Tourism Australia unveils new $200,000 logo

Tourism Australia has unveiled a new logo, scrapping the existing version that has been around for eight years.

The new-look brand mark, devised by Interbrand – sister design studio to TA’s ad agency DDB – has been introduced “to stay relevant and reflect the organisation’s changing culture and identity,” according to the tourism body.

It cost $200,000 to develop.

The new logo sticks with the familiar kangaroo symbol, but in simpler form.

Richard Curtis, MD at Interbrand Sydney, explained: “There’s a lot about the existing logo that we wanted to keep. It has real vibrancy and a sense of movement. But some of the elements are unnecessarily complex and difficult to reproduce – like the sun’s glare on the kangaroo’s back, the kangaroo’s paws and ears.”

Curtis added that the current logo was too “childlike”, and did not reflect the “sophistication” of Tourism Australia’s brand positioning.

The new logo also sees the introduction of more colours.

Curtis explained: “The red, orange and yellow in the current logo represent the outback well, but do not reflect the full range of experiences consumers have while on holiday in Australia, hence the introduction of blue and green.”

The logo took around six months to develop.

Tourism Australia’s old logo

Andrew McEvoy, TA’s MD said in a press release: “Tourism brands the world over, from Australia to Argentina, are continually updating their visual identity. Even New York’s iconic ‘I [heart] NY’ logo was revamped for the city’s recent summer tourism campaign.”

“While it has powerful visual elements that are still relevant, the current logo itself is beginning to look out-of-step with the next phase of our There’s nothing like Australia campaign,” he said.

TA launched the latest phase of its $250m There’s Nothing Like Australia campaign in June. A global review of TA’s advertising kicked off last month.


  1. Dwayne
    6 Dec 12
    3:16 pm

  2. A gay kangaroo? Very with the times.

  3. Donnie
    6 Dec 12
    3:26 pm

  4. Did the logo cost $200,000 or did the branding cost $200,000?

    Seems like a somewhat hyperbolic heading.

  5. ratsrepus
    6 Dec 12
    3:27 pm

  6. Very Sneaky Queensland influence there. The big Maroon Q sticks out like Kangaroo Butt!!

  7. ratsrepus
    6 Dec 12
    3:30 pm

  8. @ dwayne a one armed gay kangaroo nevertheless…

  9. Tony
    6 Dec 12
    3:33 pm

  10. Don’t mind the icon and colours. Not a fan of the font – has a tad too much deco in it for a contemporary brand and seems to sit uncomfortably with the icon.

  11. Gordon
    6 Dec 12
    3:47 pm

  12. mmm Classy

  13. Justin
    6 Dec 12
    4:09 pm

  14. It is just me, or did someone just take the old logo; illustrator, live trace, simplify. 200k

  15. derrick
    6 Dec 12
    4:18 pm

  16. did they just release the brand mark?

    where’s the roll out? new site etc?

  17. Mike
    6 Dec 12
    4:36 pm

  18. The new image is cleaner than the old one, but they think a 6-colour kangaroo is ‘sophisticated’??

    Reminds me of a Ken Done knock-off

  19. Leo, Tourism Australia
    6 Dec 12
    4:37 pm

  20. Hi Donnie – the cost included the design concept work, creation of artwork as well as developing guideline manuals for multiple logos – corporate, campaign (There’s nothing like Australia) and country (bearing in mind we have 12 international offices).

    Within this, there was the inevitable multiple layouts for different uses (horizontal, vertical, stacked) for 11 different languages..

    In total, Interbrand developed 223 variations of the logo.

  21. Steven
    6 Dec 12
    4:43 pm

  22. Ugh I hate this trend of sans-serification of every characterful brand out there!

    Simplify the kangaroo by all means but leave the typeface alone!

  23. a great brown land
    6 Dec 12
    4:43 pm

  24. f#@k me, genius!

    The bit about 200 GRAND for that “re-energising” I mean. Well done all.

  25. Leo, Tourism Australia
    6 Dec 12
    4:45 pm

  26. Hi Derrick – the new logo will be progressively rolled out, starting across Tourism Australia, including our network of 12 international offices, from December 17. The timing aligns with Tourism Australia moving into new corporate headquarters at 420 George Street in the Sydney CBD.

    Campaign artwork with the new logo will start to be used rolled from 1 January 2013, with the aim of having the new logo included in all campaign material globally by the end of April 2013.

