Another High Street Rebrand

Philip
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri 22 Feb, 2008 21.23
Location: Merseyside
Contact:

There may be a slight issue with the positioning of the masthead…

https://twitter.com/fast_philosophy/sta ... 2340209664
Image
sqwidge1978
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat 25 Jun, 2016 15.42

Wouldn't the Old Masthead have had a similar issue as that was Justified on the right
Philip
Posts: 1191
Joined: Fri 22 Feb, 2008 21.23
Location: Merseyside
Contact:

sqwidge1978 wrote: Tue 16 Jan, 2018 15.25 Wouldn't the Old Masthead have had a similar issue as that was Justified on the right
But as the paper was larger it would have been folded on its side.
Image
User avatar
tillyoshea
Posts: 372
Joined: Sun 23 Nov, 2003 14.34
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Contact:

Philip wrote: Tue 16 Jan, 2018 15.42
sqwidge1978 wrote: Tue 16 Jan, 2018 15.25 Wouldn't the Old Masthead have had a similar issue as that was Justified on the right
But as the paper was larger it would have been folded on its side.
True - but the FT in the tweet above is folded in half and still orientated so as to obscure the masthead - which rather suggests that the newsagent doesn't think masthead visibility affects sales.
Alexia
Posts: 3005
Joined: Sat 01 Oct, 2005 17.50

tillyoshea wrote: Tue 16 Jan, 2018 17.48 True - but the FT in the tweet above is folded in half and still orientated so as to obscure the masthead - which rather suggests that the newsagent doesn't think masthead visibility affects sales.

The newsagent in that tweet is a fool for putting a paper on his shelf fold-side-underneath.

Also the FT is distinctive due to its pinkness. Perhaps the Guardian should print on paper that's a delightfully neutral shade of taupe, darlings.
Alexia
Posts: 3005
Joined: Sat 01 Oct, 2005 17.50

Pub developers have, ahem "refreshed" the ancient and storied Rummer Tavern in Cardiff including brand new sign frontage and a much-derided interior.

See if you can spot the mistake with the new signs. (New left, old right)

Image
User avatar
WillPS
Posts: 2579
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2008 18.32
Location: Carlton
Contact:

Ancient Sky Sports logo?
Image
Alexia
Posts: 3005
Joined: Sat 01 Oct, 2005 17.50

I guess it's "period-specific".

Still more modern than this one, which was just taken down only last summer.

https://goo.gl/maps/hFmDcyzau9m
JAS84
Posts: 609
Joined: Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10.23
Location: Hull, UK

Along with the main sign, so I'm guessing the Sky Sports sign was only taken down because that bowling alley closed down?
Jonny
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon 02 Nov, 2009 09.42

For those hitherto unfamiliar with the layout of the MetroCentre, Gateshead, one of its defining features is its colour-coded mall system (Red, Green, Blue, Yellow), as featured in the centre's original logo.

For reasons of corporate design insistency, the interior navigational signage, previously decked out in those easily identifiable signature colours (allowing you to quickly get your bearings in such a massive space) has recently been replaced with incredibly dour, universally black and orange Intu boards.

The mall name (eg "Green Mall") has been demoted to a tiny footnote in the bottom corner of the board, always in black on orange.

I've tolerated the inane tweeness of the Intu brand (particularly its grating attempt at an informal tone of voice) but this is just really terrible design putting bland corporate consistency before helpful function.
Alexia
Posts: 3005
Joined: Sat 01 Oct, 2005 17.50

Jonny wrote: Fri 09 Feb, 2018 15.49 I've tolerated the inane tweeness of the Intu brand (particularly its grating attempt at an informal tone of voice) but this is just really terrible design putting bland corporate consistency before helpful function.
Not just Intu doing this in my experience. A lot of corporations - most notably the railway - are very insistent on their corporate style, however flowery and "chic", being first and foremost the priority over any semblance of usefulness. I hope West Midlands Railway dispose of London Midland's wafer-thin white-on-black station signage sooner rather than later.
Please Respond