backontrack
Established Member
A key microeconomic principle is this: in a monopolistically competitive market, firms will seek to differentiate their products from rivals' in order to achieve their economic objectives. One example of this is branding. The creation of a distinct corporate identity can be a great asset to a firm; it creates brand recognition, and that's nearly always better than being faceless or identikit.
Now, I'd contest the assertion that the Conservatives actually created monopolistic competition, as was John Major's intention (apparently), when British Rail was nationalised; however, the principles are the same. 1997 saw a proliferation of new companies on our rails, each with its own new face. 23 years later, nearly all of those firms have gone (with Chiltern, and what was once First Great Western, clinging grimly on); in their stead are new names like Avanti, with their own new methods and typefaces.
A livery isn't just a pretty colour scheme for trainspotters; while nostalgia is often a part of the overall picture (case in point: the 'retro' aesthetics popularised by GNER and, latterly, GWR and EMR), it's also about looking professional. Assured. To put it another way: every product has its packaging, and this becomes especially important when there are rivals to distinguish it from.
You can probably discern from my tone in some places that I'm not overly enthusiastic about the capitalisation of the railways, especially since those who know me on this forum also have an idea of my opposition towards privatisation. (Let's not go there.) Yes, backontrack hates capitalism - he's not a communist, but he's thoroughly sick of capitalism and climate destruction, and we all know it. So in that case...why is he blathering on about the importance of corporate identity? Surely he hates that, right? Is he just nostalgic for his early childhood in the comparatively happy-clappy 2000s, where flashy branding could sometimes seem novel to young eyes, rather than a target for cynicism and the subsequent rolling of said youthful eyes?
The answer is that I just can't help but be drawn in. It's all about image, and working out what appeals best to consumers - and that changes with the decades.
Yes, GNER are fondly remembered by enthusiasts because of their nostalgia-evoking crestplates, and acronymic name, and the fact that they operated through those great railway cathedrals of York and Darlington, while connecting two national capitals. However, the TOC have also made a larger imprint on the social conscience than most, (source: my dad remembers them), and that isn't purely due to their longevity; it's also because of their corporate identity.
Futura. It's absolutely timeless. GNER contrasted super-bold and ultra-light variants of the typeface in their logo, which they overlaid in gold over their dark blue trains. Their colour palette was simple, yet effective; the navy blue was a bit like a blue suit at a business meeting, confident and assured. The scarlet stripe that down the length of the trains was the cherry on top; creating a memorable combination of colours, implying motion and efficiency through its horizontal orientation; a burst of energetic almost-orange that perfectly contrasted the smart and buttoned-down navy. They stuck to primary colours, which really worked for them. The wider GNER corporate identity is the only 1997 one that hasn't dated - ironic considering how retro its trappings are - and you can still see its influence on our rails today.
So the GNER theme has maintained its appeal. There are stablemates, however, which already look dated. The original ScotRail looks a bit garish and late-nineties, Silverlink even more so, even down to the typeface used. Northern Rail, meanwhile, had a messy corporate identity, with several different liveries at once, while the paper timetables changed colour with every summer or winter update. The dominant hue associated with the firm was a felt-tip purple, which its ill-conceived successors have maintained - along with the company's poor reputation. Perhaps a radical rebranding is in order, if a future franchisee can ever unpoison the chalice.
There have been wider trends and evolutions. Liveries tend to be less swishy now, and more subdued. Shiny, gradiented liveries, like Dynamic Lines and Barbie, have fallen to the wayside in favour of flatter ones - there's an obvious parallel here, as Apple was ditching Skeumorphism in favour of flat app icons at the same time. On our railways, this flattening has ultimately led to the adoption of more retro, simplistic identities. It's all part of a complex puzzle.
So is anyone else interested in that puzzle, too? The fonts and typefaces, the visual trends, the attempts to impress a cohesive image upon the passenger - it's all nerdy, but it interests me, in some way.
Now, I'd contest the assertion that the Conservatives actually created monopolistic competition, as was John Major's intention (apparently), when British Rail was nationalised; however, the principles are the same. 1997 saw a proliferation of new companies on our rails, each with its own new face. 23 years later, nearly all of those firms have gone (with Chiltern, and what was once First Great Western, clinging grimly on); in their stead are new names like Avanti, with their own new methods and typefaces.
A livery isn't just a pretty colour scheme for trainspotters; while nostalgia is often a part of the overall picture (case in point: the 'retro' aesthetics popularised by GNER and, latterly, GWR and EMR), it's also about looking professional. Assured. To put it another way: every product has its packaging, and this becomes especially important when there are rivals to distinguish it from.
You can probably discern from my tone in some places that I'm not overly enthusiastic about the capitalisation of the railways, especially since those who know me on this forum also have an idea of my opposition towards privatisation. (Let's not go there.) Yes, backontrack hates capitalism - he's not a communist, but he's thoroughly sick of capitalism and climate destruction, and we all know it. So in that case...why is he blathering on about the importance of corporate identity? Surely he hates that, right? Is he just nostalgic for his early childhood in the comparatively happy-clappy 2000s, where flashy branding could sometimes seem novel to young eyes, rather than a target for cynicism and the subsequent rolling of said youthful eyes?
The answer is that I just can't help but be drawn in. It's all about image, and working out what appeals best to consumers - and that changes with the decades.
Yes, GNER are fondly remembered by enthusiasts because of their nostalgia-evoking crestplates, and acronymic name, and the fact that they operated through those great railway cathedrals of York and Darlington, while connecting two national capitals. However, the TOC have also made a larger imprint on the social conscience than most, (source: my dad remembers them), and that isn't purely due to their longevity; it's also because of their corporate identity.
Futura. It's absolutely timeless. GNER contrasted super-bold and ultra-light variants of the typeface in their logo, which they overlaid in gold over their dark blue trains. Their colour palette was simple, yet effective; the navy blue was a bit like a blue suit at a business meeting, confident and assured. The scarlet stripe that down the length of the trains was the cherry on top; creating a memorable combination of colours, implying motion and efficiency through its horizontal orientation; a burst of energetic almost-orange that perfectly contrasted the smart and buttoned-down navy. They stuck to primary colours, which really worked for them. The wider GNER corporate identity is the only 1997 one that hasn't dated - ironic considering how retro its trappings are - and you can still see its influence on our rails today.
So the GNER theme has maintained its appeal. There are stablemates, however, which already look dated. The original ScotRail looks a bit garish and late-nineties, Silverlink even more so, even down to the typeface used. Northern Rail, meanwhile, had a messy corporate identity, with several different liveries at once, while the paper timetables changed colour with every summer or winter update. The dominant hue associated with the firm was a felt-tip purple, which its ill-conceived successors have maintained - along with the company's poor reputation. Perhaps a radical rebranding is in order, if a future franchisee can ever unpoison the chalice.
There have been wider trends and evolutions. Liveries tend to be less swishy now, and more subdued. Shiny, gradiented liveries, like Dynamic Lines and Barbie, have fallen to the wayside in favour of flatter ones - there's an obvious parallel here, as Apple was ditching Skeumorphism in favour of flat app icons at the same time. On our railways, this flattening has ultimately led to the adoption of more retro, simplistic identities. It's all part of a complex puzzle.
So is anyone else interested in that puzzle, too? The fonts and typefaces, the visual trends, the attempts to impress a cohesive image upon the passenger - it's all nerdy, but it interests me, in some way.
Last edited: