Web Roast: Gap Logo Fail

Anyone who knows the GAP story knows that this new logo is missing a huge point. First, the serifs in the old logo suggest some sort of lineage/history. Meanwhile, the new design is sans-serif which essentially cuts off the past success of the brand. While, the title cased, new version suggests a better readability, it zaps the stark white/blue contrast and uses a font that looks like any other type - From title worthy to 5th paragraph worthy. The only element that is carried over is the box, but why? What was significant about the box? And why is it peaking through the now lowercased 'p' ? I also don't understand the gradient, other than it's a popular thing to do.

If GAP wanted to improve readability and refresh their brand, I would suggest keeping the blue box and white letters but change the font to something new and interesting. Also, focused on a type that looks more equal in title case. Might also play with an all lowercased version. It would have been an easy way to communicate "gap goes modern" while maintaining some integrity.

GAP LISTENS TO CUSTOMERS AND WILL KEEP CLASSIC BLUE BOX LOGO

http://www.gapinc.com/public/Media/PressReleases/medpr_GapLogoStatement10112010.shtml

The Good: they used the color blue - I guess? (I'm really reaching for something nice to say here)

The Bad:

I just don't get this redesign at all. I think it is worst than everyone is making it out to be. I even sort of feel sorry for the graphic designer that created this, as it should have never been allowed past the brainstorming / draft phase.

When compared to the last logo, why would any Marketing person feel like this new logo is better than the last one?

There are not any gaps between the letters, for that matter, there are quite pressed together and if not for the overly bold font choice harder to read.

What is up with the gradient square? This doesn't remind me at all of the GAP brand and looks so cheesy I could easily assume this latest logo was created in Word or MS Paint - Not that you couldn't make a better logo using these programs.

If I were to create a new logo I'd do a play off GAP and have the letters more spaced out with gaps between the letters. It would be more modern looking, with easily recognized link to the original brand.

Check out the Pepsi logo redesign over the last 10 years and it's progression. This was never really a move away from the core branding just a modern enhancement of what was already working for them.

I kind of think the original GAP logo with the solid blue background was perfect. So my question would be why fix something that's not broken?

What can I say? Most people, even those who don't know logos, have always known the existing logo is a bit...naff. The way it looks squashed, the font, it's all very boring, uninspiring and just outright pants.

The idea though, of a dark blue box, and a simple bit of text, is good. But the font is just ruining it.

They could have revamped the logo by modernising the font, and reducing the squashed look.

As it is, the new logo is even worse. The gradient, the thick, chunky black font, every secret design rule to good design has been rudely ignored.

Those unwritten rules exist for a very good reason, and you ignore them at your peril.

It's just outright amateurish. Some companies get away with it because their business doesn't really concern a good logo, but a fashion company should get this right.

Even the London 2012 logo, which drew huge hatred, whilst not great, is at least original and has a large degree of artistic merit, and you can see a lot of time went into it.

This is just a dreadful re-design, and a terrible original logo.

Bad Gap! Bad!

When I start a new design the first thing I do is get all my elements into the file (copy, color palette, etc), before I worry about placement or typography or imagery. The new Gap logo looks like somebody stopped with just this step and called it done.

The typography is bland, especially for such a short word. The blue box does not look purposeful. The 2 elements do not come together with any purpose. It is weak.

There is no impact. There is nothing to ever become highly recognizable. It's just default typeface and a weird blue square.

If this was my project, I'd want to know more about the purpose of the redesign. In what ways is the old brand failing? What new audiences need to be reached? Does it need to re-inspire the current audience? Is the direction/style of the clothing changing? Does the new logo need to nod to the original brand? Etc.

A new logo has a lot to live up to. It will have to be strong, recognizable, bold, energetic. It will have to be much more than this 1st attempt.

Sorry Gap. The new logo isn't really original. Not enough contrast between the square and text, and as a result the square isn't important anymore. Font face isn't original either. Seems to lack coherency. Please get rid of the gradient on square too. Yuck! So 10 years ago.

