Skip to content

Menu

HomeAboutContactSubscribe
Search
Close
DuetsBlog ® logo

Collaborations in Creativity & the Law ®

Home > Branding > Bland new brand or brand new bland? Is this Seattle’s Best?

Bland new brand or brand new bland? Is this Seattle’s Best?

By Duets Guest Blogger on June 8, 2010
Posted in Branding, Food, Guest Bloggers, Marketing, Trademarks

—Randall Hull, The Br@nd Ranch®

Mid-May the fine folks at Starbucks headquarters in The Emerald City – no, not the one Dorothy visited, the one that gave us grunge and baristas – set the caffeine scene atwitter with the "new" Seattle’s Best Coffee logo. To herald the launch, a mock commando operation was staged and the Starbucks clock tower was wrapped with banners sporting the new design. 


Seattle’s Best Coffee began roasting in 1970 on Seattle’s Pier 70. The name owes its origin to a local restaurant, which held a taste-off and the rest is history, as they say. In 2003, Starbucks Corporation acquired Seattle’s Best Coffee.

So why a complete redesign? Apparently Starbucks doesn’t believe the old logo has the where-with-all to become a nationwide brand. In a launch press release the company announced an agreement with AMC Theatres to serve Seattle’s Best Coffee at nearly 300 theaters as well as an agreement to sell their coffee at all Burger King restaurants in the United States.

According to Michelle Gass, Seattle’s Best Coffee president, “the new brand direction will bring a simplified approach to the coffee category in all the ways it will touch the customer…and we designed the new logo to one day become a universally recognized and reassuring symbol for great tasting coffee everywhere. The new logo may look understated or undone, but that is exactly what we wanted. A simple logo for the best coffee in the world.”

Achieving the lofty goal of a universal sign for anything is a herculean task and dependent on symbols and images readily identified and associated with the product or company you want to represent.

Further, reductive design has the potential of crossing a line where all relational elements are eliminated or so obscured to be unrecognizable or misinterpreted. Thus the logo no longer conveys knowledge of the product, the company, or its category. The association, which forms the foundation of branding, is broken.

This creates a significant challenge to the brand owner to reattach the previous "good will" which inured to the old logo. The new, seemingly generic, and fundamentally meaningless, design lacks this attribute.

Simplification has its place in designing a corporate icon, but making it banal does not. The result must be relevant, it’s meaning clearly understood, especially in a visually competitive environment such as street signage or packaging on store shelves.

Fundamental to design is not requiring potential purchasers to guess what your goods and services might be when encountering your logo, or leaving it open to interpretation. Circumstances might not afford the proper connotation.

The new logo is a bit reminiscent of the (Red) campaign to fight AIDs in Africa. Surely a noble cause but not in line with Starbucks objectives for the Seattle’s Best Coffee brand.

Along with many critical articles, some amusing comparisons have been offered. Paraphrasing one commentator, its looks like the love child of the Red Cross and Target. Others have referenced Seattle’s Best Blood Bank, Seattle’s Best Soup Kitchen, a UK-based telecommunications firm, even a Russian oil company.

The best in plasma, hot and fresh. Give blood with your jolt of java.

Perhaps, Seattle’s Best Coffee is subtly leveraging the popularity of Twilight and all things sanguine to encourage imbibing their brew.

Unless there is a clear and compelling market-driven reason to change, leave well enough alone and leverage the recognition engendered by a familiar brand and its symbol sets.

Granted the new shape might fit better on a coaster or lend itself to embroidered staff shirts and caps, but it reminds me of the high-ticket Tropicana packaging blunder by Arnell Group on behalf of PepsiCo. And we saw how well that worked out. Perhaps, Starbucks should follow PepsiCo’s lead and listen to their customers.

If generic is the goal, or sidling up to Burger King is their aspiration, then perhaps mission accomplished. Given the full context in which this mark will be used and the goods offered – the new design might overcome its deficiencies. However, that is not a situation in which I would deliberately place a brand.

Seattle’s Best? I think not.

Tags: Logo, Logos, Randall Hull, Seattle's Best Coffee, Starbucks
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Related Posts
Rapala 2021 A
Rapala Continues Fishing for Attention
June 16, 2021
Chunky Dunky
Hotels, Ice Cream, and Shoes as Canvases for Great Brands
October 21, 2020
ApplebeesWelcomeBack
Welcome Back to TM Incapability and Merely Informational USPTO Refusals
September 8, 2020

Stay Connected

Subscribe to this blog via RSS Twitter
Subscribe

Duets Blog Authors

Photo of Jake AbdoJake Abdo
Photo of Steve Baird®Steve Baird®
Photo of Tiffany BlofieldTiffany Blofield
Molly LittmanMolly Littman
Photo of Draeke WesemanDraeke Weseman

Topics

Tags

Archives

Blogroll

  • Brand Autopsy
  • Brand New
  • brandGEEK
  • CapsuleBlog
  • CatchThis
  • Counterfeit Chic
  • Fritinancy
  • Idea Peep-Show
  • Intellectual Property Law Blog
  • Las Vegas Trademark Attorney
  • Likelihood of Confusion®
  • LoTempio Law Blog
  • Marketing Power: American Marketing Association
  • Name Wire: The Product Naming Blog
  • On Brands
  • Packaging News
  • PSFK
  • Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log
  • Romenesko
  • SCOTUSBLOG
  • Seattle Trademark Lawyer
  • Seth Godin's Blog
  • Silicon Valley IP Licensing Law Blog
  • The Dieline
  • The FairWinds Blog
  • The Trademark Blog
  • The TTABlog

Links

  • ABA Journal
  • Capsule
  • Contemporary Intellectual Property, Licensing & Information Law
  • Domain Tools
  • Federal Trade Commission
  • Franklin Pierce Law Center
  • Ingenuity Marketing Toolkit
  • Internet Archive
  • Legal Marketing Association
  • Marketing Power: American Marketing Association
  • The Hollywood Reporter (THR)
  • Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
  • U.S. Copyright Office
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office
  • USPTO Trademark Soundex
  • WayBack Machine
  • YouTube

Stay Connected

Subscribe to this blog via RSS Twitter
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer
Copyright © 2023, SRB IP Holdings LLC All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo