View more on these topics

FCA defends spending over £60k on new logo

FCA logo glass 3 620x430

The FCA has defended its decision to spend more than £60,000 upgrading its logo.

The regulator employed advertising consultants Saatchi and Saatchi to redesign its branding last year, spending a total of £66,000.

Money Marketing sister title Mortgage Strategy revealed earlier this year through a Freedom of Information request that the FCA paid Saatchi and Saatchi £57,600 to audit its brand and design the new logo.

The regulator spent the remaining money on areas such as trademarking the logo and buying rights to use the font.

Speaking at the regulator’s annual public meeting in London today, FCA acting chief operating officer Nausicaa Delfas said: “We have indeed changed the logo. This was because it was necessary to do this. It was difficult for visually impaired people to recognise the FCA logo as it was.

“This is important because we are preparing to launch a consumer campaign on the payment protection insurance deadline and other communications to consumers.

“We did very thorough testing to see what would be best recognised.”

Recommended

Happy while you work

Well we’ve had scorching weather (yes even up here in Scotland!) and now the Euros 2016 are on – you can’t blame people for wishing life was just one big holiday.  With all these distractions it sometimes feels like work just gets in the way of having a good time! But sunny day skivers are […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 19 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Light blue touch paper and step back.

  2. what a bunch or arrogant idiots the FCA is. Not only do we have to justify every penny we charge a client but they can just spend our money with out any justification on rubbish and pay thenselves bonuses i look forward to the day i leave this industry after 25 years service so i dont have to pay these idiots any fees

  3. Try as you might Nausicaa, there really is no defending this……

    And I feel its an insult to myself and my clients intelligence you are trying to fob this of as an aid to the visually impaired

    Chief operating officer….. I think I could justify you having to find alternative employment !

  4. Richard Wright 18th July 2017 at 1:44 pm

    Words fail me – they can basicslly do what they like and are never accountable.

  5. Robert Milligan 18th July 2017 at 1:48 pm

    Who ever signed this off, should 1) Be ashamed of themselves 2) Put the money back 3) Be sacked This is a complete waste of money and time, I wonder how much was spent of biscuits for the consultation meetings and in fact how many meetings were held in its consideration!!!!

  6. Robert Milligan 18th July 2017 at 1:51 pm

    O I forgot, they could have made better use of the money by making a donation to St Dunstan Hospital for the Armed Forces visually impaired I know I do

  7. About the same as Andrew Baileys bonus. Neither were good value.

  8. Just showed the e-mail to a Brand Company in our offices
    Their reaction “Bloody hell it true London is paved with gold !!”

  9. “Bloody hell it true London is paved with gold !!”

    Our Gold useless bunch of bonus and logo hangers on.

  10. “It was difficult for visually impaired people to recognise the FCA logo as it was.” All Saatchi and Saatchi did is change the font and swap the colours around – in doing so removing the subtle “spotlight” formed by the white diagonal band surrounding the “C” which was the best thing about the logo. (It is now a maroon band on a white background, which is completely meaningless.) How does that help people who don’t know what either logo looks like because they’re blind? Patronising nonsense.

  11. Ha Ha! You really couldn’t make it up. No thoughts of using a small entrepreneurial company then?
    Two senior FCA members of staff, funded by us and on a total of £580,000 with bonuses of £110,000. What is their total package worth I wonder, with Life & CI protection, IP, PMI and Pension Contribution?

  12. Of course they defend the decision. It will snow in hell before the Regulator will ever admit it is wrong on something.

    I’m surprised that the head banana doesn’t wear a white cassock and a white skull cap. He too is infallible – like the bloke in Rome.

  13. OPM … other people’s money!!… and they are concerned about how and what we charge? Talk about leading by example!!!

  14. Austerity? What austerity?We have OPM to spend!!

  15. It doesn’t even look right. The spacing is off.

  16. Can I have the reprinting job please.

  17. I’m sure it was important to use such an expensive marketing firm to do this odd exercise, as well as being OPM it’s JFTBs

  18. Julian Stevens 19th July 2017 at 3:27 pm

    It would be (mildly) interesting to know what research was commissioned by the FCA to establish just how many visually impaired people actually give a toss about the FCA or its logo or even why the FCA felt it might be an issue.

    Did it receive tons of phone calls, e-mails or sacks full of letters from people saying: I’m visually impaired and I struggle to recognise your logo. You really must do something about it.

    I somehow doubt it.

  19. Julian Stevens 25th July 2017 at 1:43 pm

    Nausicaa Delfas’ statement that a rehash of the FCA’s logo needed to be done hardly constitutes a defence of why they spent £60,000 on it. Or am I missing something?

Leave a comment