This is quite possibly the worst re-design/re-branding I've ever seen. It fails on so many levels. I don't even think a review requires many words, as it's probably clear to anyone that it completely misses the mark.

Let's see... the square is absolutely awful. It's a bad gradient, with a bad shade of blue. Clearly the artist didn't like the old Gap blue (which I think was perfectly fine). For some bizarre reason when I read the text it reminds me of American Apparel. Maybe they were going for that same simple look, to appeal to a younger generation of shoppers... but regardless, I think they failed. I think it's WORSE than Microsoft Word Clip-Art. I haven't given it much thought before today, but I think their old logo stands up OK to the test of time. In fact, it's very recognizable. Maybe that dates me, but I don't care. It's possible they had good intentions and a great concept, but it's completely lost on me.

There is nothing significantly unique about the new logo, to call it a logo in the first place, apart from the fact that it appears that no effort has gone into making it unique or visually pleasing. Either colors make it visually appealing or it should be a cleaver design appealing to the intellect. Looking at our world today it is obvious that it should appeal more to the intellect than anything else, more along the lines of contemporary or modern expression.

The older logo had a unique type phase and the square shape. It appears fit, slim and trendy or fresh since it was not another rectangle and that particular blue shade always gave a semi formal appeal when used with other formal colors like Brown. May be the new logo was made in such a way that it compensates for the older one's weakness. The older logo had weaknesses too like, 1. it would not have been possible to use just the type phase in black; on a white background, since it was too thin and would appear lost (for example on a letterhead) without the bounding box 2. The blue colored box may not go well with other colors on which it may have required to be present.

Therefore it is very obvious that the new logo was bolder, in black, on white background and they had to retain the blue box as their corporate identity. The black and blue are not complimenting each other and they seem to drown eachother out making it very boring and uninspiring or stale. The way the gradient is applied to the box in the new logo (may not be intentionally so but) it sure appears to be a quick fix to make the letter "P" be more visible, and yet retain the blue box corporate identity.

To sum it up It looks amateurish only because there is significantly nothing unique or visually appealing or innovative in the way the new logo is. Therefore It looks fat and boring and uninspiring. If I were to redesign it i would first look for some way to cleverly represent GAP's moto of “a more contemporary, modern expression”, also focus on style because that's what cloths brand should be about and not forget to compensate the weaknesses of the older one.

Sadly i feel the old logo has a more modern feel to it than the new logo...

its quite hard to review but the new logo to me represents a new garage tech start up..

The gradient just doesn't work and although i'm sure the it has been positioned the square is just hanging there and at best looks out of place at worst reduces readability

also removing the logo from the blue box creates readability issues when on complex backgrounds on that wasn't there before.

And the choice of font... please... it has no style or appeal at all may as well have just used calibri (being the defult word font :D)

I like the old logo i think it works mind you its quite fresh for me as we don't have gap in Australia but it certainly instills a strong images of a quality product which the new logo certainly doesn't

One thing that I find interesting about this whole "gapgate" drama is that this is a brand that has been so consistent for so long and here we get a departure that is so bad it's almost like they did it on purpose. Is this some big prank? Will they reveal the real logo at a later date? Al lI can say is I hope so...

I think the guys that produced this logo, Laird and Partners, are proven operators in branding and marketing. These guys know their stuff, and that's why I feel it is a prank. They have been using this font for Gap's ad campaigns for some time now, so maybe they have been trying to move things in this direction for awhile. But to reduce the simple blue square in such a way just doesn't make sense in a professional brand strategy.

If you are at all interested in some of the backlash from this there is a great synopsis at Brand New and also a great response from a creative at Mule Design.

First, to fit this weeks hype about Gap's new logo I would convert the tounge of the G in the logo to face the other way so it spells "Crap"; and maybe make the new little r red. ( It's just calls for the play on this logo and will get some laughs.) Normally, I'm not one to give criticizing words and always try to turn to the positive. Yet, this is a big company and design should be represented well in the name of designers and they just hit rock bottom with their new logo.

