Wed 21 Mar 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!

Live! - News

IC Rebrands (sic)

Jan 15 2003 11:36
Oliver Pell
Imperial College has launched its new brand. Wonderful.
The new sign outside the Sherfield building.

Imperial College today launched the new ?Imperial College London? brand with a special issue of ?Reporter? (it does have Imperial College London written in the corner, but the ?IC? has vanished) and the appearance of dodgy looking signs across campus (pictured).

The Imperial College London brand has been in development for nearly a year and has prompted a petition to save the comma. Today is the first time most members of college have seen the new brand, and the initial student view appears to be one of universal derision. ?Rubbish?, ?bent? and ?horrible? were the comments from the first three students asked by this correspondent. Sir Richard Sykes, Rector of Imperial College, writes in his Reporter article that ?an atmosphere of understanding and support amongst the internal community is vital? ? but initial impressions appear that this will not exactly be forthcoming from the student body.

?We now have the tools to communicate clearly and consistently, simplifying the day-to-day tasks of producing letters, presentations, adverts and so on,? writes Sir Richard. ?If we work together with a real desire to meet the challenge, we can expect great things.?

Email this Article | Share on Facebook | Print this Article

Discussion about “IC Rebrands (sic)”

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 15 2003 11:41

How much did they spend on this?

You could have had a competition among pre-schoolers and they'd have come up with a better brand!

Jan 15 2003 13:21

Look, on the bright side... at least the "London" bit is in a lighter shade so not given equal prominence with IC.

3. Seb   
Jan 15 2003 14:44

Mustafa, you are rationalising. Resist! Resist!

Jan 15 2003 19:42

What the hell is that?

Looks cheap.

Jan 15 2003 19:59

I generally believe that a lot of people in the world are making it a worse place than it should be by just thinking commercially, and the rector is especially guilty of this.

But this new brand thing can surely not be commercially/economically sound. It's just such rubbish.

IC4life suddenly sounds like a good thing...

6. Rob   
Jan 15 2003 21:10

Oh well, that's the new millenium. Everything is www-ified.

Am I the only one who thinks the main motivation behind the new logo has to be that it can be used as big frame (OK OK, big table cell for the web-design geeks) around the contents of a web page?

Either way, I liked the older one better. That had some style.

But, to be honest, WHO CARES? It's just a friggin logo. It's not like the UCL merger (which would have tarnished the academic quality & reputation of IC) or the top-up fees (which would have ruined the student intake) or even the new faculty system (which just shifts the IC emphasis far too much towards Biotech, the rector's passion, and away from Science & Technology).

There are enough things to dislike our rector for. This logo is not even worth mentioning on the list....

Jan 15 2003 21:51

I can now proudly say that UCL no longer has the worst logo of all the London colleges.

Jan 16 2003 16:18

All the people I've spoken with today think that the new logo / signs are terrible.

I also believe that the rebrand cost a small fortune - which should have been spent on better things (however I'm not experienced enough with IC to state what).

Jan 16 2003 16:18

Oh, I don't like the sign either.

(to quote someone - "it looks like someone printed it out of a computer")

Jan 16 2003 18:41

My first impression of the new signs has to be "that looks expensive"...

That?s not to say they look good (they don?t), or new, or sexy, or trendy, or even worth stealing. To be fair, they look pretty blank, plain and ordinary.

Whoever audits college should have a serious go at the management in my view. Whilst the signs may have been due for imminent replacement anyway, the new 'college identity' (logo to the rest of us) has most definitely put that cost through the stratosphere. But was rebranding really necessary?

Yes, I think is unfortunately the answer, after Sir Richard did his absolute best to make Imperial the possibly the least popular university in the UK with the debacle over 10K Fees. Should the student of tomorrow decide to pays his or her top-up-fees/graduate tax to come to IC, at least they will be able to see how their money is being spent, every time they see one of the shiny new signs... I wonder if they did consultation on the new brand before launching it? Or did Chris Towler just decide and then inform the rector?

I (claim to) edit Guildsheet by the way, would anybody wishing to write an article extolling the virtues of the new signage is welcome!

Jan 16 2003 18:43

Sorry, that last paragraph should read

"I (try to) edit Guildsheet by the way, would anybody wishing to write an article extolling the virtues of the new signage please send it to .net"


Jan 17 2003 13:13

All that white space on the signs just screams out to petty vandalists to do a bit of "art work", but then again that kind of stuff doesn't happen in South Ken.

Jan 17 2003 15:07

I Liked the comma, the crest and the deep blue colour - it all looked very smart. The new logo looks like it was done in Word, ICL is a defunct computer firm, sticky-backed plastic... This branding is absolutely horrible. I feel embarrassment everytime I walk in to Huxley now, not pride like I used too.

