GAP Logo

images from http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/110957/gap-changes-logo-why?mod=family-kids_parents

Gap Logo

Gap decided to change their logo with their fan base not very happy about it. They first put the new logo on their website and the criticism began. Gap had a drop in sales by four percent and they felt that it would bust the sales if they had a new face. This was not the case. The cost of changing the logo did not outweigh the decrease in sales. It costs a large amount of money to reproduce material and change the entire face of a company. They took such a huge loss when they did this that they would’ve been better off to just invest in some updated ads. The logo looks cheap and in return customers may think that their products are. The lesson to be learned here is that the logo is the face of your company, changing that changes every aspect of what you do. Something as simple as a logo change can make you not even seem like the same company and maybe an entirely new one.
The Gap logo is established and changing it means they have to reestablish themselves. The old logo looked like a designer brand the new logo looks cheap. They used a very basic Helvetica font with a blue box. It looked more like a bank logo or a business company logo not a clothing store. The only thing that tied the two logos together was the blue box. I don’t think that changing a logo will boost sales. Obviously they need to look at their products or ads rather than the logo. Reestablishing the name of a company is a hard task. People use to have a perception of what Gap use to be like and with the logo change they may have shifted. They needed a more modern update with clean lines and a trendy look. As I said before the new logo is
boring. They needed to phase it into use instead of jump right into it. They maybe could’ve done a survey fist to get the views of the public and try several different versions. Mt. Dew did a taste contest and had people submit ideas and then posted them to have a poll and see what the public wanted. Something like this may have been a better way to go about the logo change.