Woke up this morning to see the news of the ANZ rebranding and the rollout of the new logo which was announced a few months back. I take an interest in the decisions that lead to a company rebranding or repositioning themselves, and also the followup once they decide to go through with it.
So, the OLD (top) and NEW (bottom) logos
The idea behind the rebranding was explained in a nutshell by chief executive Mike Smith:
“In recent years, the ANZ brand has become fragmented,” Mr Smith said.
“To deliver on its growth strategy and regional aspirations, ANZ has to look like one bank and provide a consistent experience for our customers and our people wherever they come into contact with the bank.”
Good intentions, but will this actually work? I get the feeling it’s heavily focused on their plans to make inroads into the Asian market. The logo has been influenced by a lotus flower.
Firstly there has been a backlash of iSnack 2.0 proportions, with many people drawing similarities to that marketing failure. I’ve yet to see more than a handful of comments today indicating this is a successful logo. The logo is supposed to represent both a human living in the customers world, as well as the three areas of focus (Australia, New Zealand and Asia-Pacific).
Personally I find the font a little bit off-putting, and much prefer the original. The logo design itself I was ok with, until someone pointed out what it looks like upside down. I would think a bank’s logo is seen upside down quite a lot on teller desks and everywhere someone has a letterhead from the bank.
Kinda creeps me out. What’s your take on the new logo? I’ve seen a lot of designers that could communicate their intentions in a better way. It just looks half finished to me (even though they spent 18 months deciding on it). The font appears mismatched from the logo itself, and the spacing between the letters feels wrong. I’m not sure why they left the horizontal line through the letters, I guess as a shout out to their old logo, but I’m not sure how that contributes to the overall rounded feel of the new logo.
What does everyone else think?
So, so bad.
The font looks childish and the logo, even the right way up, reminds me too much of the Vitruvian Man.
Worse that the Westnet logo change from several years back.
Good for me ;)
The font looks to rounded, almost like it is in a painting or a cartoon. The logo looks like someone shouting with upturned hands, appropriate for frustration that many customers feel with a bank,
BankWest is the financial institution that annoys me most with their branding. I don’t want crazy people who talk to puppets and animals in charge of my money.
This is still my favourite logo failure:
http://adland.tv/content/uk-office-government-commerce-new-logo-wankers
Shocker. Looks like a fertility brand!!! In my opinion, the logoface and mark don’t compliment one another
Understand the dislike for the logo, dont understand the lack of research?
“I get the feeling it’s heavily focused on their plans to make inroads into the Asian market.”
All you have to do is type ANZ in to Google to learn more about the Asian expansion, as for your comments about the overall design, I cant understand why people would prefer the old logo, personally I think this fits in well with ANZ’s future plans, it’s not a massive change still maintaining the overall feel, modernised curves and smoother edges. Could be better…
I personally, would not automatically think it looks like a pig when sitting upside down on a teller desk. Although it doesn’t really look like a lotus flower to me either.
I think this article lacks value, possibly even pointless.
Better luck next time.
The comments here are right. The font looks childish and the horizontal line is totally unnecessary. The designer, with the time and payment they were given, could have done better.
Adam, not sure what you mean by lack of research. The articles I read directly pointed out the Asian expansion and the purpose of the logo, which I was referencing.
In terms of old vs new, as you say, just search in Google for 5 minutes and you’ll find plenty of articles and comments similar to this post. This is hardly an unusual or odd viewpoint.
Pointless article? It’s continuing a theme of companies rebranding over the last 18 months (and the responses to that), ANZ being one of them.
Thanks for the feedback though.
The new identity is appalling. Im a designer and and ANZ customer. It’s enough to make me want to change banks. Which bank? W
check out how similar it is to the Arthritis Australia logo…
http://www.arthritisaustralia.com.au/templates/arthritis/images/style1/logo.png
think this sort of thing is very subjective, and a brand identity, is not something to take at face value and judge within 5 minutes, how they roll it out and incorporate it into their new direction will determine its sucess
[...] “The font appears mismatched from the logo itself, and the spacing between the letters feels wrong.” – Frontier Group [...]
I know this must have been a tough brief. However, for me there are too many religious connotations with this logo. It puts me in mind of a charity or church organisation. The result is something quite inappropriate for a bank. Unfortunately a missed opportunity.
Thats what you get when an Advertising Agency does branding, a half hacked job, after working at both advert and brand agencies, there is such a difference its not funny, I wouldnt be surprised one bit if this logo was done by the studio team rather than a creative director. Thats how they use to do it when i was there.
Disgrace ANZ, Richard Henderson should be spewing that something as timeless as his previous interpretation of the logo and brand has come to a halt by this amateurish attempt.
M&C Saatchi, you have no right to engage in brands, stick to advertising.
According to ANZ head of brand Louise Eyres “Unless we could be transparent about it (the fee), we removed it”
Obviously does not have any idea what ANZ cards is doing – they have introduced a fee for A$ transactions that have allegedly been processed offshore even though the transaction is for a service that was provided in australia and invoiced in A$. Just that the merchant processes the transactions offshore – information that is not available to the customer untill after the transaction is processed and the fee charged – and the fee will apply because ANZ has met all legal requirements in informing customers.
Transparency — what transparency – it is a fee and therefore revenue so if the ANZ knows whart is going on – it is regarded as transparent – even if the customer has no forewarning that a fee will be charged
[...] to be outdone, AOL is on the rebrand bandwagon. Last time I checked, AOL was neither hip, cool or anything else that they are now claiming to [...]
Oh… its supposed to be a human figure? Wouldn’t have figured this out on my own. This is the first time I’ve headed to the internet to figure out what a logo is supposed to mean.
Now the upside-down version which is a pig’s head would’ve been a cute piggy-bank logo. What are the odds vandles start going around to banks and painting on pig eyes and pig nostrils?
Go to the Corner of King and Bourke Sts in Melbourne – someones drawn Cross eyes on BOTH of the faces on the front of the branch – wish I had a Camera
Call me crazy, but if you look at the “negative image” ‘aint this logo just some white guy with a giant afro wearing a cape?