487K Montreal logo
- Started
- Last post
- 73 Responses
- shitehawke0
lucky, unfortunately I don't know the cost of the work in the example above, but I would like to know too. As I said though it may have been muddled, I doubt that the work cost as much as the montreal branding, but it was on a much smaller scale: a few square miles as opposed to the size of the greater montreal area.
Also, I think I need to emphasise if it cost 487k for just a logo, then its massively overpriced, however, for a huge identity system, of which a logo is merely a part then it has to be seen as an investment that is worth the money paid.
As far as reduced rates for govt, I don't really agree with you. I have reduced rates or worked free for clients before on small projects. Working like that on a huge project such as this kind of branding could very well be the death-knell for a company as it would eat up massize amounts of time and resources, blocking them from working on other, paying, projects.
As an aside, in regard to the cost of the project, as other people have said, this would have gone out to tender. So someone within the govt would have set the budget after doing research into the work needed. This would have gone out to companies to tender and cost is (over here anyway) a big part of the tender process with anywhere from 60-80% of the weighting of a bid given to cost. It is up to the companies entering the process to decide the amount to charge, too little and they're seen as too cheap to be worth it, too expensive and they're seen to be a luxury, so actually the cost outlined could have been a good bit higher if a different company had won the pitch, or lower.
- doesnotexist0
- Yes, it's an M. Well done. What does it have to do with this discussion?Amicus
- IT's AN M ASSHOLE
APPRECIATE ITdoesnotexist
- luckyorphan0
Businesses can make a profit however they like. But they can also give a little as well. I'm not saying that they should shoot themselves in the foot. Just be a little considerate of the fact that the money they're getting came from taxpayers, and that they should account for that. Likewise, the gov't should protect those assets and use them more wisely.
I can see this is just me here. A percentage of a budget is meaningless to me. The recently killed F-22 fighter was only .01% of the federal budget – a mere $4.2 billion that certainly isn't meaningless to the agencies who are doing more concrete work on the ground.
I understand the design community's need to rally around the importance of design – I do it often myself. But a new logo for that price is simply irresponsible. Montreal could have gotten a decent logo for a fraction of the cost, and still provide other funds across communities.
A new logo is not a need. It's a want. And there are surely more essential civic needs not being met.
- A logo that works pays for itself. I you don't understand that why are you anywhere near this industry?Amicus
- Salarrue0
C'est quoi cet merde?
- cettezarkonite
- what ever that is. sounds good though. :-Dakrokdesign
- sounds like shit to me ;)Amicus
- Amicus0
lucky – you are forgetting that design businesses are just that – businesses. They need to make a profit to survive, and by making a profit they are ensuring that they pay taxes. Funny thing that, isn't it?
Quite frankly, a million dollars is a drop in the bucket for a large city.
$687k equates to about 0.02% of the annual budget of around $4 billion for Montreal, which is raised it's rates by the less than inflation in recent years, and so it's citizens are slightly better off.
Do some research and you'll realise how little this money really is. If you consider the hundreds of items that had to be considered while the Mark was being designed it all adds up time, and as all business owners know time is money.
That being said I'm sure I could find some few jobs that you might want to work pro bono on... :)
- zarkonite0
just to clarify a small detail here, this isn't a new Montreal logo/branding. It's for the greater montreal area, which includes a few dozen towns. The purpose is to promote international exposure, in that respect money is not necessarily taken away from services.
- luckyorphan0
shitehawke -
Very good points, and thanks for providing a specific example. It's tough to argue with that successful use of design.Would it be fair to ask, however, if Dublin spent the same kind of money on that endeavor? And could the same effect be achieved for a discounted rate?
I know I'd jump at the chance to provide similar services to run-down areas of my city in hopes that I'd be helping improve the area. I would love to spend time there and speak to the people, do the research and the time, and figure out the best ways to improve their lives. I just would not be able to charge what I charge my other clients. A civic client – or a charitable org for that matter – is just different from other private organizations, to me.
I think far too many people – designers included – have forgotten what it means to make a significant contribution without being paid. Everyone forgets about all the ways that they benefit and have benefited from the cities in which they live, so the concept of charity doesn't enter their minds.
That's why it's called "giving back."