  27. derrick
    6 Dec 12
    5:05 pm

  28. cheers leo

    ill hold off judgement till then.

    initial thoughts are that its certainly an improvement on the old one

  29. Donnie
    6 Dec 12
    5:11 pm

  30. So the logo did cost $200k? Shocking.

    Tourism Australia needs to shop around next time I think.

  31. The Wiggles
    6 Dec 12
    5:11 pm

  32. “The current logo was too ‘childlike'”? Bright colours – that’ll fix things..

  33. Peter Rush
    6 Dec 12
    5:24 pm

  34. A good logo can be read from a distance. This is so badly designed if you squint up it looks like an emaciated Woody Woodpecker poking out his tongue. The big shape of the roo just disintegrates. The old logo had class.

  35. The Grey Ghost
    6 Dec 12
    5:43 pm

  36. I would have done it for $2,000 (incl GST). But added a very cool creative twist – instead of a joey I would have had a koala propped in the pouch. That would have messed with the tourist’s heads big time. I am legend

  37. Sydneynudism
    6 Dec 12
    6:03 pm

  38. Some logos regularly change woolworths for instance and some remain the same, such as Ford. I suppose there is an argument for both.

  39. brian
    6 Dec 12
    9:08 pm

  40. i love it when companies spend a couple of hundred grand to change fonts

    that’ll increase the sales for sure

  41. JJ
    6 Dec 12
    10:00 pm

  42. At least the old logo gave you a feeling of something (stunning aussie sunset). This one is a fad and their commentary is contradictory. Great work if you can get it.

  43. wilson
    7 Dec 12
    1:37 am

  44. For $200k it must be a very good logo with lots of reasons to justify the price tag, otherwise the designer would be a con artist & the person who approved spending tax payers money would be sacked or accused to have taken a bribe. How much did Nike pay for their logo? Answer $2,000. Oh well, we’re now assured that there will be plenty of tourists coming to visit us & spend big bucks.

  45. Pome
    7 Dec 12
    7:48 am

  46. Very colonial

  47. fraser
    7 Dec 12
    8:02 am

  48. I don’t know whats more alarming, the 200k or the 6 months to develop.

    You got to love a brand guideline manual, an opportunity for an agency to fleece the client for something that is typically used by one brand nazi/manager, ignored by everyone else at the client and challenged by every creative who works on the account.

  49. Double Page Fred
    7 Dec 12
    9:15 am

  50. Not too sure what the guys on this thread get paid, but in the real world $200,000 really doesn’t equate to many experienced staffers.

  51. Real TV
    7 Dec 12
    9:17 am

  52. Is it just me or does it remind anyone of the 1980’s Ken Done version???

  53. Joe
    7 Dec 12
    9:22 am

  54. When did Telstra buy Tourism Australia ?

  55. JohnW
    7 Dec 12
    10:37 am

  56. Some people might think the $200,000 is too pricey but really these boys have been quite clever.

    Because the original kangaroo was one overall tone colour you knew immediately it was one roo. Now Interbrand have made the other ear blue with a darker blue leg it looks like two loping kangaroos. So really it was only $100K for each roo – a bargain for Tourism Australia. Profoundly confusing at first glance to the tourist but who cares, lots of jolly colours and gives Tourism Australia a warm wetsuit.

  57. bob is a rabbit
    7 Dec 12
    11:44 am

  58. Interbrand always designs with multiple colours…as in 9, not 2 or 3.

    Think the Telstra rebrand. Think the Medibank rebrand. Now they’ve rolled out the same design approach again.

    What’s that tell you? It’s either a fad, or they are onto a winner (with a very good sales team).

  59. Donnie
    7 Dec 12
    12:40 pm

  60. @Double Page Fred…how many experienced staffers do you think worked on this and for how long? I would wager; 1 CD, 1AD, 1 Designer and maybe someone with some strategy experience (I think I’m being very generous, remember this is one logo, not an entire brand). I’d guess they would have spent cumulatively 50-100 hours on the logo. Add in some meetings with suits, maybe 150 hours all up. $200k? Hah! $50k maybe.

  61. Just Sayin...
    7 Dec 12
    1:13 pm

  62. The CBA logo cost about that and that was quite some time back.

  63. Ted the Multi-Coloured Roo
    7 Dec 12
    1:34 pm

  64. There is a difference between “It cost $200,000 to develop” and “They charged $200,000 to develop”. And so far I haven’t signed the clearance form to use my image.

