flame not bad but as mentioned, wrong angle. I hope there wasn’t a huge fee paid for this one.

  • Lee Francis

    First impression, love the font, not sure about the flame. The use of 3 colours makes it look fresher and upto date but a logo also needs to work in black and white and I think if you desaturated the new logo, it would have no impact.

    I am always interested to know how much money is invested in this. The logo alone doesn’t do it for me and although it may look good in some environments, (a webpage, on a letterhead) it may not work, as we see on the vans, in other areas.

  • I don’t want British Gas to ‘Look after my World’. I want them to not blow my house up, to charge me a reasonable price, and to answer the phone when I need them to.

    This logo says “We’re talking about being green” and implies through it’s graphic execution “we don’t care if things are a bit wonky.”

    This is probably a good reflection of the service so, in that sense, it’s an excellent logo.

  • B

    Not overly impressed with the design of the new BG logo. It does remind me of the 1990s. The letterform is one thing to sigh over but I am really not sure about the ‘green’ suggestion.

    Although I have seen many a good logo come from Ad Agency minds I fear this is not one.

    I really hope they charged an arm and a leg for it though… it will make paying my fuel bills a bit easier.

  • I like the typography BUT this is one of the most expensive to use (separately and in corporate identity) logo I have ever seen!

  • R

    Am I missing something? I’m at a loss to see what was so very British about the old identity. Other than the word British, which is still in the new one. The italic sans serif type is not especially British. Neither is the flame symbol. And who minds whether their energy supplier is British or not anyway?

  • lee

    lack of craft – so typical of ad agencies dabbling where they are not qualified to do so. there may be no reason why an ad agency cannot do a brand identity, but i’ve yet to see one approach the job properly and execute with any class.

  • atul

    Using such soft font is a common practice now a days.
    I don’t think using such typeface makes identity looks contemporary.

  • Brian

    All the comments here are great. Debate about design is very healthy. My twopenneth – I think it’s rather glib and lacking in gravitas. I would love to see the development work. Can’t be too much of it.

  • Stephen Slater

    Well, I’m going to be different. I like it. The angled central typeface lines make it slightly difficult to read and you look a little harder. Yes the logo has an unfinished feel, and is a bit illustrator led, but so what, it’s going to look great on the vans, and that’s what matters – can you recognise it without knowing it when it’s on a van or a billboard?

    The ‘flame’ logo is interesting for its use of green AND blue – moving between energy companies colour for environmentally friendly products, and the colour used by the motor industry for environmentally products. The flame has been made huge to get people used to the idea of it. Soon enough the british gas name will be dropped for a european conglomerate name, like bluenergise or something stupid and the logo will be all that remains.

    Just a thought though.

  • Tom

    @Stephen.. “Yes the logo has an unfinished feel, and is a bit illustrator led, but so what, it’s going to look great on the vans, and that’s what matters”

    Is this a joke comment?

    If not you’re the prize winner for the most ridiculous comment about this identity.

  • This may not be the one the ad agency liked the best, ulitmately it is British Gas who have chosen the art work, Iv ery much doubt that they were shown one example and told to take it.

  • I like the typeface but the flame just isn’t quite working for me. I feel that it doesn’t flow quite as well as the flame in the old logo. My eye seems to struggle with the angle of it and the use of negative space.

    It’d be really interesting to get a feel for the whole design process and how they arrived at the finished logo.

  • adam

    In what way is British Gas ‘Looking after my world’? By burning a fossil fuel? What a load of green hogwash. I can’t believe they have the balls to put something like that under their logo.

    As for the logo. If anyone seriously thinks that font is appropriate they should consider a change of career

  • The previous version of the logo you have shown is the mono version. The full colour version looks like this:
    http://www.goodlogo.com/images/logos/british_gas_logo_2613.gif.

    (I worked in design at British Gas for over ten years in the 80s and 90s).

  • Ania

    Love the font. Don’t like the flame / leaf shape and gradient. But I love simple and “flat” logos.

