Nearly 5 years on - how do you feel about the new badge?

I couldnt understand the haters for the new one, it was a revamped trade markable version of our old one for me. Pretty much every club has done the same. Everyones entitled to their opinion.
 
Manchester1894 said:
Yeah the intellectual trademarks IPO had it listed.. posted on here and then the MEN swiped it. haha

Here it is! https://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/threads/club-badge-merged.314458/page-427#post-9072677
Click to expand...
The trade mark office weren’t supposed to put it live on their site until after the reveal by City at the ground. Sadly someone at the IPO put it live and once that happened it created all the negativity. City knew the badge had to be seen in colour and moving (I.e. on the flag and in the exhibition room at the stadium) before a black & white static version so that fans could gauge it properly. Sadly, because of the IPO staff member posting it on their site ahead of schedule the club didn’t get the opportunity they wanted. They knew that fans would understandably check out the IPO and post links as soon as it appeared there which is why they’d planned it the way they did.
 
Gary James said:
Thanks. On the bee - it was an option from the start of the consultation and it was something I discussed in those sessions. Fans were given the opportunity to pick it and had enough done so it would have been included, as the red rose AND rivers were. There was a similar number of votes for the red rose and the rivers - personally I didn't want the rose for various reasons (mainly because it was prominent on the badge introduced by those directors who had ousted Mercer and it had not been on City's original round badge which had existed since the 1930s though not worn on shirts until 1970s). But many, many people did want the rose, despite its introduction by the new board in 1972 (Swales wasn't chairman at the time but he was the prime mover in changing the badge back then so that the club could gain control over its branding - a few years later he outsourced it of course which led to issues years later and the club earning very little from the badge; so despite the rose being on the badge I mostly grew up with, once I'd researched its history I was personally against including it). Democracy meant the rose did appear and it also meant the bee didn't. Hardly anybody wanted the bee despite some people encouraging its selection.

I know a lot of people at the time thought 'oh, they're just going to do' such and such but that consultation was absolutely genuine. I think it was inevitable we were going to select a round badge because, overwhelmingly, for the previous few years City had been receiving many, many emails, letters and calls from fans demanding a round badge. Had the eagle badge and the elements within it received considerable votes though then that badge/style would have won.
Click to expand...
As I recall it Gary, didn’t the rivers receive more votes than the rose?

For me, it probably should have been one or the other. It seems to me like if it was a genuine consultation, they would have gone with the rivers instead of the rose.

But I remember some time back you saying that the powers that be in 2008 asked you to give them a talk on the old badge and seemed particularly interested in the rose.

It kind of feels like they wanted to bring the rose back and had it got more votes than the rivers, we’d have had the rose and no rivers on the new badge.

But the fact the rivers got more votes they kind of fudged it and went for both.

I think in monochrome the badge looks fantastic, and the rivers really stand out. But my one bugbear is in full colour, the sky blue rivers on slightly darker sky blue shield, the rivers get lost a little bit and look of secondary importance to the rose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.