NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New. All posts have been closed to comments. Please visit underconsideration.com/brandnew for the latest version. If you would like to see this specific post, simply delete _v1 from the URL.
Owned by financial services firm Barclays, Barclaycard is one of the largest credit card providers in Europe and India. And it recently unveiled a new identity designed by The Brand Union that is as much about moving the service provider forward as it is about mimicking what other brands have already done: Kodak, Xerox, AT&T, Ericsson, blah, blah, blah.
The new symbol depicts a world that is calm and confident on the outside, whilst warm and vibrant on the inside. In creating a symbol that is separated from the brand name, the new logo works better online and on some emerging payment tools such as mobile phones.
Rhidian Taylor, Barclaycard’s head of brand management, added: “Our current logo and look have worked well for us as a UK credit card company, but they do not reflect the global payments company we have become. We needed to create a modern and distinctive look which signals where we are going as opposed to where we have been.”
It really is dispiriting to see such a derivative design from a design trend that is already poor to begin with. The “global” icon goes into a slightly different direction with its orange peel approach and could almost be interesting if it didn’t look just like all those other globes. And the typography is amazingly clunky and trying too hard to be friendly and approachable and, again, it’s just one more bad imitation of the bubblylowercase trend. Hopefully we’ve reached rock bottom with this combination of globes and overworked lowercases, it sure feels that way. Time to move on.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Nick’s comment is:
You weren't kidding when you mentioned AT&T in that list. This glob(e) looks like the Death Star in a funhouse mirror.
On Oct.03.2008 at 07:00 AM
Tomasz Ronda’s comment is:
Apparently, they spent 1,6 million pounds on it. Was it worthed?
On Oct.03.2008 at 07:11 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
sad, really sad. the result of mismanaged accounts and the trend of having Managing Directors at creative firms taking on the role of CDs....i wonder what agency (if any) is behind this.
On Oct.03.2008 at 07:45 AM
Paul Walker’s comment is:
At least, unlike Kodak, AT&T, and Xerox, it’s replacing another bland logo.
On Oct.03.2008 at 08:05 AM
Plamen’s comment is:
At least it completes that wonderful set of glass marbles.
On Oct.03.2008 at 08:12 AM
Nick Irwin’s comment is:
blah blah all logos going to the sphere look now?!? very sad, we would be praising it if it came out a couple years ago when marble logos hadn't hit the design scene yet
On Oct.03.2008 at 08:28 AM
Joel32’s comment is:
I can't believe how similar that is to AT&T! I don't really have anything good or bad to say, except that that blue and white sphere had already been created and it belongs to AT&T.
On Oct.03.2008 at 08:31 AM
rickyaustin’s comment is:
I'm waiting for someone to make a glass marble set for designers of this decade's disappointing glass marble marks. I'll keep my eye on Etsy.
On Oct.03.2008 at 09:40 AM
coda’s comment is:
Worthless!
On Oct.03.2008 at 09:52 AM
matt’s comment is:
I think they just froze an animated version of AT&T's logo and redrew it. And then sent a bill for 1.6M pounds???? I need to move to Europe and sell a couple logos and then retire, my god.
On Oct.03.2008 at 09:56 AM
Andrew Klein’s comment is:
i just checked, the wikipedia article on "logo" dosen't say logo = 3d sphere. I wonder where people are getting this idea
On Oct.03.2008 at 09:56 AM
lodenmuse’s comment is:
I challenge any company to just start using an actual photo of a marble as a logo.
Just do it, come on, you know you want to.
On Oct.03.2008 at 10:02 AM
koyo’s comment is:
In small size, the logo is ununderstandable.
On Oct.03.2008 at 10:03 AM
Steve ’s comment is:
Since when is blue a "warm and vibrant" color?
On Oct.03.2008 at 10:10 AM
damon’s comment is:
^^^^ ununderstandable is a hilarious word.
this logo does look like the AT&T logo.
beyond the glyph, I like the typeface used..
damon’s comment is:
looks very familiar but it's not what I thought it might be, can somebody tell me what it is?
On Oct.03.2008 at 10:15 AM
Dale’s comment is:
Not successful at all.
I understand what the were trying to accomplish with the icon, but I think there are probably other (more simplistic) ways to depict "calm and confident on the outside" and "warm and vibrant" on this inside.
That's an awful lot of money to pay for something that, in my opinion, is about as visually confusing as possible.
