This is why change isn't always a good thing.
Logo's, when successful enough can take over the product they are advertising. For example: Kellogs, KOO, Kleenex; all brands that have done so well that we identify the "brand" over the product. So if a logo can mean so much when identifying a product, and in saying that we assume it's a successful brand, it begs the question: Why fix something that aint broke?
GAP, probably feeling the need for a revamp of sorts now have rebranded with Helvetica text with an added square, because nothing says 2010 like early 90's design. The logo dubbed 'cold and unfeeling' by Stylite.com has resulted in outrage and protest all over the internet. Even though GAP can boast $14 billion in revenue last year it still isn't doing as well as it should be doing.
Will they revert back or go on strong? Only time will tell.
14/10/10 UPDATE: Gap, who redesigned the logo they said "was part of the transition from "classic, American design, to modern, sexy, cool.” to the horror of thousands, have decided to return to their old logo. No surprise there. The same fate occurred to Coca-Cola in 1985 and we all know how that panned out.
14/10/10 UPDATE: Gap, who redesigned the logo they said "was part of the transition from "classic, American design, to modern, sexy, cool.” to the horror of thousands, have decided to return to their old logo. No surprise there. The same fate occurred to Coca-Cola in 1985 and we all know how that panned out.
