Thank you for your submission. While I think your version is probably the most unique for the combination of the CG as part of the mark, we did post a comment on the homepage of our competition about not submitting any more marks that combine the CG. We feel it's redundant to repeat it given it's already in the name. I think the typeface is a bit too generic feeling. I would recommend reading through the comments on the homepage, our competition brief as well as the comments we've left for the currently shortlisted designs.
Thanks for all of the new concepts. (#238 #239 #240 #241 #242 #243 #244) I really like the feel of these logos, but I think they need something to tie them to our industry without being too literal as in #243. Otherwise they seem a bit too generic. I do love the clean lines modern feel though.
Thanks for the new entry #264. I like that you've given the mark a bit of depth. Certainly I think you're heading in the right direction, although I don't know if its quite there yet. I wish we had more time and you had entered some submissions earlier.
Thanks for #308. I think for the more abstract marks square and angular type shapes work better as there is more of a subtle connection to architecture. Round porthole shapes are not often seen in architecture. I like the subtle 3d treatment you were playing with as well.
Entry #362 ok, but does not really jump out at us. Entry #363 is pretty cool. It has an interesting feel Entry #334 is not really working for us either.