  • Quite like the leaf, err, I mean flame. Typeface will look dated very quickly – feels too much like a massive corporation trying to be new and exciting. Look at us, we’re crazy we are…

  • The flame is not really in a good position and the type face is lacking real design. The word brand altogether seems a bit disjointed.

  • Gas? looks like water if you ask me..

  • “Looking After Your World”

    So why does the logo not reflect the the globe? Surely the green element should be a globe like shape with the blue gas flame ‘protecting’ (looking after) the world…?

  • Shane

    Rush job.

  • To be fair, I do not really understand why people jump to conclusion that the Ad agency is ‘fully’ responsible for the logo. Anyone who ever worked in logo / branding process for at least 5minutes will know the level of politics involved.

    My only comment towards the British Gas logo is, that the swoosh/flame/ looks fairly similar Age UK logo.
    http://www.ageuk.org.uk/

  • spacca

    [deleted by moderator] Looks like it’s been hammered together by someone who likes cool design but doesn’t know how to implement it. The current identity is much easier on the eye, better balanced and more timeless. The new design, for all it’s “look at me, I’m new and shiny” misses the mark by a country mile.

    Ham fisted? maybe not but everything is fighting for prominence, it just lacks overall poise. Somebody, somewhere has done a reasonable job but not a great one and that is what I would expect for such a big client.

    C+ – could do better.

  • Like the simplicity, but first instinct it reminded me of Southern Electric logo because of the green. May be on purpose?

  • Sari
  • broody

    It’s obvious this was made by an ad agency. Their view of design is to make it flashy and trendy, and that is painfully obvious here. That may make for great campaigns, but not great brand design. A long-lived brand has to be restrained and timeless. This brand is going to look trite and outdated pretty quickly, if it doesn’t already.

  • Susan

    Sorry to say, I agree with most of the negative criticism. The graphic element (hard to say just what it is) is disconnected from the lettering and wrongly placed/proportioned. The previous logo had brilliant simplicity. Perhaps it could have been updated with with a more appropriate change of typeface and a green tweak or addition of a green element to the flame, if green is essential to the message. Gradients in logos are not a good idea.

  • Geoff

    As someone mentioned earlier, this is supposed to reflect an energy company, but it looks tired from day one.
    The type is out of the 70’s – bunching up against the cold I guess – and the slogan is simply embarassing.
    The flame is the only decent element present.
    I don’t know why it’s been described as ‘European’ though. It reminds me 100% of dated British work.
    Design by committee is my guess…

  • Tim Leahy

    How will the new identity help deliver on the ‘Looking after your World’ promise?

    It’s a bold and ambitious proposition and I await with interest to see how this promise is communicated and service innovation created to support it. Nat West now have their ‘customer charter’ will British Gas develop a caring and progressive green charter for us, I hope so.

    My concern is that It feels on first viewing too timid and evolutionary for such a bold vision, have the design team tried hard enough to explain the importance of design in defining and supporting this proposition?

    I’m sure they have done their best and a progressive implementation programme aligned to some fresh service improvement and NPD innovation by British Gas will help build trust and get us all get on board…its all about delivering on the promise.

  • Ednei

    A subtle change in the logo design is the only way to not lose the original characteristics and consequently the company’s identity. In this case, the positioning of the flame’s image above the word ‘gas’ left the arrange more logical and integrated. The gradient used gave more realistic light and flame.

  • Tom

    Not very clever in my opinion. And no doubt cost a packet. Thats going to be an expensive brand to recreate too when they get round to doing their pens and t-shirts – Another excuse to add a few more pence to our bills.

    And as for the strapline…. pure corporate drivel / pish / lies / ****.

    DECEPTION BY DESIGN. GOD, I HATE THIS WORLD. * BLAM ! *

    Nee Nor Nee Nor Nee Nor.

  • Zolot Design

    No new “news” here, I agree with G the first commenter here, ad agencies pitch for and do any and all creative work. Having just completed a gas company logo for their “green” program (which was mandated by government regulators), this one is pretty lame. The flame itself is an old, worn out symbol for any energy company which needs to be looking to the future. I won’t even get into the “typeography” employed, however, clients very often limit creativity regardless of more inventive ideas presented. This result does appear to be donated, and it does a great disservice to all.