On Oct.03.2008 at 10:19 AM
Michael’s comment is:
"The new symbol depicts a world that is calm and confident on the outside..."
I agree. I always think of shredded balls when I feel calm and confident.
This shredded piece of wtf is actually the perfect logo for a credit company (right now).
On Oct.03.2008 at 10:51 AM
jRod’s comment is:
after viewing this logo, one question comes to mind: why hasn't AT&T sued them yet?
On Oct.03.2008 at 11:07 AM
Darrin Crescenzi’s comment is:
Agree with jRod on this, even though the two companies fall under different trademark classes, AT&T is ubiquitous enough — at least stateside — that this mark would clearly draft off of its establishment.
I suppose the only thing saving them from litigation is the fact that nobody in the States will see this unless abroad.
On Oct.03.2008 at 11:24 AM
cashbak’s comment is:
The old 'Bondi Blue iMac' B symbol and related imagery was well overdue.
This is the Barclays 'keep 'em sweet' color version - there are more color versions, some background textures by Lewis Mulatero. A logo by itself does not a brand make.
And the 1.6 million sounds like it includes implementation, focus groups etc. What's 1.6 million anyway - it used to be one persons Lehman bonus.
Imagine trying to please all the stakeholders on this project.
Can we have some more facts from TBUnion to fill in the blanks?
On Oct.03.2008 at 11:45 AM
John McCollum’s comment is:
Why?
On Oct.03.2008 at 12:18 PM
John McCollum’s comment is:
What was the answer to the inevitable question, "Um, doesn't this look like we're ripping off AT&T?"
Maybe they said, "No, no, no. It's nothing like AT&T. Their globe has lines that go horizontally. Ours does a loop-de-loop. They look nothing alike."
More likely, they employed a Jedi with the eerie power to cloud minds: "These are not the globes we're looking for..."
On Oct.03.2008 at 12:21 PM
AL’s comment is:
Lame.
On Oct.03.2008 at 12:47 PM
Matheus’s comment is:
Lame, but better then the first one
The first is like: Look I know Photoshop
Jonathan’s comment is:
Oh man the feedback on here is hilarious thus far, and its all so true. I agree w/ loden, someone please just start using an actual marble as your mark, that would be amazing.
On Oct.03.2008 at 01:27 PM
Jonathan’s comment is:
...and to cashback's comment - 1.6M in pounds does not equal 1.6M in dollars, trying doubling that.
Its going to suck for Barclays to pay $3.2M for a logo, and then get sued over it.
On Oct.03.2008 at 01:29 PM
jRod’s comment is:
no... no.... even better. pay $3.2M for the logo, then pay the sharks ANOTHER $3.2M in a year long court battle, then have to pay ANOTHER $2-3M to get an "original" logo that looks remarkably like Taco Bell.™
sweeeeet.
On Oct.03.2008 at 03:09 PM
Jon Weden’s comment is:
Looks like AT&T has been turned inside out and is now beginning to unravel - an apt comment on today's global banking industry?
Shocking how at the presumed high level of design consultancy working on this identity that someone didn't cry fowl before it went public.
On Oct.03.2008 at 03:31 PM
Ryan’s comment is:
If you can look past the obvious similarities to AT&T... it's not even visually appealing. What were they thinking?
On Oct.03.2008 at 04:41 PM
Hibryd’s comment is:
All these shiny, globe-related logos give us one thing to look forward to: they're ALL going to have to re-brand in 10 years or so when they look similarly dated.
On Oct.03.2008 at 05:15 PM
Phil’s comment is:
This is even more disheartening to see since it was done by the Brand Union which actually has quite a wonderful logo for itself, which I belive this site had reviewed as well. Just don't know who allowed this out of the gate, and for such a cost.
On Oct.03.2008 at 06:00 PM
Chris Herron’s comment is:
I usually like attempts to modify (or hand-draw) type so the resulting logotype is proprietary, especially for brands of this stature. But there are notable x-height problems here, particularly with the "r" and "y" letterforms. But overall, the logotype is appealing.
On Oct.03.2008 at 06:07 PM
Paul Cooley’s comment is:
Ununderstandable indeed.
I feel like it only works on very large media.
Oh and this "lowercase=friendly" thing is getting a little out of hand...
I mean, cool it.
On Oct.03.2008 at 07:52 PM
Wünderwoman’s comment is:
That's whack...and not in a good way.