  65. A
    7 Dec 12
    1:49 pm

  66. So the website has not changed at all. 200k for a logo. Good gig if you can get it!

  67. Jen_O
    7 Dec 12
    2:17 pm

  68. Ken Done and the QANTAS logo made a baby!

  69. Nathan
    7 Dec 12
    2:50 pm

  70. I’d expect the general public to not fully understand what a re-branding actually involves and have a knee jerk reaction to the cost, but I would have thought the people who read Mumbrella should know better. Apparently not, given many of the above comments.

  71. Tim Riches
    7 Dec 12
    2:53 pm

  72. For mine, I think the colour approach while more representative is less distinctive, the overall personality is much more corporate and it’s a shame that the element of indigenous visual culture is gone from the mark itself.

  73. Donnie
    7 Dec 12
    2:58 pm

  74. @Nathan…it’s not a re-brand, it’s a new logo.

  75. Jack Bruce
    7 Dec 12
    3:01 pm

  76. hmm yeah….the old logo was at least on brand…what on earth have they done to the poor kanga….talk about confusing messages………..the tourists will all be asking to see the green and blue kanga…”.no no not that one you know..the blue one…like in the picture…”

  77. Belinda
    7 Dec 12
    5:01 pm

  78. $200K seems like a very reasonable price for a new brand rolled out across 223 applications. You need to take into account the months of strategy, hours of design time developing several different concept options and then numerous iterations of the 223 applications plus amends. When you break it down to a per item price, it’s actually only $2569 each. Considering all a brand agency has to sell is time, and they spent 6 months on it, it’s actually quite good value. It’s not just a matter of illustrating a logo and presto you’re done. It’s repositioning an entire brand. What you need to consider is the return on investment for Tourism Australia.

  79. One Punch Mickey
    7 Dec 12
    6:43 pm

  80. I’m astounded that so many Mumbrella readers would complain about the cost? Do we know what the brief was? The requirements? The quantity of concepts? The requested amends and new concepts? $200k would be eaten up quickly. And for a design where I presume the IP is assigned to the client to roll out for perpetuity worldwide… It’s a fair cost. I don’t particularly like the design, but hey they won the work so the client must like it. Not for me though. Maybe next time the client puts the logo on eLance for bidding we might all stop complaining?

  81. hannah
    8 Dec 12
    10:22 am

  82. i like it

  83. Nathan
    8 Dec 12
    12:37 pm

  84. @Donnie So Interbrand delivered a single Illustrator file with the pictured logo in it, and then took a cheque for $200,000? I think not.

  85. Nic Eldridge
    12 Dec 12
    10:22 am

  86. ITT People bitching and moaning because another agency charges more than them.

    How about a discussion on the merits of the logo?

    Does it sell Australia? Does it even need to?

    FWIW, I think the symbol is great but the type seems to be lacking something in that sterile, corporate way.

  87. JP
    13 Dec 12
    2:02 am

  88. Att. Leo/Tourism.

    Re the older brandmark.
    I think the original captured the feeling of late afternnon sun. One of those lazy warm sunny days we love so much. I also liked the way the sun was subltly wraped into the tail and the way the roo was looking slightly toward camera.

    Re the new brandmark
    very current and could date, also looks a little sterile. We should keep in mind that this is not designed for designers but for a global audience. Given the update. I’m not impressed by the shapes that have been taken from the older style and certainly think these should be a liitle more fluid. Yes its a different style, but I think some of the ‘detail thinking’ has been missed. This looks like its been designed by a mid-weight designer between other jobs. Sorry, but just because its a big job does not make it a good job.

  89. Al
    19 Dec 12
    2:23 am

  90. Just to be clear; I don’t know anything about design.
    I prefer the old logo, it has a more “Australian” feel.

  91. Philip
    19 Dec 12
    3:40 pm

  92. Looks like Tourism Australia have finally caught up the late 20th century. There’s nothing new or innovative here and we can all see what the roll-out with overlapping colours will look like. Done done done. Seeing this makes me like the old one more, just for not being another slick ‘contemporary looking’ (whatever that means) logo. As for the sans serif – I think that’s a real missed opportunity to be different.