RFC Fan Forum Night - Tues, Oct 18

[cub]

i find that strange. Here and BF, from what i've read is largely a negative reaction.

Well I answered that question. I said overall net result as positive, but there was a loud minority of people who didnt like it.

Just out of interest what figures did you come up with and where do you get them from or is this just a broad generalization?

[mightytiges]

One question that answered was about consultation with us supporters and members (or lack of it) and just presenting a new logo to us now as is. The answer given was if they had presented a draft logo to someone then that someone could trademark it before the club does. It was also mentioned that Richmond doesn't own its own intellectual property - the AFL does - so the AFL has to be kept up to speed with how the new logo is progressing and how it fits in with the AFL's own licencing and trademarks.

The Club is expecting some negative reaction initially but see releasing it now gives supporters 5 months to get use to it by the start of next season. They also believe that wins on the field and a more successful era will translate to a greater love for this new logo in time. The argument put forward was that fondness for the 80s logo with the leaping tiger over the sash was a result of it being in existence in a successful era. The same argument was put forward as to why supporters still remember Tetley and Esso are our sponsors 30 years later. 

[bojangles17]

I like it, there are some subtle chages I note from the first view a little while ago, good idea with RICHMOND below, no need to have tigers written when there is a logo of a tiger, derr ...looks stylish, daring and PROUD....Good work

[Smokey]

Well seeing it's been leaked to the Hun and posted publicly by Jon Ralph earlier tonight , it's all out in the open now which it was basically anyway as a very close version was released by IP Australia. The difference to that logo is some the white has been reduced and the word 'Richmond' in large text followed underneath by 'Est 1885' placed underneath the logo.

...................blah blah blah (not your report MT, just the club rhetoric used to sell an unnecessary change).......................


There's also a full tiger body that goes with the logo head and chest which the club will also use (on bags for example).

They then finished off with video which will be release tomorrow morning which is more a drumming up support video - they have Newy, Benny Gale and Dimma talking about the club, it's history, it's great players (Dyer, Hart, Bourke, KB and Richo), the new era with highlights of Cotch, Lids, Dusty and Jack and finally a short cartoon of a tiger in the grass morphing into the new logo and roaring.

That's what I can remember. Any questions fire away.

Great theories = crap end result.  Still hate it.  Nothing wrong with the 'traditional one' we had been using imho and the longer we used it the more traditional it became, bit like not changing our jumper to appease the fly by night corporates.  We all love to hang our hat on the history of the club - the tradition, the passion, the success - yet we sell a part of who we are for what gain?  What would be the reaction be to the club moving from Punt Rd to Junction Oval because it was considered more modern, more chic, more 'in tune' with the modern market?  Sacrilege you say?  No difference as I see it.

[TigerLand]

Someone with a Graphic Design background, I don't like the logo. I don't enjoy having a sook at what our club does but atleast I know what I'm talking about on this one.

a) Tiger snarl isn't convincing, poorly done IMO. Hard to do with a 2 type colour pallet (yellow and black only colours, tough to make facial expressions without a variety of colours)
b) Fail to see the relevance of the shield. No history of shields in our game or club?
c) Text wise I'm baffled why on earth we have gone with a plain type face. Would have preferred
d) 100% Disagree with the inclusions of white. We are and always will be yellow and black. Should have made it so.

Understand the process they have gone through but just disagree with the design decisions. Funny thing about the creative world, nothing is ever 100% wrong, at worst somewhere out there someone will appreciate what you've designed.

IMO design doesn't portray passion, courage or power - which IMO what a sports logo should represent.

[TigerLand]

It's just an opinion BTW.

What our logo looks like is hardly an issue. Get our list right and win a premiership and we can have a pink panda for all I care.

[mightytiges]

Great theories = crap end result.  Still hate it.  Nothing wrong with the 'traditional one' we had been using imho and the longer we used it the more traditional it became, bit like not changing our jumper to appease the fly by night corporates.  We all love to hang our hat on the history of the club - the tradition, the passion, the success - yet we sell a part of who we are for what gain?  What would be the reaction be to the club moving from Punt Rd to Junction Oval because it was considered more modern, more chic, more 'in tune' with the modern market?  Sacrilege you say?  No difference as I see it.

Don't shoot the messenger smokey but the Club argues that we have had a number of logo changes throughout our history (they showed 6 different logos prior to this new one) and that some people associated the current logo with a period of no success. On top of that is the practical issues (difficulty in incorporating into apparell).

[mightytiges]

a) Tiger snarl isn't convincing, poorly done IMO. Hard to do with a 2 type colour pallet (yellow and black only colours, tough to make facial expressions without a variety of colours)

More colours means greater difficulty in incorporating it onto apparell.

c) Text wise I'm baffled why on earth we have gone with a plain type face. Would have preferred

In fairness the font and look of the text looks far better than my crude attempt in my summary post.

[one-eyed]

By the way the company that did the new logo was CANYON.

http://www.canyonbranddesign.com/

[yellowandback]

You know the world over, people want to change things for changes sake.
This is no different.

Very lame excuse to change an already good logo.

I predict that this logo will change again in the next few years.

[Francois Jackson]

cant believe some of you lot care about the logo if it  brings a new era to the club and we start making finals then WGAF.

We have had 20 years of rubbish with the old one so why not bring in the new change.

Thought it makes perfect sense if you want the truth

[Penelope]

personally i dont have a problem with change, but watching that video when the full tiger roars and morphs into the shield shaped head i cant but think of the kimba comparison ( yeah i know lions tigers, but lions have prides, not tigers )

As daniel is alluding to ( I think) if we start having success people will come to accept and even like the logo.

I embrace change if it is for the better. I understand the desire to get a logo easier (cheaper) to put on to merchandise etc, but i still feel it is ordinary.

I would love to know if there was any market research such as showing a group of people (not just richmond supporters but general public) the logo and asking how they feel about it. does it really say proud, aggressive?

[Loui Tufga]

cant believe some of you lot care about the logo if it  brings a new era to the club and we start making finals then WGAF.

We have had 20 years of rubbish with the old one so why not bring in the new change.

Thought it makes perfect sense if you want the truth

I agree with this Were not the only club to change our logo in the past couple of years, Geelong did it 5 years ago and it hasn't hurt them one iota
IMO it represents us turning over a new leaf and starting another chapter in the great history of the club! We can only hope it works as well for us as did Geelong

[WilliamPowell]

cant believe some of you lot care about the logo if it  brings a new era to the club and we start making finals then WGAF.

We have had 20 years of rubbish with the old one so why not bring in the new change.

Thought it makes perfect sense if you want the truth

daniel, I actually agree with you in principle

It's not that they've change the logo. But for me it is what they've changed it to that i have a real problem with. Just don't like the design

I sat there last and even after they had explained why they chose that one and what it is supposed to stand for, I still don't like, think we could have done a lot better

Having said that what i found interesting last night was the number of people who during the course of the presentation change their view on the logo 

[Muscles]

I can only think that the new logo must appeal to the younger generation, because it looks pretty ordinary to me.