It’s official: The logo for the London 2012 Olympic Games is hideously ugly


Yesterday, the organizers of the London 2012 Olympic Games unveiled their official logo, and it's officially hideous. They paid £400,000 for that? As one of my friends put it, it looks like a bunch of old people tried to imagine something that would appeal to young people. Unfortunately, they forgot that today's young people don't live in the 1980's.

Comments (55)
  1. Josh says:

    The video looks and sounds like one of those cheap 80’s cartoons where a rogue computer virus escapes into the real world.

  2. Miguel Correia says:

    yyuuuucccckkkk!!!

  3. Neal says:

    You’re missing the whole point of the logo.  The IOC has finally tired of having to sue everyone in existance for using the Olympic logos so they’ve come up with one so hideously ugly that no one wants to use it.

  4. Yikes says:

    Here I thought Americans were the only ones to spent rediculous fees on fugly artwork.  They need to stop payment on that check.  

  5. Dean Harding says:

    The bit containing the rings looks like a stylized map of Australia (minus Tasmania, but nobody can blame them for that :p)

    I’m not sure I "understand" the symbolism in it though. Do the various bit mean something or is it just random shapes?

  6. Meesa says:

    Maybe it’s supposed to be retro?

  7. Mendelt Siebenga says:

    The eighties called; they want their logo back.

  8. joe says:

    wait… what?

    what’s the logo? That hideous mess of hot pink blocks? are you serious?

  9. Igor says:

    I am at a loss why you Americans find it so ugly? Is it because you lose in every olympics discipline each time or what?

    Seriously, that logo is cool and you are all bunch of nerds if you expected flashy shiny oblong shapes which everyone and their grandma can put on their website nowadays.

  10. MT says:

    Is this a joke? My 8 year old nephew can do better!!!!

  11. Brent says:

    Well, I’m British and I hate it too, so it’s not just the Americans. Infact, you’ll find most Britons dislike the logo too.

  12. Mike Dimmick says:

    Well..ya see…you’ve got to kind of squint and sorta turn your head…

    It’s supposed – I think – to be

    2  0

    1  2

    which you can kind of work out if you look at it for a while, but completely non-obvious.

  13. P says:

    At first glance it looks like it’s spelling out

    Z O

    R

    But I guess 2012 seems to make more sense ;)

  14. Syz says:

    http://main.london2012.com/en/news/archive/2007/June/2007-06-04-12-06.htm

    This page says "the new emblem is modern and will be dynamic, evolving in the years between now and 2012."

    That’s good. Maybe it will evolve into something that doesn’t look like crap.

  15. Talisha says:

    Hurt my eyes so much I couldn’t go past the homepage.

  16. Jon says:

    http://reddit.com/info/1vt4a/comments

    Some have commented that the logo looks somewhat.. um.. racy?

  17. Cody says:

    [That’s good. Maybe it will evolve into something that doesn’t look like crap.]

    They must’ve just set the bar low to begin with.

  18. Mikkin says:

    I am definitely in the wrong line of work if someone can earn £400,000 making poop.

  19. James Kew says:

    <i>Do the various bit mean something or is it just random shapes?</i>

    Maybe. The "2" could be seen as a very stylized outline of Great Britain; at a further stretch, the "0" a very stylized outline of Greater London.

    Still fugly though.

  20. TheQuux says:

    No forking way. Ermmmm…. no CreateProcess’ing way!

  21. Paul says:

    Us Americans haven’t done much better in the past…. remember Izzy? The Whatizit?

    http://www.izzypins.com/history.php

  22. Londoner says:

    Most Londoners I know hate the logo AND the idea that the Olympics are coming here – since we’re the ones who have to pay for it.

    We’d never had voted for the Olympics to come here if we’d had a choice.

  23. victor says:

    > Us Americans haven’t done much better in >>the past…. remember Izzy? The Whatizit?

    >http://www.izzypins.com/history.php

    From there: "ACOG excluded Izzy from the Opening Ceremony and barred him from appearing at venues while games were in progress. The reason: Izzy’s presence created such a frenzy of excitement, it would detract from the solemn traditional ceremony or create a side show that would draw the attention of spectators away from the Games."

    They are kidding, right? I always thought they came to their senses at the end and they realized how ugly and nonsense that thing was. (I was 12 at that time and I never understood it. First time now I see it means to be something from torch world… :-S)

  24. mccoyn says:

    Raymond can you help me debug this problem I’m having?  I go to this one particular web page and one of the pins on my monitor goes out, I think its the green.  Strange, because when I leave the page everything starts working fine.

  25. AC says:

    It obviously cost £400,000 because the artists had to spend ridiculous amounts of licensing fees for MS Paint. You couldn’t have possibly designed that logo with anything else

  26. Mervin Bickerdyke says:

    And it triggers epileptic fits. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/6724245.stm

    (BBC says so)

  27. James says:

    "It obviously cost £400,000 because the artists had to spend ridiculous amounts of licensing fees for MS Paint. You couldn’t have possibly designed that logo with anything else"

    Actually, the root of the problem is that the developers misunderstood the brief: rather than ‘design A logo’, they thought they had to design something USING Logo, the programming language…

  28. John says:

    It could be worse … one would imagine.

    Maybe the next logo will feature happy-slaping.

  29. Rick C says:

    Igor, would that be the 2006 Winter Olympics where the US came in 2nd with 3 total medals more than Russia, or the 2002 Winter Olympics where the US came in second in total medal count, *21* medals ahead of Russia?  Perhaps you meant the 2004 Summer games, where the US came in first, beating the Chinese by almost 40 medals?  (I didn’t want to sound like I was beating up on Russia, so I switched countries.  Russia came in first in the bronze count that year.)  How about the 2000 Summer games, where we took first place in gold, bronze, and total medal count?