  • Danoucha Starkweather

    I wonder how much they paid for that?

  • Slam

    Yeah, some other dodgy brotherhood company designed that by the looks. Keep the money in the family eh. Layout sucks. No creative skill but then, British Gas doesn’t exactly have any soul. And, looking after your world? Yeah. At a cost. A highly inflated cost at that. Might as well have designed the logo with the flame burning all the poor. [deleted by moderator]

  • paula

    a copy of a copy of a copy. is this an original solution? and the good idea and profesional solution that justifies the time and money invested? these agencies so capable in communicating their goals would do the market a good favor if they hired real designers to solve their clients´ problems.

    do you really think this new solution will be as durable as the previous?

    ps: thanks for the use of green to refer to the ecologic commitment of the company

  • Wonder how much they paid for it, probably lots of money, looks like it could be worth about $50.

  • James

    @ Jez

    Fair enough, I respect your opinion, I just whole-heartedly disagree with it still! My reasons…
    Of course it looks ‘dated’ as it’s been around for so long and for good reason as it’s stayed true to it’s heritage unlike countless other brands. Doesn’t mean it’s a bad logo. A good logo is something that people will remember, recognise and relate to – doesn’t actually matter what it looks like as long as it fulfils those reasons. Obviously as a designer you want to create something aesthetically pleasing though but why change for the sake of being ‘modern and trendy’? Look at Pepsi, new logo all the time. Could you tell me what the current Pepsi logo looks like without looking at a can? Doubt it. Yes of course it is supported by the colours!? (red/white) Aren’t most logos, sorry that’s a ridiculous comment. As for product packaging….it’s the bloody logo on a can! Again how many brands can rely solely on just their logo on packaging to achieve what CocaCola have? It’s a f**king great timeless logo.

    and that’s my opinion 😉

    @James:
    That is purely my opinion regarding the coca cola logo.
    IMO it’s dated and has no particular relevance to the product it is describing.
    The fact that it has remained unchanged for 125 years and is recognised worldwide is more due to the branding, ie the logo itself is supported by the colours, multi billion dollar advertising, product packaging, sponsorship deals…
    Only my opinion of course.
    jez
    2011-10-14 12:53:22

  • Frank Nicholas

    I love the new British Gas logo! Very clean and refreshing to look at!
    Powerful design! Great job, you guys!
    – Frank Nicholas

  • (a different) Tom

    Did somebody stamp on the G?

  • I have to agree with the majority on this one. It is not a well executed design at all and the font is awfully clumsy and awkward. Not one to really sink the boot in, but this logo does in my humble opinion look exactly like a ‘ready made’ logo on one of those websites where you simply choose an icon and type your company name into the text field beside it pay your 25$ and then be on your way. I’d love to know how much this cost.

  • Tim Bond

    No doubt this redesign cost BG thousands Glad – disappointing result I think. The typography feels clumsy and does not work in this context, positioning of the new flame is poor and whole logo is unbalanced. I would have like to see something a bit more dynamic, the new logo is just boring and the strap line is awful

  • bob

    Is it better than the 2-decade old logo? Yes. But only in that it is the “new” version of something that 2 decades from now will look just as “bad” and generic as the old one (actually, much much sooner). There’s no quality in it – the type is a train wreck and it’s just pleasing because it isn’t the old one. Ad agency, branding studio, freelancer or integrated shop – who cares today – the designer(s) behind this just weren’t up to the challenge. The craftsmanship simply isn’t there. The other agencies that were involved in the pitch would have all done superior work than this on a mark.

  • Its OK, but not lighting my fire and I can see dating quickly! Nice to see our money is going to good use!!!!!

  • Color is good as environmentally conscious
    Type not matching, shape doesn’t really abstract like a flame
    Think different, if its no finalized.

  • If it is not broken…….. You know the rest.

