RR01

so Starbucks logo is changing. i think they should have at least kept the word "starbucks" on there. But i guess if you have one on every street corner and been around for 40 years, most coffee drinker would recognized you just by the color on the cup. But how about new coffee drinker who wants to know what kind of coffee you are drinking, its hard to find out the brand with just a picture. maybe they are banking in that people would ask and they would have word of mouth advertising, or they have bigger plans for world domination like Apple and Nike and wants to be recognized without verbiage.

i like the fact that they are trying to do something new. it looks simple... i can get use to it. has a relaxed feel to it.

The article summarizes why Starbucks wanted to change their logo. They struggled against independent coffee houses and chains back in 2009 and had successful countered with Frappucino and VIA. but they wanted to get back to their roots and think that "a rebranding can be a helpful signal to partners and customers alike of a new, emerging Starbucks."

http://www.identityworks.com/reviews/2011/Starbucks.htm

This would make an interesting case study. Companies like Apple and Nike can be recognized from their symbol alone. It interesting to think how a simple image can have an affect on a company's success. There's so much thought that goes into why the logo is the way it is.