What do you all think? To me it looks at least ten years overdue. Here is more information, including pictures of previous logos, hat tip to Andrew Sullivan.
The new Walmart [sic] logo
Previous post: Medieval cities: Europe vs. the Arabic world
Next post: Authoritarian Regimes
Do they push lowercase sans serif fonts in design school? It seems everyone is going to that style. I don’t know if I like it or not. I think it might appear dated very quickly.
What’s interesting is the abandoning of the “bargain”-type logo with the more contemporary, neutral one. It is fashionable, yes, but it’s also softer, with those nice curves on the bottom of the W and the thinning on the top of the a. Does this bespeak a new corporate attitude? Time was they didn’t want anything fancy in their stores because it detracted from the cheap-ness aesthetic. Now they’re investing in green building design and making some (admittedly shallow) eco-gestures. They’re still union-busting mega-bastards, but it makes you wonder where they’re going with all this… or is it, simply, trendy?
Looks like a drug logo. Don’t like it. I rather liked the simplicity and heaviness of the original — it got across a sort of “serve and obey your corporate masters” feel which fit well with the company. Oh well. Tempus fugit.
How will they do the squiggly in the Wal~Mart cheer?
The sphincter comment is priceless.
I hate it; of the logos shown, the ‘Frontier Logo’ is the best. I don’t understand or like modern aesthetics very well, they all seem dull and chintzy to me. This is the logo equivalent of a modern, worthless ‘glass box’ skyscraper.
The asterisk at the end looks like clip art.
“The abstract total-design logo is the most marvelous fraud that the American graphic arts have ever perpetrated upon American business. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, these abstract logos, which a company (Chase Manhattan, Pan Am, Winston Sprocket, Kor Ban Chemical) is supposed to put on everything from memo pads to the side of its 50-story building, make absolutely no impact-conscious or unconscious-upon its customers or the general public, except insofar as they create a feeling of vagueness or confusion†¦Yet millions continue to be poured into the design of them. Why? Because the conversion to a total-design abstract logo format somehow makes it possible for the head of the corporation to tell himself: “I’m modern, up-to-date, with it, a man of the future. I’ve streamlined this old baby.† Why else would they have their companies pour $30,000, $50,000, $100,000 into the concoction of symbols that any student at Pratt could, and would gladly, give him for $125 plus a couple of lunches at the Tratorria, or even the Zum-Zum? The answer: if the fee doesn’t run into five figures, he doesn’t feel streamlined. Logos are strictly a vanity industry, and all who enter the field should be merciless cynics if they wish to guarantee satisfaction.†
- Tom Wolfe, author of “From Bauhaus to Our House† as quoted in 1972 (when he judged the AIGA’s Communication Graphics competition) in “Seventy-nine Short Essays on Design” by Michael Bierut
Renee: “They’re still union-busting mega-bastards”
And that message really has meaning to American and international consumers, doesn’t it? Walmart’s sales in the latest fiscal year were only $375 billion. Sales growth may be slowed in the current quarter, but in the first quarter of FY2009, Walmart’s sales grew about 10%, year over year.
Do you think anyone who shops at Walmart really cares whether the person scanning his T-Shirts and his bag of Cheetos is “union certified”? What I’ve noticed at my neighborhood Walmart is the growth in self-service checkout customers.
Yeah, let’s unionize the Walmart workforce and watch how much more the company can automate jobs out of existence.
Is this change in response to the negative image of Buy-n-Large, from WALL-E?
this change is too radical.
it doesn’t matter if the new logo is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ somehow. a brand is mostly perceived by its logo. changing the logo requires elaborateness and only slight changes should be made.
if the change is too extreme, customer perception and therefore attention will change (and mostly drop), sometimes to the point where the brand isn’t recognized anymore.
negative example for this (in europe): ‘fairy’, changed to ‘dawn’ and back due to huge losses.
positive example for this (in europe): ‘raider’ changed to ‘twix’ (sonst ändert sich nix…; still can’t forget the slogan of this multi million ad campaign). i know these examples refer to products and not to company logos, but i still think the same rules apply here. brand maintenance is a delicate business.
p.s. i’m missing the ‘beta’ tag
If a brand’s overall mission has not changed, why change a logo?