- luckyorphan0
Amicus -
There is no question that public institutions could spend some amount of their cash on the arts and good design. That being said, a gov't is like a family. It has a set budget on which it can spend how it likes. But it should weigh their options across the board. And it should consider that the money it spends is being given to them by the community with the trust that they will spend it wisely and carefully.Having designed countless public and private brands, we all know what it takes to deal with developing a brand, and while the hours are worked, and the time is spent, I believe that designers should offer a cut rate when it comes to taking taxpayer money. It's kind of a civic duty, in my mind. Charging a private rate for a public design is a light version of war profiteering, in a way, though nowhere near as severe.
Also, I don't believe that creating a new city logo is the best way to promote the arts and design. I imagine that $687k would have gone a long way to improving the arts in public education, "teaching people to fish," if you get my meaning.
- The best way to teach is by example, and 0.02% of the budget is a drop in the ocean.Amicus
- jamble0
I often think a large part of the logo budget goes into the time it takes agencies to make up the bullshit explaination for what the logo represents and how it's a dynamic and synergistical solution to a blue sky problem etc.
That said, I do quite like it.
- that's only cause too many people in government and management believe too much of the bullshit from business and self help booksAmicus
- ...from business and self help books and gurus. Some of it is good stuff, if you can cut through the jargon and jingoism.Amicus
- But the studio still bears responsibility for providing BS designspeak.luckyorphan
- shitehawke0
Theres also this little known city logo and its redesign.
Now, Im for money being spent on design, and not just because Im a designer. As many people have stated before the cost design an identity, and that's what this project is, is not just a logo design. Nor even just stationery nor a website. The money that the was spent on the montreal identity is not just on the design of one mark. Its everything.
In Dublin theres an area called the docklands. Years ago it was a fucking wasteland, people didn't want to go there as it was rough as fuck. Then it started to be renewed and part of that was giving the place an identity. Now personally I don't like the logo, but now it has, wayfinding systems that work and beat all those in the rest of dublin. Big businesses and banks invested in the area, houses and apartments and shops were built and it actually became a good place to live with big events for the local communities and it has a sense of pride now.
Thats a small area of Dublin, directly benefiting from branding but at the start money had to be spent to instigate that. So put that onto a bigger scale for a whole city and it will put the pricetag into perspective. The money that is spent, is not pissed away, its invested. Both to attract business and tourism to the area, but also it's spent on businesses to implement the work, who in turn pay their employees who in turn have money to spend (hopefully) in the area who in turn contribute to taxes to help the area run.
I'm sorry for the long post, but design is not just about creating pretty but ultimately useless ephemera. It can do good if it is done properly.
- I love North Yorkshire.jamble
- c'mon down... thie shite is right!Amicus
- Very well argued, SH. My only beef real beef with this whole endeavor is the price tag.luckyorphan
- I just don't believe that civic work should cost the same as private work – just a personal belief.luckyorphan
- LOL @ I love North Yorkshire.akrokdesign
- Amicus0
lucky – serious question:
Do you think government's have a responsibility to fund, protect and raise the profile of the arts/culture?
I don't believe design is art, but it is, on some levels, part of the cultural fabric of a city, region and country. In that respect governments should be highlighting good design as a way to differentiate the city, region or country from others and also to highlight the design industries in terms of graphic, product, landscape and architecture as much as possible.
In that sense it is actually irresponsible of Government not to put the effort, thought and money into good design.
Furthermore they should source the best design possible from the local area if it is good enough to meet the objects of the project.
- Good point. And thanks for speaking to me like a person. My thoughts are below.luckyorphan
- noneck0
I'll toss one more Government contract anecdote on here.
A few years ago, my partner and I were asked to put together a proposal to redesign a complete website for a provincial government. Not for a government agency, but for the entire government. This province had a GDP of over $235 BILLION at the time.
They told us that the budget for the project was $10,000. In total.
They also told us that they new that the budget was completely out to lunch, but since this was a high profile job, tough shit.
Governments don't just pass out big contracts. When they feel like it, they can screw over agencies too.
We met with them, and ended up passing on the job.
- Good call. I'd say that's in-line with the same decision-making that led to the $487k logo.luckyorphan
- luckyorphan0
I have to agree with a lot that noneck said. Gov't orgs, universities and museums are all nightmarish clients for all of the reasons listed above and more. I would say that one of the biggest issues with these orgs is that they are usually staffed with very conservatively-minded individuals who have very little experience with design at all.