  • I am reminded of the motto… “Do what you do best… and hire the rest.” CHI & Partners needs to stick with their core competency. Mediocre logo at best. Very sad. A missed opportunity for British Gas.

  • Not bad. I like the colours of the flame, particularly the green is a good idea.

  • Pat

    [deleted by moderator]

  • jimmydoo

    How do you say “lame” in UK English.
    Hope they didn’t pay for it…. they were ripped off

  • Peter

    Terrible, there are a thousand ribbon logos on various branding websites that are far better. Logo Lounge noted this design trend in 2007. The old logo is better in my opinion.

  • Cezar Cavalcanti

    Is important to say, Branding is not just a visual identity, I ask on me about “Where is the DNA of Brand?”. To do Branding, them need more than this, the brand has to happen!

    The new Typography is bad, it’s a classical problem of advertising agency. In Brasil, we have a same problem, and curiosly I saw a project of “Eletrobras” who has same colors, but an real Branding, although the typography has not convinced me. You can see in the links below:

    http://www.revistadesign.com.br/2/2010/03/29/nova-marca-da-eletrobras/
    http://www.eletrobras.com/elb/novamarca/

  • It is not a problem of who did the project, but how they did it.

    As my Brazilian college already say, branding is not about design, ideas or creativity, but is about identity and strategy. Those parts that usually are not taken in consideration inside a advertising agency.

    Usually their culture is more based in a aesthetics and creativity approach. And there is nothing wrong with that, but serves more the purpose of advertisement.

  • Very well done, clear cut and simplistic feel.

  • Olivaris

    Point taken about ad agencies doing brand work, but still would be interested to know how much they charged considering they have the Ad account. Have to say though, this one looks a touch overcooked and naive from a typographic POV. The workmark looks overly customised and doesn’t sit comfortably with the flame that is not a ‘flame’ or the positioning statement. Might want to leave this one out of the folio.

  • Wow, what a huge improvement! Looks very up to date.

  • Tim Bridle

    In the history of logo design has a strapline ever appeared larger, in relation to the actual logo?
    Horrible, force justified, vacuous, marketing led drivel…

    And the logo/typography isn’t much better!

    Thought provoking article in this months CR, about how ever tighter deadlines and constant mid-stage client involvement has led to a possible decline in creative standards, this execution of a logo illustrates that notion perfectly.

  • It certainly doesn’t sit right with the wordmark as stated by others on here, too high up and close to the center which makes it seem less like a flame which originates from ‘somewhere’ (like the old logo) The typography itself is nicer and it looks as though they’ve incorporated some of the shapes of those letters within the flame. A reasonable effort overall I suppose but could have been better though out I think.

  • Bill Cantelon

    Nicely done!

  • alix

    total tosh

  • Graham Henderson

    Not sure if I like it. But it has a familiar ring to it… LOOK AT THE AGE UK LOGO!!! Half of their device, similar fonts AND colours!!!! Comments?

  • Again design is subjective, many of the comments are in reflection to personal opinions of British Gas. Company apart, I feel the logo is an improvement on the previous incarnation.

    The injection of the eco colours of light blue and green, suggest an envrionmental emphasis which can’t be a bad thing and this seems to be reflected in their website too, with many pages on helping to save energy and become more eco aware, (and maybe help when prices rise again)

    All in all a general improvement.

  • Jimmy Nail

    To James Wallace, BG is very much a British company. Owned by Centrica, who are based in Windsor.

  • I like the Logo very much for some reason. The use of colours is pleasant. I still hate the company though :-)

  • The British Gas logo has a slight Euro look to it with a strange choice of type font. It also has a very similar feel to the ageuk logo.

  • When the logo was first made I felt it would date very quickly and it has. I feel like the slogan is a little too broad and non descriptive… and given the recent price increases, it doesn’t exactly hold water… :O)

  • Paul Mackenzie Ross

    The new British Gas logo has been around for longer than two years now which, despite my own personal reservations about it, seems to indicate that it has been widely accepted. We get used to these things, just as we did with the 2012 Olympics logo.