Jan 19 2003 12:37

Totally rubbish design.

First, the write background will become yellowish after a year or two. And our 'brand new' logo will look like a logo of some c*** company.

Second, The dark blue background incorporate with our old logo generates confidence for student and trust for outsider.

Lastly, f*** off and get a life Richard, you mess up our college!

Jan 19 2003 15:50

Intriguing... they may have re-branded the website, but the title bar on my browser proudly states - Imperial College London - IC website !

i think they may have rushed it a little bit, dont you?

17. Alexei   
Jan 19 2003 18:44

The above is the new logo of Imperial College. Oops, sorry, Richard!

Jan 19 2003 20:31

Umm, did I miss something or did we just get bought out by a supermarket chain and get labelled "EXTRA VALUE COLLEGE??"

Jan 19 2003 22:13

Extra value at just ?15,000 per annum! Bargain!

Jan 20 2003 09:32

Oh dear. The Rector of IC appears to be having a bad New Year. Not only is his new signage going down particularly badly with students and staff; not only did UCL not want to come and play, but now nasty Charles Clark and Tony Blair have taken away even more of his toys. A quote from the Telegraph this morning:

"Chancellors [sic] would have to apply to the regulator for permission to increase fees. This would be granted only to those presenting a strategy for improving access. Mr Clarke said the regulator would force some universities to "change their behaviour significantly".

Sir Richard Sykes, rector of Imperial College, London, said: "This is social engineering at its worst. It will bring chaos into the system. They are insisting we take socially deprived kids who have not been educated properly.""

I bet everybody is treading very quietly around Suite 5 this morning... :o)

21. me   
Jan 20 2003 12:38

Well, at least they left a space on the new logo for the crest....

22. NickD   
Jan 20 2003 14:27

If you want to know where it all came from, see

then try to guess what sort of fee this firm charges.

23. Sam   
Jan 20 2003 17:13

not to put too finer point on it, but looking at the source for that page:


Pa***s User-Agent string into useful info.

Source: Webmonkey Code Library


oh dear... fantastic consultants, but having to resort to Webmonkey code to design your webpages... how boring...

24. Sam   
Jan 20 2003 17:14


somebody fix the rude words filter...

as far as i am aware

p a r s e is not a swear word, but a*** is...

Jan 21 2003 23:02

It is a pretty controversial term...

Jan 22 2003 17:25

allo Piggy,

I was just monitoring the IC discussion and i totally agree with what you are saying. Branding is a very sensitive issue, i myself have been branding my image for years. Please post more messages so we can find out more about your ideas.

Jan 23 2003 13:01

I want to know if Mr Tanaka knows yet.......

Jan 30 2003 01:14

Look at City University's logo... I never noticed it before.

29. chris   
Apr 07 2003 11:48

BBC News:

"Imperial College, London"

Apr 08 2003 14:44

The City logo was shown on a previous article

Further on from that, King's College Department of Chemistry is closing - they are honouring this year's application and then that's it! Quite shocking, really. I wonder where all these staff will go??? hmmm

Apr 08 2003 15:04

King's Electrical & Electronic Engineering department wasn't closed but 'downsized' last year (after a UL review led by the Heads of EEE at IC and UCL). Most of the research groups were closed with expertise focussed on a couple of areas (with 'outsiders' from IC and UCL brought in to lead the new leaner department).

Consolidation afoot?

BTW I'm guessing most of the good chemists at King's will go to QM (with a few being poached by IC or UCL) which is presumably the only reasoned why Rob mentioned it.

32. Stirer   
Apr 08 2003 17:51

What about the Chemicals?

Apr 09 2003 11:55

It all really depends on whether the Chemistry dept at QM can secure the whole of the new building for Chemistry and materials chemistry research/teaching and disuade less glamorous departments (such as faming artists) from prancing around.

I'm sure IC will want to get one or two from King's and with the grey area over space at QM, IC should move now to have first pickings.

I suppose this all explains why King's failed to organise ASPIC* last year.

*for the interested parties, ASPIC is the Annual Symposium of Postgraduate Inorganic Chemistry and involved the "big four" chemistry departments in the University (IC, QM, UC, KC) and has been hosted by: 2000 IC, 2001 QM, 2002 n/a (King's), 2003 UCL.... but will it go ahead?

It was established by a group of academics, one from each College - IC's organiser being Dr Brent Young (of "was it Bill or was it Ben" fame for those readers who remember Brent's mechanistics lectures!) and involved a 3/4re day of presentations, posters and symposia followed by a "big session" in a local establishment!

...Cuz we all knew that it was the weed, anyway... :P

Closed This discussion is closed.

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


See Also

Live! Poll

How frequently would you like to see a CGCU magazine being published