New Starbucks Logo?

Log in to reply
D

DotNetWebs

  • #41
    Drpepper said:
    I'm going to hazard a guess that just maybe a company the size of Starbucks actually have a fair idea as to what they are doing.
    Click to expand...

    You can't always make such an assumption.

    Anyone remember this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke

    A quote from the article:

    "The simple fact is that all the time and money and skill poured into consumer research on the new Coca-Cola could not measure or reveal the deep and abiding emotional attachment to original Coca-Cola felt by so many people."

    Regards

    Dotty
     
    • Like
    Reactions: mike.davis
    Upvote 0
    D

    DotNetWebs

  • #42
    JamesHall174 said:
    ... if someone had asked me to describe their logo before I looked at it today I wouldnt have had a clue what it was like...
    Click to expand...

    That's basically why I started this thread.

    I understand them wanting to refresh their logo. Most big companies do it every (10?) years or so.

    I just don't think the symbol is recognisable on it's own.

    It also seems a bit over complex. IMO the most effective logo's are the simple ones like Nike and Apple etc.

    Regards

    Dotty
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Drpepper

  • #43
    DotNetWebs said:
    You can't always make such an assumption.

    Anyone remember this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Coke

    A quote from the article:

    "The simple fact is that all the time and money and skill poured into consumer research on the new Coca-Cola could not measure or reveal the deep and abiding emotional attachment to original Coca-Cola felt by so many people."

    Regards

    Dotty
    Click to expand...

    Not quiet the same though, that was a change in product rather than change in logo. Plus the rest of the article "resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy."
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    Upvote 0
    Jeff FV

    Jeff FV

    Free Member
    Jan 10, 2009
    3,891
    1,861
    Somerset
  • #46
    Going a little OT, here's a little logo quiz for you:

    logoquiz.jpg
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    DotNetWebs

  • #49
    Drpepper said:
    ...the rest of the article "resulted in a significant gain in sales, leading to speculation that the introduction of the New Coke formula was just a marketing ploy."
    Click to expand...

    Did you read the note on that article expanding on that statement:

    http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp

    "These rumors are an attempt to make sense of the unthinkable, that a company of the size and reputation of Coca-Cola could have effected such a blunder. It's more comforting to cast it all off as a brilliant conspiracy than to live with the notion that a large company might not be infallible....." etc.

    Regards

    Dotty
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Drpepper

  • #50
    DotNetWebs said:
    Did you read the note on that article expanding on that statement:

    http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/newcoke.asp

    "These rumors are an attempt to make sense of the unthinkable, that a company of the size and reputation of Coca-Cola could have effected such a blunder. It's more comforting to cast it all off as a brilliant conspiracy than to live with the notion that a large company might not be infallible....." etc.

    Regards

    Dotty
    Click to expand...

    So it may or may not have been a marketing ploy - 'aint wikipedia great :p
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Drpepper

  • #52
    mike.davis said:
    I hope you are not referring to me, as I can assure you I am not a one man band.

    However this forum does have alot of one man bands thinking they know better.
    Click to expand...

    Nope, no one in particular just an observation.

    I know nothing about large business as mine is pretty small (er hum - business I mean!), and I do only try to comment on things I can be pretty certain off. Hence I don't know if the Starbucks logo is good, bad or indifferent, and I wouldn't presume to pass comment, beyond maybe if I liked it or not. I am however presuming a company Starbucks size has done some research into the logo - that was basically the point I was trying to make :)
     
    • Like
    Reactions: KidsBeeHappy and papverpoppies
    Upvote 0
    G

    GaryF

    Free Member
    Oct 6, 2009
    106
    22
    Kent
  • #53
    I think Starbucks is much more popular in America, that probably has something to do with the confidence behind the idendity alterations.

    Drpepper, I would have thought the London 2012 logo would have had extensive research too, but that hasn't gone down well. Still, people remember it ay.
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Drpepper

  • #54
    GaryF said:
    I think Starbucks is much more popular in America, that probably has something to do with the confidence behind the idendity alterations.

    Drpepper, I would have thought the London 2012 logo would have had extensive research too, but that hasn't gone down well. Still, people remember it ay.
    Click to expand...

    I hate the 2012 logo, as you say so do others. And as you say it is in the public consciousness. So does that make it good or bad :|
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    DotNetWebs

  • #55
    Drpepper said:
    ... I am however presuming a company Starbucks size has done some research into the logo - that was basically the point I was trying to make...
    Click to expand...

    Yes and I agree that they will done a lot of research into it.

    My point in response was simple that no matter what resources you throw at something like this you cannot ensure that it will be well received.

    Here's another example I remember very well:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1325127.stm

    I have not said that Starbucks have made a bad decision. Just that for me personally the new logo does not seem very effective. I just wanted to see what other thought of it.

    Regards

    Dotty
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Drpepper
    Upvote 0
    G

    GaryF

    Free Member
    Oct 6, 2009
    106
    22
    Kent
  • #56
    Drpepper - Well if it's remembered for being bad I would generally say it's bad mate. When it first was released someone mentioned it looked like someone else giving head, and every time I've seen it since I see that before anything else. It makes me cringe being from a Graphic Design background. But then again, for some reason I remember the Sydney 2000 logo; yet that wasn't pornographic.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Drpepper
    Upvote 0
    D

    Drpepper

  • #57
    GaryF said:
    Drpepper - Well if it's remembered for being bad I would generally say it's bad mate. When it first was released someone mentioned it looked like someone else giving head, and every time I've seen it since I see that before anything else. It makes me cringe being from a Graphic Design background. But then again, for some reason I remember the Sydney 2000 logo. yet that wasn't pornographic.
    Click to expand...

