From the BlogSubscribe Now
I guess you should…. if it’s good. There’s something to be said for accumulated brand equity…
So, is Gap’s new logo really that bad?
Well, the people at YourLogoMakesMeBarf.com thinks it makes them barf!
What do you guys think? Leave a comment below!
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Chris Reimer, Stanley and Arlene . Stanley and Arlene said: RT @RizzoTees: Should You Keep Your Logo Unchanged Over The Years [ plus a few links to Gap's awesome new logo ] http://t.co/h7D4Vut […]
Re: The Gap logo. No barf. Just nonplussed.
It doesn’t make me wanna barf. I just wanna know what’s going on inside that floating blue box. Betta be somethin HAWT!
Love the graphic, but it doesn’t really bother me that pepsi can’t stay put with one logo. I think it speaks to their brand promise. If pepsi wants to be the fresh, modern alternative to a historical brand, switching with regularity makes some sense … I’m still drinking coke, though.
i agree, i think it’s ok to update your logo every *several, several* years or so but also think it’s awesome that coca-cola was able to stay with the same icon forever. i like that too
i agree, it’s fine to update. coke’s enduring logo is frankly shocking to me. but hey, let’s not forget the New Coke crap they tried to pull on us
oh my god! it’s the worst…it looks like a graphic that would be on those templates to spice up a document you can create in Microsoft Word or Excel.
yikes! what are they thinking? 🙁
I found the following article interesting:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1662452/gap-thats-not-our-real-logo-its-a-crowdsourcing-project
The folks at Gap must have know all this would be coming. Did they want buzz and is this all part of the plan? I say yes. When was the last time any of us talked about or went to the Gap? I got my “i hat pants” shirt from rizzo and that is all I need anyway.
Honestly, was the “new Gap Logo” really the final logo? I say it is not. This is not how they would introduce a new logo…just by placing it on their website with no other public applications (I looked a little and I could not find any mention of other applications). No billboard in times square? Nothing else. My guess is they will come out and say they decided they liked what they had. Some will be pissed, others will say it was brilliant.
I found the following article interesting:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1662452/gap-thats-not-our-real-logo-its-a-crowdsourcing-project
The folks at Gap must have know all this would be coming. Did they want buzz and is this all part of the plan? I say yes. When was the last time any of us talked about or stepped foot into a Gap? I got my “i hat pants” shirt from rizzo and that is all I need anyway.
Honestly, was the “new Gap Logo” really the final logo? I say it is not. This is not how they would introduce a new logo…just by placing it on their website with no other public applications (I looked a little and I could not find any mention of other applications). No billboard in times square? Nothing else. My guess is they will come out and say they decided they liked what they had. Some will be pissed, others will say it was brilliant.
I was in a design chat last night (DCTH on twitter) and we all agreed with this. Big brands don’t post a new logo w/o a release (and an explanation for the reasons behind the new logo).
So as much as I hate the conspiracy theory, I don’t know how else to interpret this.
Also, their CEO seems to specialize in corporate speak (i.e. not really saying anything) -> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marka-hansen/the-gaps-new-logo_b_754981.html
As a designer I hate that then net result of this is a crowd-sourced logo (done without a brief, input from marketing team, etc). It really devalues the branding process.
I agree. I know this is an overstatement, but I think Crowd-sourced = Art and nothing more. To me, branding is business strategy in action. Don’t get me wrong, I love art, but adding strategy to the mix is how informed visual solutions happen. Art is not the pathway to accomplishing business objectives.
Great question Chris….and a timeless one. (which is a good thing since I’m seeing this for the first time four months after its original posting). At first glance it may appear that Pepsi is reactive or transient or just has a greater turn over on their brand teams. As a (former) brand team member at a large beverage company for years, my experience suggests it’s quite common for the new regime to consider logo changes and package design changes right out of the gate. Why? So that there is a tangible and noticeable testament that there’s a ‘new sheriff in town.’
Change for the sake of change is ineffective, costly and damaging to a brand. However, if a brand is adapting to ongoing adjustments to brand strategies which are intended to stay contemporary and ‘cutting edge’ or seek to expand a demographic target or other considerations, it not only makes sense it is likely necessary. This is how I assess the Pepsi changes.
Another point which should be taken into account is market share changes, sales swings and other business considerations which alter the strategic focus of a brand.
Subtle changes are much more palatable and offer more consistency as strategies and consumer tastes change. Comparing Pepsi’s 1898 logo to the 2008 logo reveasl a dramatic change. When reviewing the changes chronologically the differences are much less drastic.
As for the GAP logo change, only time will tell what impact it will have – positive or negative – but their change strikes me as a significant shift without a clearly defined benefit.
Perhaps GAP should have switched to Comic Sans font within their existing box. 🙂