    Oh, wait, your post was sarcasm.  Never mind.

  30. Merus says:

    It looks like they tried to force the British flag into the logo somewhere and failed. (This is more obvious when the logo’s red, though apparently it changes colour for no good reason.)

    Also, loving the British people complaining about hosting the Games. What happens is everything mysteriously starts working optimally for two weeks and people put on their best face for the tourists, although perhaps in Britain their best face is to not frown so visibly.

  31. Leo Davidson says:

    Igor’s post is the first positive comment about the logo I have encountered anywhere except for those officially attached to the logo. I must have read through hundreds of people’s comments now and everybody, except Igor, hates the logo and wonders what the designers were smoking.

    Based on the amount of negative feedback I would be very surprised if the logo lasts until 2012.

    (Once you notice the Lisa Simpson thing, though, it is at least amusing to look at. :-))

    Leo (Londoner)

  32. I don’t know if I laugh, puke, or puke while I laugh. Eew.

  33. Andy C says:

    "And it triggers epileptic fits.

    (BBC says so)"

    Interestingly BBC News showed the logo (in full on animated-gif-esque, headache inducing, flickering colour vision) to illustrate the story this morning. Which seemed somewhat inadvisable.

    I give it about a week.

  34. I’m from the UK and frankly I’m really ashamed of our totally crap logo. Spot on Raymond!

    There’s a big furore about it over here, check out a poll on the bbc news website –

    http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/olympics_2012/6718243.stm?dynamic_vote=ON#vote_olympic_logo

    72.3% gave it the lowest score out of 4 categories which is pretty damn rare for a web poll (!!)

    £400k for that. I mean for God’s sake, a 3-year-old could do better.

    The dome, the millennium bridge, now this… what next?!

    Ack give me a green card someone!

  35. The logo is supposed to look like ‘2012’ ina  kinda funky, blocky way.

    It fails at every level.

    I live in London (well until the end of the month when I move to Kent) and the Olympic village is just 3 miles down the road. It’s going to be a massive cost overrun for absolutely no benefit to  Joe Public.

  36. The artist says:

    give me a green card someone!

    If you give me 400K, I will.

  37. Will Dieterich says:

    " puke, or puke while I laugh"

    Just make sure it is not pink or they will get you for copyright violation.

  38. MD says:

    England already won a 2012 Olympic gold medal: Stupid Logo Category :)

    -MD

  39. Igor says:

    Logo clearly resembles 2012 and it also looks like some running legs. As a concept it is ok.

    If you want to give some constructive criticism though, then I would say:

    1. Color is out of gamut for printing
    2. Color is not web safe

    So instead of #df0094, they should have used #db1c8e (safe for printing), #cc0099 (safe for web), or #cc3399 (safe both for printing and for web).

    All those saying "my little kid would do it better" should apply their kids for some serious contest and if they win something send them to art school and then found a logo designing company and start earning big bucks instead of wasting time on this blog.

  40. Looks like it was designed by Led Zeppelin. Four symbols.

    PMP

  41. [ICR] says:

    "Interestingly BBC News showed the logo (in full on animated-gif-esque, headache inducing, flickering colour vision) to illustrate the story this morning. Which seemed somewhat inadvisable."

    FTFA "This concerns a short piece of animation which we used as part of the logo launch event and not the actual logo."

  42. Mr Cranky says:

    That should be “1980s”, and “’80s”.  Apostrophes are for contractions and possessives.  

    [When I learned punctuation, I was taught to use an apostrophe when referring to decades. But then again, I was also taught to use an apostrophe when spelling the holiday that comes at the end of October. -Raymond]
  43. Mr Cranky again says:

    It’s pretty sad when an idiot corporation blows millions on idiotic "brand" creation.  For a government enterprise, I reckon it’s pretty much the usual graft.

    For a $100 prize, you could have a contest, and have plenty of good ideas to choose from.

  44. Mr Cranky responds says:

    True, Hallowe’en is a contraction.  Used to be anyway.  

    I’m too old to remember much of what I was taught, but I’m pretty sure some of it wasn’t 100% accurate.

    I should also admit, in the spirit of fairness, that there is rarely 100% consensus on English grammar issues.  As I presume you’re aware.

  45. nobody says:

    Worst. Logo. EVER.

  46. Londoner says:

    "Also, loving the British people complaining about hosting the Games. What happens is everything mysteriously starts working optimally for two weeks and people put on their best face for the tourists, although perhaps in Britain their best face is to not frown so visibly."

    Actually, all us Brits will go on holiday for the period so when the terrorists attack we’ll be safe – and on our return all the monstrous carbuncles of Olympic buildings will have been flattened. We might smile at that, you never know…

  47. Igor says:

    "For a $100 prize, you could have a contest, and have plenty of good ideas to choose from."

    And there would still be a bunch of loud obnoxious idiots who wouldn’t like what was chosen. Get over it, it’s not that important anyway. Tragedy is that children die from hunger, disease and molestation in Africa so the money could have been put to much better use.

  48. mr.dott says:

    Look-a-here:

    http://kuteev.livejournal.com/601811.html?view=11960787#t11960787

    xa-xa!

    Russian rulz! yobanavrot!

  49. Poor thing, it’s injured!

  50. David Pritchard says:

    Igor, you must be on the same drugs as the consultants. It’s absolutely dire.

    It’s a typical case of everyone being so terrified of taking responsibility that no-one is prepared to say "Look, it’s trash. Start again", and also, I imagine, a case of too many cooks. They tried to cram so much diversity, political correctness, brand marketing, youth, energy and dynamism into the thing that they forgot the final, unwritten rule: "must not be rubbish".

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content