On Oct.03.2008 at 08:15 PM
Jeremy Matthews’s comment is:
Fabian Marchinko’s comment is:
Oh for crying out loud a globe is all they could come up with. Have designers really become that lazy?
What ever happened to thinking outside the globe?
…Or box for the matter:)
mingshi’s comment is:
@ Jeremy Matthews - what a great gumball collection we got!
but really
B.O.R.I.N.G...!
On Oct.04.2008 at 01:39 AM
illusio’s comment is:
This new logo has multiple personality disorder.
On Oct.04.2008 at 04:11 AM
Valentino’s comment is:
Looks like Barclaycard just enjoy the latest trends. I suppose the next one will be in less than 10 years. Didn't they learn from the last logo they had created?
It should be a lot cheaper to employ someone who just copies though.
On Oct.04.2008 at 05:13 AM
Neil Martin’s comment is:
Wow Jeremy, good collection!
On Oct.04.2008 at 01:02 PM
Mark’s comment is:
It must suck to work at Brand Union right now...
On Oct.05.2008 at 01:46 AM
stefano picco’s comment is:
I like the new one, but it's not perfect ...
On Oct.05.2008 at 10:26 AM
Mongoose’s comment is:
I'll start with a straight-up C- for this.
As Armin said, it's the low point of a trend. In the 80's, the highly abstract, circular, monochrome logo was big; to the point that Prudential changed their rock logo to a abstract piece of nonsense.
This is just the same back again, except with spheres, carefully gradiented and lighted to make them three-dimensional. It can be done right, but when it's wrong.. see this logo, see Xerox.. it's meaningless and blotchy.
And this is, quite frankly, done very wrong. The pallette is very reminiscent of AT&T, and the peels look sloppy, uneven, inexact. I like the font rather more than Armin did, I think the letterforms are rather nice, smoothreading and.. sigh, must I say the word? 'friendly'.
I'd rate this lower, but it's better than the old logo, which had a nice enough 'B' but that yellow italic lettering that feels slapped in. Thus C- : the least possible grade for what I would count as an improvement.
--Mongoose
On Oct.05.2008 at 02:32 PM
Goffredo Puccetti’s comment is:
Holy S*** Reading this forum is getting too painful.
I am a Barclaycard owner. Best credit card in the world, ok!
And now worst logo ever. I mean this is by far the most revolting, banal, totaly utterly idiotic logo ever. It is worst than Xerox. It is a BAD COPY OF THE WORST LOGOS AROUND!!!
Is there an etiquette on this forum? I mean I just want to scream!
This is crap! This is not graphic design, this is insulting!
Jeez... I remember some ten years ago we signed a Manifesto called "swoosh no more", where designers swore never those swoooshes which were everywhere at the time. Maybe we should do something about these idiotic sphere-like, fake 3d, moronic symbols?!
I hope this is the bottom line, really. A disgrace to the profession.
G.
PS: Did the Barclay brand guy really said "Modern and distinctive look"?
On Oct.05.2008 at 05:07 PM
Joe Szczepaniak’s comment is:
I have to say, from a totally objective formal position this mark (symbol AND typography) are quite well crafted. I recognize that the lowercase "r's" need some serious tweeking, but letter for letter it's pretty decent. The marble itself has a very nice sculptural flow to it.
Now, that having been said, I agree that designers need to think beyond the aesthetic of a company's brand identity. The unoriginal nature of this mark is really what makes it suffer.
But if you can't see the formal qualities of the mark you really need to ask yourself if you're in the right vocation, my friends. Take a look at Jeremy Matthew's post with all the other globes. I trust you will see that some are, in fact, quite a bit more sophisticated than others.
Also, I don't understand the emotional responses to this. I'm beyond serious about what I do as a graphic designer, and I don't get emotional. To me, that smacks of jealousy, that someone else got paid such & such amount for work that you could do with your mac tied behind your back. It should be well known to you folks that the designers of these marks often come on to Brand New and read the comments. Do you think you're going to teach them something by acting like a bunch of asses? Does it usually make you more receptive to criticism when someone is treating you like this?
Tisk. Tisk. I click my tongue at you.
On Oct.05.2008 at 05:48 PM
T-Bone’s comment is:
@ Jeremy Mathews: that's genius!
this logo makes no sense. looks like they've designed it in 3D and rotated by accident to reveal the part that should be hidden. but that's probably giving them too much credit. at least the xerox one, as average as it is, has a concept behind it.
