sorry

Architecture, maybe

but not architecture, and not the sh*t on that billboard.

wonder if they are hiring...

Even the muffler below is laughing at it.

i bet that building is steel stud and dryvit. 'forever...'

I'll take the billboard over the awful AIA radio ads I've heard.

lb's right. the muffler is a way better sign.

we've stooped to advertising on billboards???

Unpredictablity can be just as forever as developer driven mediocrity can be forever.

See that picture kids! Laugh now until you are drawing the bathroom elevations for it.

The snobbery of architects never ceases to amaze me.

The existence of the billboard itself doesn't really bother me but the painfully 90s graphics do!

The architecture is what it is....everyone has to make that kind of stuff sooner or later.

i wonder how many times a day people in that office have to suffer a principal saying "think outside the box."

Are'nt billboards Anti-Architecture?!?!?!?

MBH architects should be ashamed

hah. san francisco's finest - with the hotel intercontinental in the background.

hey spruce, can you please verify the golden mufflers tel. no. & address, ?
334 folsom st. 415 543 8899 ???

thanks in advance.

hey they have an office in newport beach .. may have to send them my resume

golden gate mufflers & brakes center
415-543-8899 998 Folsom (at 6th)
"drive the difference"

For those making a pilgrimage, compare and contrast the building on the billboard with the Plaza Hotel one block north on 6th.

what a waste of a billboard...

That ad has zero sex appeal.
Did you make that up spruce?

I look at it and I find it hard to believe someone really made that ad...

i am so happy to be unemployed

I did not make it up.
Though I agree that the irony of the contradiction between tag line and image does appear to be good to be true.

greenlander, you are absolutely right. There is nothing at all intriguing or mysterious about it. So bland.

And, I wonder if the diamond council people are going to go after them for copyright infringement - don't they own the word "forever"?

since when can architect's afford billboard advertising??

So why don't one of you bright young things post an example of what YOU would do with a billboard and show us some of your fabulous 'forever' work? It is so easy to pick someone apart. Holz.box, You may not think the project is fabulous but it is certainly not S##t. Can't you just say that you wish it was a better example on the billboard, (whatever "better" means to you....) It is so easy for all of you to sit on your high and mighty horse and pick apart the people who are busting their butts and risking their dollars to keep you employed every day.
Go write a book if you don't want to build buildings that the average person can actually afford and use. The billboard is meant to appeal to the average consumer of architecture, and it does. If it was meant to appeal to snotty architects it would have been in dwell magazine.

archie is pissed because he coined that sweet tag line.

What it is saying to me as an average consumer of architecture (whatever that is?) is that since my real estate that I own just lost 20% of its value I should go get me some architecture. yeah, that's it.

Hear, hear, Archie!

It's not meant to be intriguing or mysterious.
It's a very simple ad... what you see is what you get.

reminds me of this: a celebration of power point

'The billboard is meant to appeal to the average consumer of architecture, and it does."

Ye speaks of things that do not exist. Or at least, are undefined.

Oh Yeah, I guess I should have said consumer of architectural services, or CLIENT. You know what I mean by average consumer: vp of design for some business, corporate guy, developer, owner of a hotel chain, etc. Don't you think that firm is trying to reach their average client? It is an ad for the consumer (in this case client), not other architects.
I think it is an ad to drum up business, not to make us other architects feel good about ourselves and our legacies.

CLIENT is ambiguous. Are all clients vp's of design for some business, corporate guys, developers, or owner's of hotel chains? That firm is indeed trying to reach out their client base which can uphold their bottom line, maybe. So what does the quality of that ad say about that firm's position on its clients, its context and ultimately itself? That ad says 'I am asking for money without asking for money.' That ad doesn't make me feel bad about myself - just them, slightly.

It is to drum up business. More mediocrity for more mediocrity. That's fine, just don't call it good/great architecture (mediocre architecture).

