1. Gina

    Great picks for both successes and failures! However, there is one major failure that wasn’t listed here: Tropicana. They completely redesigned their logo which took away the orange and the straw and also made the caps on the cartons resemble oranges. While I was able to identify their products easily while they had the new logo, I’m sure most people could not recognize it. By far one of the biggest rebranding flops I can think of… it was not a great way for them to spend $35 million dollars! Thankfully, they are back to the original logo.

  2. Interesting. I had heard of the GAP logo redesign but not some of these others. It’s interesting to note that quite a few of the badly designed “new” logos violate one of the basic principles of logo design—making it reproducible in black and white. Gap, MasterCard, Kraft—all using colours and gradients which, if turned black and white, simply won’t work.

  3. Reynolds

    Gap really did have a stinker with that new logo, can’t beat the London olympics logo though!

  4. David

    The Google logo works well as a strong brand but I think it looks horrible. Not sure why people love it so much.

  5. Awesome article, so many great redesigns. The KFC redesign is perfect! I’m not too sure about the new Starbucks logo, It’s nice but I personally prefer the previous one.

    My least favourite has to be the GAP redesign, as you said the old one was very liked and familiar to almost everyone so radically changing it was a definite mistake.

  6. Jafar

    I like the new Seattle’s Best Coffee logo. In fact I’ve been buying more of their product because of its simplicity.

    The old one was boring to me. The new one is fresh.

    So yes, it is working on some people.

    Good article btw.

  7. jumi

    i like the Google logo…on one hand its simple; which i think is necessary as its TG is the whole world, on the otherhand, it brings in the fun of doodle which creates people involvement and generates curiosity and interest…great job done, if u ask me!

  8. I thought Starbucks were very brave to remove the name from their logo, but it seems to have worked so far. The Yellow Pages logo is simple and beautiful, and—for me—the KFC logo is the perfect example of how to update an old logo and actually build on the success of the original.

    • Mel

      It would be even more brave if Starbucks removed their name from the signs outside their stores ;-)

  9. Paul Mckay

    Thanks for the post. I’m with Gary on the fact this is just another post reiterating what people have previously said, however I find it interesting to read other people’s views on good and bad logo rebranding and what they view as good and bad design.

    I agree with the comments and views that you’ve mentioned regarding all the logos displayed in this post and only want to mention a few points on the Starbucks logo.

    I personally am a fan of the previous logo design (with the writing), however I understand why Starbucks is branching off in this minimalistic style direction. With the companies long term view to start their own alcohol range as well as their existing ice cream product range, the company needed to produce a logo design that was functional, recognisable and clean. The fact of the matter is, you can’t have a logo with ‘COFFEE’ written all over it on a wine bottle.

    I think my favourite logo out of this selection has to be the ‘Google’ logo. I love the use of bright, primary style colours to represent the search engine and think it’s a very bold statement to make, especially in this day and age. The doodles that appear now and again turns the logo into something more, almost as though it’s a living entity that keeps up with the modern times and celebrating key figures of the past. It allows us to interact with the logo without us knowing it and also becomes a viral aspect to google. All in all, it can be seen as a great marketing piece and a brilliant way to get people to their site.

    The logo I dislike the most has to be Aol. The execution is poor and in my opinion, looks boring. Considering they’re a large multi-national corporation, their rebrand looks childish and unprofessional. Their determination to attract the younger generation appears forced and feels fake, making them look like they haven’t done the required research necessary.

  10. Benny Schmidt

    There are wonderful and bad logos but I can’t remeber that KRAFT changed their logo? (by the way: I’m from Germany :))

  11. Google and Kraft Foods logos are the best in my opinion. Although I liked so much the Kraft foods redesign, as you said it was a big change and not everybody is open-minded to change. Let’s see if it’s gonna work for them. Cya!

  12. Bruno

    Thanks a lot for this article. As El, San Diego Zoo and Yellow Pages are also the best for me.

  13. Daniel

    The BT logo rebrand and the LV= rebrand are good examples of a complete change that worked really well.

  14. Tim

    The Google logo is boring. That’s why they have to do funky things with it every time there is a holiday. It looks like someone typed it in Microsoft Word back in 1997, made it too many colors and said, “My 6 year old thinks it looks great, let’s use it!” If a client hired me to design a logo for them and I charged $1000 and this is what I came back with, he would never hire me again.
    The Starbucks logo is nice, however, I don’t think it would work as signage on a building. You really need to have the name of your store on your sign. In fact, some cities have rules about that sort of thing. I think it works great on the products and cups, though.

  15. Great article, really enjoyed it! I love how the KFC logo is almost the same, but so much better! Well, the latest Starbucks logo is for my taste a little bit too simple… Every time something disappears from their logo. Next time it will be only a green dot.. ;)
    But the gap logo! Oh my! I haven’t seen this one yet, but it is a huge disaster, my jaw dropped when I saw it! I just couldn’t beleive my eyes…

  16. Dave Saunders

    I also like the Starbucks logo change. Too many “branding experts” seems to be reciting tired opinions from text books about it being somehow wrong, but I find it to be bright and vibrant. Even if it does turn out to “fail” (which I don’t think it will), kudos to Starbucks for having the courage to stretch.

  17. Gary Ludwig

    You’re going for pretty low-hanging fruit here. It would have been more interesting if you hadn’t simply reiterated what pretty much every good/bad logo blogger has been saying over the course of the past year.

    A few points, though:

    MasterCard Worldwide: It was quite clear from the initial press releases this was the parent company logo, not the retail product logo. The strategy is very sound, the design actually quite good (comments to the contrary notwithstanding). People commenting on branding should really know what they’re taking aim at before they pull the trigger.

    Seattle’s Best Coffee: It’s quite possible all the attributes you ascribe to the old Seattle’s Best Coffee logo are exactly why they changed it. So it wouldn’t look like scores of other vintage, cozy, homey, fussy undifferentiated coffee logos. And I’m very tired of people professing on the one hand to be savvy enough to comment on the design, but on the other to being so easily “confused” by what’s being sold by a logo that says “Coffee” right in it.

    Aol: Describing the Aol logotype as “a Helvetica font (or a variant of it)” creates the impression you lump all sans serif typefaces together. There isn’t much there (aside from the absence of serifs) that looks like Helvetica.

    You’re entitled to your opinions, and I’d defend your right to express them whether I agree or not. But you haven’t added anything new or interesting to the conversation about these brands.