On Oct.05.2008 at 08:35 PM
Neil Martin’s comment is:
@ Joe Szczepaniak
The dictionary defines a logo as "A name, symbol, or trademark designed for easy and definite recognition"
As Jeremy so accurately pointed out, there are so many marble logos out there that the "definite recognition" is being completely lost. Put Barclay's logo on the side of a bus and I assure you people would most likely not be able to recognise it as Barclays and perhaps moreso as AT&T.
To say that we, as designers are getting emotional about it as absolutely right. It's because we're passionate about design. We are compelled to design. It's natural for you. That's why so many here are being negative towards the logo because it doesn't stand out at all. And when that's what a logo is supposed to do, you know that it has failed.
On Oct.05.2008 at 10:05 PM
Jose Nieto’s comment is:
The Creative Review blog has a pretty funny send up of this silly design trend.
On Oct.06.2008 at 01:35 AM
Justin Hill’s comment is:
It's Barclaycard's "Death Star II" logo!
On Oct.06.2008 at 03:22 AM
AL’s comment is:
Don't laugh! Marble is a capacious thing!
On Oct.06.2008 at 06:16 AM
Goffredo Puccetti’s comment is:
Joe Szczepaniak wrote:
"Also, I don't understand the emotional responses to this. I'm beyond serious about what I do as a graphic designer, and I don't get emotional. To me, that smacks of jealousy"
and
"Do you think you're going to teach them something by acting like a bunch of asses? "
Wow! :-) First of all I am passionate about my work and yes I get emotional from time to time about it. I felt physical pain when UPS rebranded their logo. I cried (yes, indeed) when I landed at Charles de Gaulle Airport Terminal 1 and I saw that they were changing the sign system thus destroying the magic of Adrian Frutiger's work. But not because I was jealous! Just because they were implementing bad design on global scale.
I know maybe it'd look more normal if I said I cried for jealousy, but no: I cried for unecessary usage of bold typefaces and bad kerning.
That is why I say that the Barclaycard rebrand is revolting. Not because I am jealous, just because I feel it is bad design. Not original (plagiarism some suggest), unispiring, banal and cheap beyond descrpition.
Regarding the "teaching" to the others. Personally, it is the other way around: to me agencies such as Brand Union are the masters! They are the best in the business! They are part of Wpp, they share projects and visions with people at Landor, Grey, JWT and so on... These are the best people in the brand arena. How can I possibly think about keeping a proper attitude so to be able to teach them? I mean I collect books about those agencies!
I think that as long as all the fellow graphic designers here post their views with name and surname there are no side effects in being honest. We all share and learn.
I don't feel like I am acting as an ass when I say that the barclaycard logo is a banal plagiarism of an existing logo (At&t) with the cheap addition of the most banal grapic 3D gizmo effect oh-so popular right now.
Regards,
max’s comment is:
I don't see any reason for keeping the globe-thingy. It looks like the unwrapping of a candy.
The company name is a vast improvement.
jompydoodle’s comment is:
http://www.oneillit.ie/assets/images/250px-eircom_logo_flat.jpg
On Oct.06.2008 at 11:06 AM
jompydoodle’s comment is:
or
Ivan Philipov’s comment is:
von Glitchka?
On Oct.06.2008 at 03:12 PM
Erin Narducci’s comment is:
After reading what they were shooting for; it was a good concept, just poorly executed. I didn't see a globe and differently didn't get "a world that is calm and confident on the outside, whilst warm and vibrant on the inside." "The globe" appears to be falling apart. And the typography doesn't deliver the same message as what the globe was shooting for.
On Oct.06.2008 at 04:35 PM
emd’s comment is:
I'm starting a new identity design shop.
Should I name it GUMBALL or MARBLE?
On Oct.06.2008 at 10:39 PM
Chris Mills’s comment is:
Uck, no rhyme or reason.
On Oct.07.2008 at 03:38 PM
Lance K Muller’s comment is:
Herd mentality at its best. This really proscribes to the "Same same, but different" ethos... we want to be different, but lets not leave the comfortable and known path... so boring, it will soon be forgotten... great job to whomever came up with this... boy, do you have balls...
On Oct.08.2008 at 08:30 AM
Corey Buckner’s comment is:
Despite the well-noted and deserved criticisisms levied here I think it is worth noting that the new logo is STILL infinately better than than the former IMO.