    I'm just off to have another look at it now :p

    Is there such a thing as it's so bad its good?
     
    Last edited by a moderator:
    Upvote 0
    Christine Hough

    Christine Hough

    Free Member
    Mar 31, 2006
    3,111
    602
    Hull England, but trade on line
  • #66
    Drpepper said:
    I'm going to hazard a guess that just maybe a company the size of Starbucks actually have a fair idea as to what they are doing.
    Click to expand...

    Our wonderful city (and yes, it does have it's good points) decided on rebranding a few years ago and some design agency made megabucks (of our tax money) designng a gear cog log with the word 'hull' underneath ... cool with no capital H in the name.
    This did not go down too well in the same year as the city was at the bottom of the school league tables.
    Then all the signs were altered to include the logo and I expect all council stationery.

    After that there was push to always call it Kingston-upon-Hull

    Both have now quietly been forgotten.
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: Drpepper
    Upvote 0
    D

    Drpepper

  • #67
    Christine Hough said:
    Our wonderful city (and yes, it does have it's good points) decided on rebranding a few years ago and some design agency made megabucks (of our tax money) designng a gear cog log with the word 'hull' underneath ... cool with no capital H in the name.
    This did not go down too well in the same year as the city was at the bottom of the school league tables.
    Then all the signs were altered to include the logo and I expect all council stationery.

    After that there was push to always call it Kingston-upon-Hull

    Both have now quietly been forgotten.
    Click to expand...

    Ah yes, but that was the wonderful public sector spending money on a whim, that isn't really theirs anyway, got to love em' :rolleyes:

    I've been to Hull a number of times, it's OK - unlike Grimsby :p
     
    Upvote 0
    Dot Design

    Dot Design

    Free Member
    Jul 21, 2006
    574
    110
  • #74
    I've not read all the responses, it's late etc. :)

    I think the new brand identity is a good move, it's a bold move but one that makes sense.

    To me Starbucks have chosen to simplify their logo and remove the text element in order to diversify, they have probably realised that their brand is so strong (mainly in the US) that the times right to branch out.

    Best and most coherent way of doing this is strip down the logo, remove the text and use it as a graphic in a similar way Apple, McDonalds and Nike use their 'apple symbol' , 'M' and Swoosh'. I think they probably should have had a tweek stage inbetween and have jumped a little ahead of themselves but it's done.

    I really believe the strongest brand asset Starbucks have is their green colour and the white, and secondary is the 'Siren' and they have retained these which is good.

    Overall a bold move but a good one in my opinion.

    I wrote a blog post this morning on the subject that has a variety of responses that some might find interesting >>

    New Starbucks Brand Identity – Less is More?
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Deleted member 87479

  • #75
    MrMichael said:
    I would probably see it as a smart move[...] As mentioned in the article, moving away from using 'coffee' in the title also makes sense if they are moving into other product ranges.

    [...]

    In time therefore, they should potentially benefit from having a non-word based logo.
    Click to expand...

    Agreed, it’s logical to do this - it makes good sense to open up their audience recognition internationally.

    However, I wonder whether part of the appeal was in seeing the word 'coffee' itself?

    Coffee drinking implies a certain lifestyle and sociability - seeing the word itself was something to connect to, perhaps. Don’t we attach a lot to the very idea of coffee nowadays?

    That said, the Starbucks brand is so strong in the UK that I doubt it would affect their current following - but it could do harm when introducing it into new markets.
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    DotNetWebs

  • #76
    Dot Design said:
    ... use it as a graphic in a similar way Apple, McDonalds and Nike use their 'apple symbol' , 'M' and Swoosh'..
    Click to expand...

    But IMO it's not in a similar way at all.

    The three you mention are all very simple but instantly recognisable symbols.

    With the possible exception of the apple the symbols used also don't have any real connotations beyond the products involved.

    The 'Siren' however is derived from a topless Greek methodical 'seductress' that are often found in Christian art:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siren

    The first Starbucks logo even had the breasts clearly showing.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e9/Sbux_logo_pre_1987.gif

    Personally I just can't see how simply removing the text while retaining this symbol is going to significantly improve this brand internationally or in other cultures.

    Also I don't believe that having an English word in a logo necessarily means it won't be recognised and understood around the world. After all a word is just a collection of symbols and if people recognise that those symbols mean a great cup of coffee then that's all the understanding they need.

    As I said before I am not saying Starbucks don't know what they are doing, just that I can't see it!

    Regards

    Dotty
     
    • Like
    Reactions: mike.davis
    Upvote 0
    Eagle

    Eagle

    Free Member
    Oct 3, 2004
    5,235
    587
    UK
  • #77
    The logo's just following the natural order:

    The typical life-cycle of a logo could be as follows:

    Year 1 to 5 - Graphic Element and Full Trading Name (••• Davis & Davis Electrical Ltd)
    Year 6 to 10 - Graphic Element and Shortened Name (••• Davis & Davis)
    Year 11 to 25 - Graphic Element and perhaps reduction of the name to a monogram (••• D&D)
    Year 26+ - Lone use of either Graphic Element or Initials.
    Click to expand...

    from: Logo design and how to avoid disaster

    I think it'll work in the US but it's way too premature to roll out in the UK (as this thread amply demonstrates).

    Tch! Wish these multinationals would consult me first! ;) ;)

    .
     
    • Like
    Reactions: DotNetWebs
    Upvote 0
    Log in to reply

    Latest Articles

    Top Bottom
    Community
    Articles
    Menu