RE: Check out the new Lamborghini badge

[chrisironside]

It seems to me the first thing someone would want to see is how it compares to the previous logo... so why not include an image?
I think this is a really good update of the logo. It's not a rebranding so I think people shouldn't get too excited about how similar it is, but it looks to be nicely simplified.

[ChocolateFrog]

Didn't Aston so this recently?

Miniscule difference that we're accompanied by an actual press release.

[ChocolateFrog]

chrisironside said:

It seems to me the first thing someone would want to see is how it compares to the previous logo... so why not include an image?
I think this is a really good update of the logo. It's not a rebranding so I think people shouldn't get too excited about how similar it is, but it looks to be nicely simplified.

Is the one on the right the old one?

It looks better IMO. Not sure what the end point is of every single logo getting steadily simpler with each iteration.

The same is happening with football club badges.

Every brand with their name in Aerial size 12 on a white background.

[wolfracesonic]

Hairymonster said:

I wonder how much that cost them.

I’m not sure but this lot aren’t cheap…

[Japveesix]

gruntmonster said:

Is anybody really bothered Miura included

Exactly, it seems like they're reventon the wheel to me!

[Evolved]

ChocolateFrog said:

chrisironside said:

It seems to me the first thing someone would want to see is how it compares to the previous logo... so why not include an image?
I think this is a really good update of the logo. It's not a rebranding so I think people shouldn't get too excited about how similar it is, but it looks to be nicely simplified.

Is the one on the right the old one?

It looks better IMO. Not sure what the end point is of every single logo getting steadily simpler with each iteration.

The same is happening with football club badges.

Every brand with their name in Aerial size 12 on a white background.

It’s generally done to ensure digital reproduction is consistent. Nowadays so much is consumed on smaller screens that highly detailed logos just don’t replicate the way brands want. A simplified logo means casual viewers instantly recognise the brand and logo. The costs involved for a brand refresh like this are eye watering.

[dinkel]

chrisironside said:

It seems to me the first thing someone would want to see is how it compares to the previous logo... so why not include an image?
I think this is a really good update of the logo. It's not a rebranding so I think people shouldn't get too excited about how similar it is, but it looks to be nicely simplified.

Coming from 33 years experience in the business: the real effort is making sure the new logo is OK on all bits where it sits.

It's not just on a car and above the factory entrance you know...

[ChocolateFrog]

A good case in point. Bring back the original.

[ChocolateFrog]

Porsche seem to be one of the few that have gone the other way and it looks all the better for it.

[AmazingGrace]

Slow news day, PH?

[ajap1979]

ChocolateFrog said:

Porsche seem to be one of the few that have gone the other way and it looks all the better for it.

Not really. The new Porsche logo lost all the textural elements that would not be reproduced in digital spaces. Further simplification has seen the “Stuttgart” text changed to black, instead of embossed, which obviously doesn’t translate to screen.

It’s a bit silly to think that manufacturers are somehow being persuaded by brand agencies to follow a trend to simplify. That need has come about because brands now have to communicate across a far more diverse range of touch points. As with Porsche, this isn’t a rebrand (nor would it cost millions of pounds), its brand refinement.

Don’t get me wrong, I’ve been a brand consultant and designer for 20+ years, and I’m old enough to remember the days of beautifully printed car brochures, but the simple fact is that brands need to exist in a completely different environment these days.

[pacdes]

I'd have thought placing the old and new logo together would be crazy idea.

[FastNige]

Have been on the horns of a dilemma with this one but, and after much chewing the cud with others on this subject, (admittedly a specialist field), prefer the new version.

[Kenny.Junior]

Radec said:

It doesn't even matador, i won't ever have the chance to own one.





(Sorry bad pun)

Made me laugh.

[ambuletz]

what a boring logo, why are so many brands changing their logo to these flat, basic coloured things that look like it was done using microsoft paint on windows 95?

[dinkel]

the real effort is making sure the new logo is OK on all bits where it sits.

And since all those bits could be everywhere and vary from paper to metal to pixels > a strong bw is the way to go.

[ajap1979]

ambuletz said:

what a boring logo, why are so many brands changing their logo to these flat, basic coloured things that look like it was done using microsoft paint on windows 95?

There are a number of posts above that explain…

[gruffgriff]

chrisironside said:

Well the existing textural image has reproduced here in digital format perfectly well....feckin nonsense

[donkmeister]

ambuletz said:

what a boring logo, why are so many brands changing their logo to these flat, basic coloured things that look like it was done using microsoft paint on windows 95?

You wouldn't believe the number of people who stroll up to a Lamborghini showroom, see the signage and then shout "Oh hell no! I'm not buying a car with a bit of shading on the badge, I'm heading down the road to get a Ferrari instead!"

I mean, that's definitely the defining feature of a monumental V12 supercar isn't it - whether or not the badge has a bit of shading on it.

[Lester H]

Didn’t VW do a similar thing fairly recently ( year or so)? No one noticed it or cared after the first five minutes. There’s also a similar bull on some attractive, premium men’s shirts. Probably raging at the price.

Edited by Lester H on Wednesday 3rd April 08:58