So, I will add my review I added as a comment at Freshness mag because those were my true first thoughts of this logo. ( Which is sometimes helpfull to get a true first response) Here it is: "No. Please don’t change it. ( Is it too late now? ) First, the new logo looks awful. I say this due to the fact the box that has the gradient screams amature. The placement of the box screams amature. Gap already has an established look, a classic look. It is like making the Nike swoosh a square with a toe print. Why change what is already good? Most companies would die for a logo that sticks. Don’t kill the company with this logo."

Now after this review I have to hit it with a positive constructive critique:

I probably wouldn't steer far from the established look. Maybe a shade up or down on the blue to add a bit of change. Maybe go in and play slightly with the current font when it comes to the inner shapes that the letters create or aligning the stem in the center of the G so it aligns with the center line of the A and in turn aligns with the P.

With the original font their are a lot of different stem shapes going on. If you could even the thickneses of them and try and make them more similar to each other. For example, the top P stem is thinner then the bottom stem of the p. Keep the new thickness the same for the entire line going down the A and across it ( just to compare ).

So overall, my opinion is to keep the classic look and slightly alter it to improve it's balance and to maybe go a shade darker or lighter in blue. Although, sometimes even colors are established and related to the memory of a logo. So, I would not steer far from the original. People have attached themselves for years to the classic look... so try not to make them feel lonely.

I wish the best of luck to Gap and their new design.

What have they done?!

Please tell me that the design agency that made this, DID NOT get more than $3!

It, Is disgusting, in more ways than one, the functionality is rubbish, How is this going to look, sprawled across the back of jeans and hoodies?!

I personally don't design logos. But I am incredibly disappointed with this!

[/endroast]

What's the role of a company logo in transformational change, http://bit.ly/9TGSLj

This is a huge step backwards. The design looks like it was done in MS powerpoint lol!!!

I can make that on Powerpoint.

is there any place to submit "the worst design of the year" and : " the worst business decision of the year"???

I actually feel bad for the designer. I imagine in my mind it went something like this: designer begins showing some very rough drafts before they were baked. Vice Pres of Division Snack Foods spots it and loves it, shows it to the VP of Marketing, who would have preferred Comic Sans, but hey it's a snappy and fresh font anyway, right?

Designer cries that version 2.41 is far superior and would you all please have a looksee? Nope, not happening. Boss man is fully on board with this hideous thing. Hands it off to his step son to "tidy up", because he's got Microsoft Works and knows of computers.

Designer tries to scrub his/her name off this project and puts in for a transfer to the sales team.

Seriously, the old logo has a tradition to uphold, and this new version just trashes it.

I swear this looks like something someone did in MS publisher. What were you thinking Gap?

There's always been a clean cool sophistication in your previous logo that carried across the brand in the commercials and such. Now this piece of crap? If I could put a -1 for originality I would.

I also echo similar comments made and too wonder if this isn't some big PR stunt. It certainly makes one wonder.

Sometimes to me, plan and simple is the right way to go. It says exactly what it is. "GAP" is "GAP", how complex do you need to be?

Don't like Gap in general. The old logo is at least recognizable from down the block or across a mall. But the new logo looks like someone did it who was playing around with MS Publisher or something and someone wth no design sense or training.

I can just imagine the Gap Marketing meeting on this one. "Let's move our blue box to the right and top behind the P. That will be so new and hip."

I am sure the designer had more and they all got shot down and finally they said fine have this. The creative director should have seen this one coming.

Were there any other versions of this logo before landing on this one or was the first one someone made as a joke just to see if their board liked it.

It tell you, Marketing companies can make a turd seem amazing with enough descriptive language and the song and dance routines they do to impress potential clients. They pulled out all the stops on this logo presentation. Gap logo = Epic Fail

Hahahahah,

Now this is really FAIL!

