• Project

  • Region

  • Industry

Prairie Fire: Kansas City Style Joint has Woken Up in London

Prairie Fire: Kansas City Style Joint has Woken Up in London

Branding agency White Bear Studio created Prairie Fire’s new brand identity to transport the grilled and griddled art of Kansas City BBQ around the world.
White Bear Studio Shares a bit on their brand identity for newly rebranded Prairie Fire and the importance of futureproofing your branding and strategy from the get-go.

Prairie Fire’s brand world needed to be unified and able to be rolled-out across the restaurant interiors, packaging and merchandise to ensure that every touch-point promoted their proposition. We set out to create a brand that fully embodied the newly defined brand values we developed: Gritty, American, Community and Quality. The visual language and copywriting emphasises BBQ cooking and simultaneously future proofs the Prairie Fire restaurant to eventually extend across other product lines. The logotype was handcrafted and inspired by moulded bent iron commonly used on a ranch.

Prairie Fire is open and proudly flying their flag bringing people together over great food. Even if for the time being that means bringing households together over a tasty takeaway.

CREDIT

  • Agency/Creative: White Bear Studio
  • Article Title: Prairie Fire: Kansas City Style Joint has Woken Up in London
  • Organisation/Entity: Agency, Published Commercial Design
  • Project Type: Identity
  • Agency/Creative Country: United Kingdom
  • Market Region: Global
  • Project Deliverables: Brand Creation, Brand Design, Brand Identity, Brand Strategy, Brand World, Branding, Graphic Design, Illustration, Tone of Voice
  • Industry: Food/Beverage
  • Keywords: food, resturant, food and beverage

FEEDBACK

Relevance: Solution/idea in relation to brand, product or service
Excellent
Vote
47
Good
Vote
7
Bad
Vote
10
Implementation: Attention, detailing and finishing of final solution
Excellent
Vote
48
Good
Vote
5
Bad
Vote
10
Presentation: Text, visualisation and quality of the presentation
Excellent
Vote
48
Good
Vote
4
Bad
Vote
11