Anyone noticed it? They changed it from this classically timeless design to THIS cliched monstrosity.
What do you guys think?
My dad’s a UPS guy, and he really doesn’t like it; neither does my mother. She ardently supports the old logo, saying something to the effect of, “what’s wrong with them, the original little box was so cute. What is that thing?”
According to some of the supervisors at the branch my dad works at, changing the logo on everything from every UPS guy’s socks to the sides of every UPS truck, etc., is going to cost something like $23 million…and not all UPS branches have up-to-date trucks, equipment, etc. My opinion: I don’t particularly care for the new one, liked the old one just fine–plus, it was established, and I think the money, (if that figure is correct) could probably have been much better spent.
Oh, and welcome to the boards, Headcoat!
What’s so great about that Yale logo? I think it’s hideous and out-of-date. Yale doesn’t even use it anymore.
Has there ever been a company that has never changed their logo, ever?* BBDO just recently changed theirs after 100 years or so.
Who will have more problems with the new logo, I wonder? UPS or the UPS Store (formerly Mail Boxes Etc)?
*After I typed this, I thought of at least one: the red triangle of Bass ale, Britain’s oldest trademark. John Deere has used a deer for a while, with some slight modifications. And most of the major movie studios have never abandoned their logos, though Warner and Columbia tried to.
And who can forget the most famous symbol of American capitalism, the golden arches of McDonald’s? The placement of the company’s name has moved around, but the yellow M itself hasn’t.
The new logo (and the web design) make them look like a petroleum company.
Well, I guess I’m alone here but I think it looks pretty cool.
Needless to say, it certainly isn’t $23 million better.
I don’t see any improvement in the new logo. What amazes me is that they decided to keep the awful dung-brown color in favor of changing a logo that didn’t need to be changed.
…anyone wanna buy some “vintage” UPS uniforms?..or new?
Logo changes like this are standard stupid Dilbert-world idiocy. They probably paid a consultant company some money to come up with ideas for image changes, it suggested the new logo, the company has to make the changes else it will appear to have wasted the money, etc.
Note that the old logo was “wrong” because they aren’t just a package delivery business anymore. But the new logo has nothing to do with their business at all. That’s Dilbert-world logic. Expect it to go away soon and a revamp of the old logo to come back.
Changing headquarters locations is also a sign of a badly run company. Founded in Seattle, moved to Atlanta a few years back. Absolutely no good reason.
Yeah, from block letters spelling out “BBDO” horizontally to block letters spelling out “BBDO” vertically. :rolleyes: The new vertical logo didn’t fit the same space and required redoing all of their letterheads and forms completely from scratch.
I don’t think they were using the old one for 100 years, though. They were “BBD&O” for a long time before they dropped the ampersand, and used the full names for a while before that.
Aw hell, I like it better. I think people associate the company with the brown uniforms and trucks rather than the string-tied box. They kept the color scheme.
And remember, their competitor FedEx, recently changed not only their logo, but their official company name. I doubt its a coincidence.
It’s kind of like the underwear gnomes…
Step 1. Spend $24 million changing logo
Step 2.
Step 3. Profit!
As for the brown, I think it would be insane for UPS to drop brown. It isn’t really about aesthetics, it’s about identity.
Ask anyone what company’s color is brown and they’ll know – UPS. Not even which shipping company – which business is associated with the color brown. That’s good brand identification that it’s taken decades to establish.
And the color scheme doesn’t really relate to customer preference. Do you really choose a shipper based on their uniform colors?
Well, they recently bought out Mail Boxes Etc., and had to change out their entire stock of signs, uniforms, etc., so if they’re going to make a switch, this was the perfect time to do it.
Other than the fact that Boeing (based in Seattle) is undergoing some severe downsizing issues, and Atlanta is a major airport hub? I’m sure there’s a very good reason for the move. As for the “Dilbertian logo change,” I guarantee that UPS’s sales will go up as a result of it. Why? Because we’re not talking about FedEx right now. When’s the last time there’s been a news piece or message board thread about UPS? Change like this inspires short-term free publicity - which is probably worth a whole hell of a lot more than $23 million.
The new UPS logo looks like it’s got a bad combover.
My beloved Atlanta Falcons just changed their logo for the first time since the team was founded in 1966.
Old logo: Simple, tough, distinctive.
New logo: looks like every new expansion team’s stupid logo
I’m not happy about this.
Lots of reasons to move to Atlanta:
– lower avg. salary for workers
– closer to major population centers (east coast)
– much bigger airport
– cheaper land/facility costs
– better weather (fewer related delays)
Plus, Atlanta and/or Georgia probably gave them big tax incentives.
I agree about the Falcon’s logo, but I don’t see any big deal - aesthetically or not - with the UPS logo. Never paid it much attention. If I saw a big brown truck I knew who it was.
Correction -
Founded in Seattle, then moved the company headquarters to Greenwich, CT some years later (the 50’s IIRC). Relocated to its present Atlanta location in the early 90’s. The reasons given by Skammer for the move are all true, with the exception that the better weather benefits only the HQ staff, as the operational air hubs are located in Louisville, KY (primary hub) and Philadelphia, PA (secondary air hub).
Mars