On Oct.08.2008 at 05:26 PM
Dale’s comment is:
The orange-peel globe thing is *completely* incomprehensible!
On Oct.10.2008 at 01:34 AM
Nat Cowx’s comment is:
'I usually like attempts to modify (or hand-draw) type so the resulting logotype is proprietary, especially for brands of this stature. But there are notable x-height problems here, particularly with the "r" and "y" letterforms. But overall, the logotype is appealing.'
WTF!
On Oct.10.2008 at 11:38 AM
Mark’s comment is:
geez.
did the AT&T logo get caught in a tornado or something?
Justin Hill’s comment is:
Maybe Luke Skywalker blew up the "AT&T Death Star," then got rebuilt into the "Barclaycard Death Star II."
This is the most radical looking globe logo I've seen.
On Oct.12.2008 at 04:51 AM
Justin Hill’s comment is:
Does that logo have any resemblance to this?
My answer: YES.
On Oct.12.2008 at 04:56 AM
Tim Burley’s comment is:
There's one blue wrappy river globe see throughness logo that's been missed - Google Earth - how close do you wanna get frchrissakes??
On Oct.15.2008 at 06:01 AM
Incredulous’s comment is:
Are any of you people actually designers?
The reason I ask is that after reading all these negative comments (about 90% of what's posted on this site), all it really does is make designers look like a waste of time and money.
I can't help but think that if I were in charge of branding a large company (I am)and had lots of money to spend, and I happened to find this site during my research (which is exactly how I did find it) and read the posts on here, I'd conclude "why should I bother throwing good money at designing a logo?"
1.5 million? I can get someone to design a good-looking logo for $250.
Keep trash talking everything people. It may make you feel witty and intelligent but all you're doing is de-valuing the profession. Congratulations.
On Oct.15.2008 at 09:49 AM
David Sanchez’s comment is:
It feels like a eagles nest egg from the main corporate brand parent Barclays. Is a bit of a cliche, but cute device If I may. What is upsetting is that evokes a bit of att.
On Oct.15.2008 at 01:16 PM
Ben’s comment is:
I agree with Joe Szczepaniak's comment. Not jumping on this whiny bandwagon.
On Oct.24.2008 at 02:31 PM
Doug’s comment is:
Keep in mind that AT&T is not a global brand. In the UK and Europe, the vast majority of Barclays account holders will have had limited exposure to the AT&T globe. Conversely, most US consumers don't know what Barclays is unless they're investment bankers or fans of soccer and golf, where the company puts lots of sponsorship money.
On Oct.24.2008 at 03:51 PM
Joseph hedges’s comment is:
I completely accept that this is a mark that shares a lot with many other globe marks, and therefore I would definitly mark it down, but I have to say that it is simply the nicest version I have seen. Its great use of colour works well for me personally and the type is clean and right for the sector. I'm sure the designer was thinking that it was close to other marks but they have done a great job of moving it on. I know it is subtle, but it is enough for me to actually like it... clean, simple and perfectly balanced. In fact you can tell it was created by a good designer.
This industry can be pathetic to be honest, too many people feel they need to express how great they are by running peoples work down, yes, there is some rubbish out there, far too much, but this is actually a nice mark. Come on people, snap out of it, snap, snap!
On Oct.26.2008 at 05:23 PM
Mondayne’s comment is:
This is WAY more exciting than any of the logos Barclays ever let me design when I worked with them.
On Nov.09.2008 at 06:09 AM
Andrew Sabatier’s comment is:
I missed the debate (or is that small-minded, one-sided and brand illiterate venom-fest?) on this blog for some reason.
If you're interested in my thoughts on the cynical Creative Review of the Barclaycard identity are available here:
In brief: unqualified cheap shots at a competent identity are easily made.
If you're not qualified to voice your opinion you cannot afford to voice your opinion.
A.
Goffredo Puccetti’s comment is:
Thanks to Andrew Sabatier for the link: very thoughful and articulate vision on the rebranding issue.
I do disagree on the conclusions about Barclaycard redesigned logo but I see your point on the bias in the CR review. It is an important issue which I had missed completely. Thank you very much.
Robert’s comment is:
Tell me what was your first impression about the logo, symbol, signature or whatever, after opening this link: etalons After seeing this you will forget how Barclaycard logo even looked like.
On Jan.13.2009 at 06:17 AM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
