Live!
Tue 20 Feb 2018
- The award-winning student news website of Imperial College

Know something you shouldn't? Tell us, using our quick, 100% anonymous tip-off form!

Discussion

Imperial Debranding?

The comments below are unmoderated submissions by Live! readers. The Editor accepts no liability for their content, nor for any offence caused by them. Any complaints should be directed to the Editor.
Jan 21 2003 15:10
 

In a year or so's time we may be wondering what all this fuss is about...

http://live.cgcu.net/news/?id=603

Jan 21 2003 15:51
 

but did sen tell the rector where to go?

2. Seb   
Jan 21 2003 16:20
 

The Pro-rector for student affairs tell his boss where to go? Surely not.

Jan 21 2003 18:05
 

What did he really expect? The signs outside Huxley and Beit started detaching themselves within a few hours of going up.

That's what you get for using cheap plastic signs with a naff logo.

Jan 21 2003 18:22
 

Just which students does the rector think Sen can control? Or is Sir Richard accusing our sabbaticals and council members of vandalism?

5. Rob   
Jan 21 2003 23:12
 

Whilst the new signs look naff... torn up signs give an even worse image. That's just my opinion.

Jan 21 2003 23:16
 

I think its hillarious! You've just got to laugh...;-)

How about something constructive though - print out A4 full colour labels of the crest and go around sticking them in the big white spaces on the new signs...

Jan 21 2003 23:16
 

Damaging College property is not only wrong but counter productive.

Having said that, I'm not entirely sure how the Union can be expected to stop anyone from doing it - unless the implication is that a Union Officer or staff member is one of those responsible.

Jan 21 2003 23:38
 

He's also made the assumption that:

a) the signs are being pulled off and not detaching themselves (which some of them are).

b) that any which ARE being pulled off are being removed by students and not:

* disgruntled members of staff

* drunken/malicious members of the public

The rebranding is unpopular amongst staff and students - and peeling signs are prime targets for drunken antics of the general public or students from other colleges, not just our own.

Even if the rebranding was universally applauded, the cheap sticky signs would come off all by themselves.

It's a complete farce - they should've spent less money on consultants (most 10 year olds could come up with a better logo) and more on proper signs.

Of course, using the rebranding money to GIVE AWAY pens, ties, shirts etc with the "proper" branding on would probably have been a much better way to spread the brand. If you have a community which is proud to be associated with the college they'll wear/carry advertising material quite happily - as long as it's free/cheap.

9. Bob   
Jan 22 2003 00:05
 

College is facing a loss of ?4.3 this year. They spent ?4.8m on rebranding. They have no spare money so the union is getting less money. The union spend more money on random stuff, so clubs and societies lose out, and face budget cuts of 25%.

No rebranding means a surplus would have been created by college! Surely Sir Richard and his Suite 5 GSK mafia could have worked that out!

Jan 22 2003 11:08
 

A question for the floor, do the college intend to produce permanent signs or are they quite happy to leave stickers littered all over the campus?

11. tom t   
Jan 22 2003 12:27
 

Hi

Question for Bob, who I won't email cos I expect the email given won't work:

Where did you get the ?4.8m figure from? and is it really true?! If so, I simply cannot believe that someone sanctioned spending SOOOOO much on wasting old notepaper, and buying new. The new postgraduate prospectus, which arrived monday, are 'wrongly branded'. Will all three pallets of these now be pulped? How much longer will this lunacy prevail? AAARRRRGGGGHHHHH 4.8m would buy approx. 15 PhD students for three years plus associated research costs...

such irresponsible wastes of cash should surely be accounted for at top level, no?

tom

Jan 22 2003 17:00
 

Pity, I was looking forward to the new issue swipe cards with the new logo on and new writing (which probably would read "Imperial College London" <new line> "A division of Sykes Industries")

Has anyone actually noted that the swipe cards display the IC crest? Surely the new ones would have had to have been issued sooner or later - after all the crest is only for historical usage remember.

(this post might not make full sense, do one's best)

13. ...   
Jan 22 2003 17:20
 

The security office are actually issuing new swipe cards with the new logo on them now. In fact they have done since the rebranding exercise started.

But I figure they're not bothering to get everyone to change their old swipecards to the new ones. Why? - Laziness? Frugality? Who knows?

Jan 22 2003 18:45
 

Well, UG1 Maths no nothing of this changing.

15. Bob   
Jan 22 2003 21:01
 

My e-mail does actually work.. it is simply a redirect.

Anyway the figures are from a reliable socurce i cannot disclose.

16. Dan L   
Jan 22 2003 21:02
 

From what I heard college were going to make a surplus this year.. before we decided to rebrand

can anyone confirm this?

Jan 22 2003 23:56
 

Dan, if you want an informed answer (as opposed to someone just ranting on some heresay) you could do worse than to .

18. Jon   
Jan 23 2003 10:46
 

"Why bother?"

Surely out esteemed union could have told Sir Sykes its was a s*** idea? I vote we get marker pens and write "Science, Technology and Medicine" on all the new signs...

19. tom t   
Jan 23 2003 11:53
 

Mustafa, rodney is not the finance director - he is 'director of policy and planning'.

Apparently chris towler is the chap who gives out the answers re: cost of rebranding and surpluses...

tata

Jan 23 2003 15:54
 

Sorry, I confused him with Tony Cannon (who is the Finance Director). But despite Rodney's job title, he is very much a money sort of person.

21. Dan L   
Jan 23 2003 17:45
 

I have been in contact with Chris Towler, and he has given me a large amount of information concerning the rebranding costs.

Once I have checked a few items, I will be able to publish the true costs to everyone....

22. Atul   
Jan 23 2003 21:45
 

Has anyone actually met someone who likes this rebranded image?

23. Sam   
Jan 23 2003 22:18
 

I've met Sykes a couple of times, and i guess he likes it...

does that count?

24. Tank   
Feb 03 2003 12:24
 

Hi All,

As part of a coursework project we are investigating people's views on the current (and not so current) events in "the College".

As such we need people to complete our questionnaire which is online at www.cgcu.net/eesoc.quest.htm The form should only take you a few minutes to complete and would help us all immensely.

Cheers

Tank

Feb 03 2003 13:46
 

Further to that, the correct address is:

http://www.cgcu.net/eesoc/quest.htm

Closed This discussion is closed.

Please contact the Live! Editor if you would like this discussion topic re-opened.

 
Live!
Live!