Oh come...I think there are 2 options:

1. The marketing board suck and they made the decision and drive the design guy nuts

2. Design Board really suck and come up with this piece of crap....

What the hell the old logo looks so much better than the new one, if I ask my mom about it, who never heard about GAP, I bet she will say that the 1st one is better!

The new Gap font is so common...nothing special here...and that square...wtf...what's up with that gradient? it looks like this, so Win 95 style! http://iphone3ghacked.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/windows95logo.png

They should organize contest logo and I am sure they will get some really amazing examples!

Well what can I say....Good luck GrAP Design Team :D

I personally like the old logo a lot and thought it worked well. I'm not a fan of the new one, but something tells me it'll work.

Don't forget, Gap isn't here to please us with a nice logo but to sell more; It's well possible that they've tested it and had a lot of positive responses; be it 12 second tests, brain scans (like the book buyology) or other research advice.

However, I think the main point here, is setting price expectations. Gap is more of a mall shop and probably have a higher ratio there than anywhere else now, so along with a new price policy may have come this new logo.

Whilst I couldn't care much for the design itself, if it sells, why not. Amazon isn't a "sexy" site, but I don't think anyone here is going to challenge their conversion rate.

Cheers

Noel

The new Gap logo gives me a quick-glance feeling of an insurance company. Plain font with blue square. Not terribly dissimilar to the Nationwide logo really.

I love simplistic designs, especially for fashion brands, but if that's what Gap was going for, then they missed their mark.

I saw another site talking about this same logo, and they showed an example, using the same font, but all lowercase and no random blue square. That actually looked pretty good.

This seems rushed, forced and not thoroughly thought out.

.......................... And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation ................................

Like roasting the poor SOB that put this out

Since I have my pulpit on -lets play the devils advocate - This logo is easy to remember - the first logo was no Picasso either - It will (new) fax well - Nike has a dash adobe a stepped on cube ......hell things could not get any worse.

So who ever and where ever you are mister designer ...........don't let the bastards get you down.

I can't really even give this a score, as it doesn't even count as design...

What's really appalling to me, is that LAIRD+PARTNERS the company that designed this atrocity (if design was even remotely involved)...would have been paid a huge some of money, to sit on their hands for 6 months and then at the last minute deadline put this together, with some bollox spiel about how the new logo reflects a Gap in the market place...

Maybe it's just me, but I really do get sick and tired of seeing crap re-brands of well known logo's by gig up themselves agencies, charging massively overpriced amounts of money, for absolutely no thought involved... (happens a fair bit in NZ)...

I do realise that this design has now been pulled and that GAP, are using facebook, 99designs and all other design communities round the globe to get free re-designs... I was tempted myself, but then I decided, that it's not fair, some agency twit, got paid a lot of money to do this, then it was pulled and I can imagine there was only a 20% rebate as per all agency standards, and now GAP have the cheek to get free design done.

Ok my rant is over, maybe it's just me, but I actually think this may of been the agency's idea...

The font choice is simply uninspired, almost lazy. The use of black for the font completely gives it a much different and unstable feel than the original, completely opposite old Logo. And a gradient in a small square? It's almost like they hate the brand so much they want it to self-destroy. And they succeeded.

Ugly font choice, the square behind the text is even worse. I do agree with emma thesis about gap using this stupid choice for their benefit, smart idea btw.

I have given one star only for design as at least the new design is properly kerned.

Gap have seen sense and reverted to the original logo but with the cross on the 'G' and the 'A' aligning.

Most logos of big companies like Pepsi, Coke, Google etc only change very slightly over time and evolve rather than be changed in a big way at one time.

seriously?

It's look very simple design

I still thinking... why?

Was this done on powepoint.

The 'designer' must be feeling a tad embarrassed now...

Honestly I do not like very much. It 's very simple and the colors too flat. Should be better with shades.

(Google translation .. sorry)

this new gap logo looks very generic, the old logo is established and much superior