Branding stories

We all know that when a brand changes it's logo, this is not the reaction they get (unless you're a marketing/graphic design/com person or some kind of lunatic).

(Pic curtesy of the fun tumblr "Things Real People Don't Say About Advertising".) 

However, when the brand is famous, or well-loved or both, the change doesn't go unseen.

Recently, two big brands took a leap and changed -or modified, in one of the cases- their logo : Gap and Starbuck.

For it's 40th birthday, Starbuck went the simplification way, by getting ride of the ring with it name in it, keeping only the two tailed mermaid and going back to its roots by returning to a monochromatic design.

 

The move toward a simpler design is far from being an unprecedented trend for a brand, and there are many example of the process. The evolution was also brought by the current strategy of Starbuck: the brand has been diversifying for years now and doesn't want it's logo to single-out the coffee-selling part of the business.

However, I personally find the choice to drop the name from the logo a clumsy move, as it weakens the brand recognition. Sure, it is not a problem in some places, were there is a Starbuck at every corner and everyone knows what the green mermaid on a cup stands for, but for countries where the brand isn't as well recognized like France, this new logo could prove damaging.

Others arguments against the logo as the symbol of the brand extension strategy are made over there at bnet by Geoffrey James, and those make sense as well. By cutting away the "coffee" to expand it's brand signification, the core activity becomes muddled and the global signification of the brand is only weakened and made unfocused.

Way more controversial than Starbuck's more sober logo is Gap's rebranding.

On october last year, the brand stirred one of those flamestorm the internet is famous for when it unveiled this new logo.

Unarguably uninspired (it would be difficult to do more bland than some Helvetica with a blue square), the new logo excited rather vigorous protests online. A discontented internet user with a knack for programming created a  "Crap Logo" generator, dozens and dozens (and dozens) of cybernauts posted their own suggestion of rebranding.

The one good point on Gap's side is that they were very reactive, communicating through their Facebook page.

But the uproar was such that after a few feeble attempts at pretending the new logo was the start of a crowd sourcing project, the company finally backtracked, and "after much thought, decided to go back to (it's) iconic blue box logo”.

Well, at least the Doctor would approve. You can't go wrong with a blue box.


So, what do you think? Hidden genius or tragic fail?