Posted 17 January 2011 at 10:43 PM | Comments (5)
I haven’t rushed to comment on the new Starbucks logo because—unlike other recent logo disasters—I’m not fervidly opposed to it. Even though there are reasons I prefer the old logo, Starbucks did everything right when revising it:
They kept it recognizable.
They didn’t throw away their brand equity, which took years to build.
And, though this is subjective, they’ve given their customers a smart—and almost inspiring—explanation for the changeover.
I don’t even mind that they eliminated the “Starbucks Coffee” text, because it makes sense considering that they’re increasingly moving toward new countries and new product. It demonstrates that their mermaid symbol is strong enough to stand on its own. It may even demonstrate that their company is fearlessly progressing with the times.
So why do I prefer the old logo? It’s simple, really (and perhaps unsophisticated of me):
I like my coffee to have a heritage. I want to know that it has been around a while. I want it to be warm and authentic. I want someone to have made it with care. I don’t want it to be cool and modern. My electronics, my appliances, my car—they can be cool and modern. Not my coffee.
So while the new Starbucks logo is well-designed and well thought out, on a cup it looks like it holds coffee from a fancy thermos and came from a fancy gas station. I like the old “stamp,” which looks like it holds coffee from my local, loved coffeeshop that has been around for ages. It doesn’t matter that it didn’t actually come from my local coffeeshop. It made me feel like it did.