Print Ad Image: 

It took me a little while to figure out that Mantri's new logo is the MD's signature.

I have always liked the Mantri logo (the old one). It is familiar, looks strong and somehow appropriate for a real estate company. It's biggest advantage in my view is the familiarity. So many buildings in the city carry that logo - and it is so recognisable now.

So why does a company choose to change its logo - such an important and core brand attrribute? Either because the old identity has become too old and boring, and not being able to relate to contemporary needs. Or because the brand has a new story to tell.

Neither of these reasons seem to fit in this case. More importantly, the signature as a logo looks weak. I cannot imagine it standing out on a building, which is critical to Mantri. It does not read easy, and is too much of a swiggle signature.

The thought of 'assurance' with the MD's seal is fine. But practically, does the unit lend itself well to the different applications of a logo? Does it, in itself, represent essential brand values? Time will tell.