Starbucks Unveils Their New Logo (VOTE)
Yesterday, Starbucks commemorated its upcoming 40th anniversary with a logo change that marks the company’s milestone year and the next chapter in their history. If GAP and United/Continental Airlines taught us anything in 2010, it’s that redesigning a well known brand logo is riskier than ever due to social networks and online communities. So, how will the new Starbucks logo fair?
HISTORY OF THE STARBUCKS LOGO
In the original version of the logo, which was based on a 17th-century “Norse” woodcut, the Starbucks siren was topless, had a fully visible double fish tail and was an unfamiliar brown. In the second version, which was used from 1987–92, her breasts were covered by her flowing hair, but her navel was still visible, the fish tail was cropped slightly and Starbucks employed their trademark green. In the third version, used between 1992 and 2010, her navel and breasts are not visible at all, and only vestiges remained of the fish tails.
THE NEW LOGO
It’s obvious that one of Starbucks’ main goals was to really simplify their new 2011 logo and strip it down to the essence of what makes it unique. They have dropped the secondary black color and removed the detailed band that housed their company name and 2 stars. From a purely aesthetic point of view I think this logo is quite successful. It’s simple, clean, and draws upon the known siren, which in itself is quite beautiful. It was a no-brainer to stick with the Starbucks green as well. The new logo is set to be rolled out in March.
THE BIG QUESTION
Can Starbucks get away with not including their name in the company logo? Have they reached the point world-wide where they can simply be known by a graphic mark (such as the McDonald’s “M”, the Nike swoosh or the Apple icon). I would venture to say “no”, but what is unclear is if this “nameless” logo will only be deployed in-store (on cups, napkins and signage) or if all of their external marketing and signage will also carry this new logo.
VOTE
We’d love to know what you think of the logo. Do you like it? Will it be successful? Any chance Starbucks will have to reverse course if the masses don’t approve?
Facebook
LinkedIn
4 Comments
It seems as though each successive iteration has zoomed in further on the siren.
The new logo keeps enough of the old that there should be no difficulty recognizing it for what it is. However, there is enough difference that I think the primary recognition of it as new will not be in the form of “Oh wow, they changed the logo” but will be a nagging suspicion that something is different but not quite being able to place it.
I think a bigger issue is how the new logo will fit into the traditional and iconic Starbucks decoration motif.
I think the new logo is a little too Apple/Mac, clean, shiny, uber-modern to fit with warm inside of a Starbucks shop, and so I think it’ll be interesting to see 1) if they modify their standard store decor to address this disparity, and 2) how they place this logo in their existing branding.
This logo will probably require a redesign of most of their packaging and branding, which I’m not sure will be as smooth a transition if only for the sheer size of their brand.
I didn’t like it when Target went to a simple red dot, but I was wrong. When I watch the commercials now and just see the red dot, it grabs my attention and keeps me throughout the ad. I see it on international commercials too and like it. Starbucks – the simple version will probably work best even though I’m not yet impressed…, but , frankly this is the first time I’ve ever noticed the green woman with the star on her head.
I think your logo will be easy to recognize as starbucks but some logos need the words because it’s part of it, like heineken, they don’t use only the red star
I would want to type a response, but my eyes are still too f’d up from trying to read your white on black website. Yikes, man!