Before I sign off for Xmas, I pass on my modest legal view with some asthetic considerations thrown in.
1.
FC - 'Manchester City' cannot be confused with any other organisation. hence why the Rags have ditched it.
2.
Words - the Manchester at the top is emphatic and the City stands alone. We are often now called this around the world. I heard Ranieri call us 'City' the other day and so there you go. Not a bad thing, in my view.
3.
1894 - Again, resonates around the world. The dippers use their 1892
ad nauseum. Whilst our heritage is obvious to us, that's unlikely to be the case in, say, China, but where history and continuity are highly valued assets. If only our
@Gary James has the opportunity to educate the British Media away from their 1992 obsession.
4.
Colours - Multicolours will go down well with most. With respect, us moaners are a rather conservative lot. Out in the world of punters, they like bling. Is one colour Gold? It will shine under lights. The red also stands out and gives the badge individuality. As a born and bred Mancunian, I find being told that I am not from Lancashire very insulting. Others don't mind, obviously. Furthermore, I don't know but guess that there are spot colours being used [as opposed to standard pantones]. This makes copying both more difficult and more expensive.
5.
Design - The circle is tidy and confident looking, much like Chelsea's, for example. I'd say that the overlapping shield also provides further protection against copying. Of course, someone will have a go but they will never get the colour and design exactly right.
Overall, it makes sense to me. I worked with the IPOs 20 years ago, They are probably the best in Manchester and so no surprise the club have engaged them. If you get the chance, read the classes that the trade marks are being applied for. The mind boggles. Onwards and upwards.
Merry Christmas from a wet and windy Manchester. Peace, Love and Freedom for all.