I think that my main argument is that if a city wanted to do a logo for any reason, that when they found out that all of the bids would be around $500k, they should have dropped the project. I'm not saying that designs aren't worth that price. Rather, I just think that when you're dealing with public money and not a private grant or institution, money that is assumed by the public to be for the benefit of the public, they should prioritize appropriately, and consider that a new logo was simply outside of the parameters of a responsible budget.
In the end, there are countless better ways to spend $500k in a city than on a new logo.
That being said, I think that it would have been nice to see some civic cooperation and charity (like that displayed by Glaser) reflected in the budget proposed by the studios involved.
End.
- noneck0
Keep in mind a couple of things:
1) The agency didn't really set the price. These things are put out to bid, usually with an stated budget. The city knows how much it was willing to spend.
2) Designing an ID system for a city is not the same as designing an logo for a private corporation with a single owner.
3) If you've ever had the opportunity to work for a government–be it municipal, provincial, or federal–you know what a pain in the ass they are to work with.
Working with government clients is a tremendous pain in the ass. I would lump universities in there too. You have never had such a difficult client. They'll send in two people for every person the agency sends to a meeting, and each of their people is there to represent the interests of four others that couldn't make it.
Any decision needs to be run past a large committee, who then runs it up past other decision makers for feedback.
And then, because your work is for a public organization, it needs to be completely safe. Is there ANY possibility that this could offend even 0.00001% of the population? Because that person exists, will see the work, and will be offended. This work is incredibly sensitive.
Then, lets say that the work has something wrong with it, a tiny little detail that makes it into the newspapers (because it will). Doesn't matter where the fault actually lies, the agency takes the blame. Even if the work doesn't have something wrong with it, the agency ends up in the media anyways with this kind of discussion. "City pays $500K for this waste of money" kind of articles are easy targets for the media.
It can be pretty tough to justify the real cost of an identity project to a client, even if you only bill $3000. A lot of work gets done for that money, and the deliverables are pretty skimpy. Combine that with the complexities of working with a government? $500K for creative is a bargain.
- Having said that, the logo is nice, not great. And logos for govts are never a good idea.noneck
- hektor9110
Designers talking trash about how much was spent on a design project. Well I don't care how much was spent on that logo, as long as it works. I will care about the price if the logo does not serve its purpose.
- akrokdesign0
"the biggest fucking hypocrites, for the most part. not too mention a very jealous bunch"
sounds like the LA tagline. lol.
- How so?luckyorphan
- Ah. I get it. Of course, that could be the QBN Public Voice tagline too, eh.luckyorphan
- yeah it's pretty universal.akrokdesign
- akrokdesign0
LA don't need a logo, they got luckyorphan. lol.
- marcostill0
this thread reminded me why i hate designers
- Yes! We agree!luckyorphan
- They get so mad over something so insignificant.luckyorphan
- no, they're the biggest fucking hypocrites, for the most part. not too mention a very jealous bunch.marcostill
- jimbojones0
meh, I'm done with this thread, arguing over the internet is pointless.
try to realize that 500K expenses for a city of montreal's size is such fucking peanuts. try to realize that while those very 500K given to one principal just like that may be a big deal, but split over all the schools or whatever in montreal it's nothing. like I said, you can get 10 teachers for that. or millions of paying tourists. try to realize that contests or crowdsourcing or school projects result in intergalactical shit nobody wants to see. try to realize that the city hopes for huge ROI and it will pay off anyway. but if you still don't realize all this you probably won't.
have fun making brands without a logo. pro bono. free.
- Yes. I'll gladly follow Milton Glaser's example. He's a bright chap.luckyorphan
- You're right. A design studio would use that money much more responsibly.luckyorphan
- luckyorphan0
No, I think that a bunch of posters with a ten thousand dollar logo on it would do the job just as well. The city could have held a competition, or found some up-and-coming studio. Or opened it up to the schools in the city, and make it more democratic and let the people vote on who the city could award $10k to. Either way, they could have been a bit more creative on how to get a decent logo, and saved a mint in the meantime.
- you didn't just say fucking "competition" did you? fucking hell you're all over the place.marcostill
- Letting people vote on things is how you end up with shit like Toronto Raptors for an NBA team name.Andrew_D
- You're right! Down with voting!!! There's too much at stake!!! The experts must decide!!!luckyorphan
- I think the problems with government is that they are elected by people with no expertise in government.Amicus
- same problem happens with committees or competitions for logos.Amicus