Of course "client" is ambiguous!! So is consumer, but companies still put up billboards to attract consumers.

I think the building they chose and the words they used are probably pretty effective for their target market which looks to be corporate, large project clients. It says that an investment in a building is a good one, perhaps better than in stocks- a building will be there, and can be lived in or worked in, even if its value on paper goes down, unlike stocks. So maybe it will get someone to take that project on the back burner off of hold.

At least they are doing something about a slow economy. It takes guts to spend money to advertise in a down market. Other architects in town should thank them for taking a pro-architect stance. That's more than the AIA has done lately.

I noticed yesterday, as I have many times in recent years, the proliferation of printed plasticized canvas "signs" being used these days, at strip malls and storefronts, even draped over a more permanent sign on a post sign streetside or tied to the side of an office building. These signs are incredibly cheap and FAST to get, so I can understand (on some level) their popularity. But I have to wonder: If a business won't even invest in a long-term sign for themselves, how likely are they to see the value of building an edifice to their status and success?

Also: content and marketing message aside, that billboard is a sterling example of why architects should not do graphic design. I highly doubt it was done by a professional graphics firm. It's got recent grad using Photoshop and approved by a committee written all over it.

Cross posted with Archie, so I'll add that even in the face of an ugly billboard I totally agree with her(right?) last paragraph. The sentiment of the billboard is one I think most of us can support, even if we don't like this specific billboard.

But that isn't a 'pro-architect' billboard - its a pro MBH billboard with a cheesy tagline and droll graphics. Times like these are the times to shine and impress, not dump all the effort. Do you think that office lacks anyone with enough graphic skill to present a marketing image with some awareness of the world around it outside the bottom line? Because times are uncertain we should stop being critical because we might not say nice things?

LB - I've noticed a lot of those cheap canvas signs too. Usually they are on marginal businesses that probably have short term leases at less than desireable strip malls, etc. If you are Brand X Pizza Delivery Service why dump good $$$ into a permanent sign when the Dominos and Papa John's of this world will probably put you out of business within a year?

That said I'm no fan of the popular sign style of the day...backlit translucent acrylic. Almost would prefer the canvas. At least it's easy to take down.

why not use a classical example of architecture not something that was designed and built within the last 5 years and already looks dated?

don't confuse your developer driven speculative architecture as being FOREVER. this billboard is false advertising. we are all used to this kind of work. shit most of us are doing it every day and smiling while we are bending over just to get a paycheck so we can go out and buy some cool frames and an iphone. you got to act as though you think the work you do is "architecture" that serves the client. you've got to tow that line and be a company man and act that this work you do is good for something. so its good for the client. yeah whateva otherwise, you'd probably defenstrate yourself at your next site visit. the architect's intent? suicide of course.

It has a base and a cornice. What else could you ask for? Some Corinthian columns?

Maybe they should have used the pyramids... but I guess they didn't design those... oh and wait they're not really buildings.

So what are the characteristics of an architecture worth designing, building and advertising?

I'd work there.....
http://www.mbharch.com/careers/benefits.htm

sometimes gettin paid is better than doing (A)rchitecture...

Touche', Croupier.

Of course, you'd have to endure the smug derision of some of your Archinect fellows who consider anything the public might like far, far beneath them. Oh, the shame!

yeah well Like PJ used to say "I'm a whore".
I regularly do things that are beneath me in order to eat and keep the repo man away. I guess I'm just not too ashamed to admit it . Sometimes I think architectural criticism is just a cover for insecurity.

Man, MBH sounds like it treats its employees a hell of a lot nicer then Eisenman and Holl do.

Where do I sign up to design EIFS covered developer schlock and get paid like a professional instead of a wage slave?

For the record, the sign is pretty lame, but at least they're gettin' the word out!

of their work isn't too bad

Apurimac, Peter actually is great to work for. I wish we can all get rid of the sterotype that all greats are pain to work for. All except Zaha that is..