Visit Denver, But Please Ignore That Horrific Logo

/ Comments (15)

There are industries that never seem to “get” good advertising. Used car dealers are one. Dentists are on the list. Plumbers. But topping the list every, single time – especially when you study the marketing budget they’ve got compared to all those other industries combined – is government.

To the long-running list of government atrocities, we now add the new mark for the Denver Metro Convention and Visitors Bureau. Following a trend that’s spread through states across the nation of renaming this division of government, Denver’s first step was to pare down the Denver Metro Convention and Visitors Bureau moniker to, simply, “Visit Denver (The Convention & Visitors Bureau).” The second half (in parens) will be dropped as people get used to the new name. We’re okay with the name. It’s a clear call-to-action. Fine. Whatever.

But we do take issue with the accompanying logo. Where’s the finesse in this thing? It’s as if they attached a plate to the back of some big-booty mama, slapped some red paint on, had her slam that thang down onto a page of notebook paper and called it done. Anyone see Denver flipping them off in those buildings in the middle? That’s a no-no for us, as well – considering the message is to welcome visitors, not offend them.

Chalk it up to focus groups. Blame the clogged government marketing pipeline. Accuse the agency responsible. But don’t forget to shed a tear for this logo that’s out there in the world representing, for EVERYONE, the place we hold dear.


who’s the agency please?

Malenke|Barnhart did the site. Not sure if they did the mark.

One of those building silhouettes could at least have been the Wells Fargo building. That would’ve added a little more distinctiveness to the logo. Emphasis on “a little”. This looks a decent thumbnail sketch (look at the skyline from the west side of the Museum of Nature and Science). Only it never evolved past that point.

At least Denver has 4 bars of cell phone coverage!

Maybe I don’t get it because I’m a writer, not a designer, but just what exactly makes a good logo? Can the Egotist point out something it likes? I normally understand why bad logos are bad (like London 2012) but I feel like I’m missing something on this one.

This logo is the visual equivalent of a complete rectal examination

Hmm, I actually really like the iconic simplicity of this mark. Unique? Not really. But it’s clean and would work well in any application. I can see a lot of potential with it. Especially in animation. At least it isn’t web 2.0 glossy style like every other new identity these days. Now, the typeface of Denver is a pretty weak, but that’s about my only real argument against it. Just my 2 cents.

justin: a good logo should follow a couple of basic rules.

1) it should be simple.
2) it should be meaningful.
3) it should make you feel good looking at it (unless the meaning is that it doesn’t make you feel good).

i think some good examples are, Apple, this one for talk [ ] and this one for ag low [ ]

A good logo should also communicate and reinforce a concept.

Looks like a hand copping a feel on a jagged boob. Should be accompanied by the tagline, “Menver—We Like Roofies.”

Ha! Classic. Thanks Jonathon!

Yo john, you’re blowing the layout up. scale it down a few ummmkay?

Should have sent it to an out-of-state agency… when will Coloradans ever learn.

At least they didn’t use rainbows or try to use a lame watercolor look for the mountains…

Karsh and Hagan did the new brand. throw in the cash register building and some rainbow colors and you have the old Nuggets logo.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Link = <a href="">This is your text</a>
  • Image = <img src="http://imageurl.jpg" />
  • Bold = <strong>Your Text</strong>
  • Italic = <em>Your Text</em>
Rocket Fuel