By now you’ve seen all the frenzy surrounding the failed rebrand of the Gap logo. Last week on its web page, the company quietly replaced its iconic blue square logo of 20 years with a fairly generic and uninspiring-looking replacement. The new logo and brand launch were derailed almost immediately after being introduced. Backlash and criticism on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites seemed to catch Gap by surprise. On its own Facebook page, Gap acknowledged this fact and tried to spin it into an opportunity to harness the passion of its customers via a “crowd-sourcing project” to design a new (new) logo:

“Thanks for everyone’s input on the new logo! We’ve had the same logo for 20+ years, and this is just one of the things we’re changing. We know this logo created a lot of buzz and we’re thrilled to see passionate debates unfolding! So much so we’re asking you to share your designs. We love our version, but we’d like to… see other ideas. Stay tuned for details in the next few days on this crowd sourcing project.”

After overwhelming negative feedback about the change, and the reactionary crowd-sourcing idea, Gap ditched its plans and returned to its old version faster than you can say “New Coke”. Read the official press release here.

The big question is this: are the marketing minds at Gap really that out of touch with their customers and the basic rules of branding? Or did they just pull off an unprecedented PR stunt? It’s certainly plausible, however ill conceived. They did manage to make their brand buzz-worthy right before the holiday shopping season and connect with their customer base like never before. But if it was a stunt, at what cost did all this free publicity come? Tricking your loyal customer base ala Joaquin Phoenix can’t be a good idea. On the other hand, changing an established brand icon with apparently little to no involvement with your audience upfront isn’t too smart either. In any case, Gap ends up looking foolish when it’s all said and done.

These are my thoughts. What are yours?

The amusing part? The letter was set in Comic Sans, a common Microsoft font usually reserved for birthday party announcements or “free puppies” posters.  Instead of taking the letter seriously, people everywhere are mocking Gilbert for his choice of font. Not since James Cameron’s use of the font Papyrus for his blockbuster movie Avatar, has a font received so much notoriety.

Hatred of Comic Sans is not new. In fact there are entire websites (bancomicsans.com, flickr.com/groups/comicsans/) dedicated towards the eradication of the typeface. The font itself was conceived at Microsoft in 1994 for use in a software program aimed at children, and featuring a cartoon dog. A year later, it was included as one of the few standard typefaces in the Windows operating system, and has been a fixture ever since. Comic Sans can now be seen in everything from warning signs to official documents.

Here are some examples of questionable uses of the font:

It’s time for you to weigh in. Tell us what you think about the font, the letter and the drama around the trade of King James.

The United name stays, but the iconic red and blue “tulip” design is no more. Created by legendary designer Saul Bass in the 1970’s, the United logo was simple, elegant, and instantly recognizable. The fact that the logo remained fresh and relevant decades later is a testament to the strength of the design. Please take a moment now to mourn.

What we’re left with is the United name and essentially the Continental logo. The resulting identity makes no effort to break new ground, and instead already seems tired and stale. The Continental globe has some brand equity, yes, but it’s also a symbol that’s long been a commodity in the logo world. Hardly fitting for what is now the largest airliner in the world.

Perhaps this is just a stop-gap branding exercise, and we’ll be surprised by an innovative new identity down the road.  Time will tell.

The answer is a lot. In fact, color can be everything. Just where would Tiffany’s be without blue, UPS without brown, or Coca-Cola without red? Not only does each of these brands make effective use of color, they own that color in their respective categories, hands-down. Granted, it took millions of advertising dollars and years of brand impressions to do it. So what does that mean for businesses that don’t have the marketing budget of a small country? Can your brand still use color to stand out from your competitors? Why, yes of course!

Feeling Blue (or Red)

Here’s a fantastic graphic originally published in Wired magazine that illustrates the color landscape of corporate America. Although a little dated (note the Enron logo), it does a great job of showing just how concentrated the space is for brands using red or blue as their primary color. It also becomes obvious where there might be opportunities for differentiation.

Take a moment to think about where your brand falls on the color map of your specific battleground. Are you swimming in a competitive sea of corporate IBM blue?

Don’t Just Use Color, Own It
Here’s an example of how Hodgson/Meyers used color as a strong brand differentiator for Applied Systems, the largest and most progressive company in the insurance management technology industry. Applied Systems’ previous brand used a traditional royal blue and bright red color system. Ok, not a bad thing in itself — however, most of their competitors and a host of other companies in peer industries were using a similar color palette. Not good if you’re trying to stand out.

before

As a result, H/M proposed the current warm yellow as one way to break away from the pack and to represent Applied’s focus on cultivating strong customer relationships, as well as their status as an innovative, forward-thinking industry leader.

after

The new yellow color was designed to be an integral part of the brand, and was applied (pardon the pun) on everything from the corporate logo to promotional buttons. The result is a fresh look that re-energizes the brand and signifies its status as an aggressive, vibrant company.

What do you think?
What companies, brands or marketing campaigns do you think use color as a strong brand asset?  Comment here.