As I understand it, the Coca-Cola’s script letters on today’s cans and bottles were created by Frank Robinson about 1872. Robinson was a partner of founder John Pemberton.
McDonald’s golden arch logo with company name across it served them well for at least 40 years, though I think it has just recently been slightly modified.
Holiday Inn redesigned its signs in the early 80′s, I think. But that coincided with their mission change – to serve the business customer rather than vacationing families. Still, the company name was written in the same font for over 50 years. Last year Holiday Inn announced it would require franchisees to spend $1 billion to change the company’s logo.
I don’t think WalMart has changed its mission. To me, changing their logo is a waste of time and money.
Looks awful. Like something out of the 70s. But that’s kind of what it feels like to shop there. I’m not dissing big boxes, it’s just that Walmart’s stores always look like hell.
Good color and font choice, warmer, rounder are more friendly, but the goofy sun image throws me, it looks like something an energy company might use to green up their image and imply they’re into solar energy.
I like the new one. The older one I’ve begun to think reflects on older stores a certain dingy-ness, the way older stores feel compared to the newer Supercenters.
Yeah, let’s unionize the Walmart workforce and watch how much more the company can automate jobs out of existence.
No, they’re too cheap to do that. They’ll just use some third world country or just pull another Jonquiere. Besides, the automation would break down much like their low-quality goods. That is, the automation would break horribly and frequently.
Of course, if you restore the balance by repealing Taft-Hartley and friends, balance can be restored. That means taking every dirty trick away from business and allow a good faith negotiation. Right now, it’s just “we win/y’all lose” in favor of the company. This happens when businesses can wage a war of attrition, and turn the “secret ballot” into a joke. The former is designed to force their hand out of good-faith negotiation. The latter is just to give the perception of a democratic choice(where the secrecy only holds as long as you vote in support of the company).
To deal with such entities until then:
Call in the National Guard next time they fly/drive in to react to a union(or start playing dirty pool with the community). Escort any of them out of the state; ensure they are cut off completely. If they wish to aid and abet hostile countries, they need to face the consequences.
If they respond by closing up shop, fine. If they’re locked out of a large enough region, consider it justice. Just make sure they leave and nothing remotely similar comes back.
This logo won’t evenTo deal with such entities until then:
If only they’d just call in the National Guard next time they fly in to a unionizing region. Escort them out of the state and report them as terrorists.
As for the logo and the slogan changes, they’re nothing more than a whitewash. They’ve harmed too many communities and antagonized too many people to make any impact.
If Wal-mart (or anyone) replaces a checkout clerk with an automated machine, one job is lost. But you’ve completely ignored all the other jobs created to design, market, build, install, and maintain that machine. You’re acting like a checkout clerk position is a high-value add position that our economy should hold onto. And therefore, unions=good? You must live in bizarro world. By your logic, we should oppose any effort to automate a business process because a laborer might be put out of business. That’s exactly the kind of short-sighted thinking that continues to let unions mooch off their members (let’s face facts – unions are primarily concerned with serving their own management, and in their spare time they pay lip service to their members while they pick their pockets). If you need more evidence of the deadweight loss imposed by unions, check out the Detroit auto industry. They made their bed, and now they are lying in it.
Does anyone go to the Wal-mart clerk because they enjoy their sunny dispositions? Frankly, if there is no line at either, I prefer the self-checkout to the clerk.
J. Hoffa:
If you need more evidence of the deadweight loss imposed by unions, check out the Detroit auto industry. They made their bed, and now they are lying in it.
They aren’t going to die as they do what others won’t do: mass produce performance into cars without a high pricetag.
This question remains: why does it take coercive action to remove unions? Something just seems a bit wrong when those who’d normally remove regulation would not even think of touching things like Taft-Hartley.
Instead, they would rather take the approach summarized as “Carthago delenda est”. The meaning of that is sanctioned revenge on labor unions(until they no longer exist).
mk is right. This is a rip off of the BP logo, but not as amusing as the “brown ring of quality.”
http://home.nyc.rr.com/dmcguire/brown.gif
sethstorm: “Besides, the automation would break down much like their low-quality goods.”
For someone who seems to dislike Walmart so much, you certainly seem to know little about the company. Walmart’s huge edge over its competitors for 20 years has been its extensive use of computerized inventory control and automated warehouses.
sethstorm: “To deal with such entities until then:
Call in the National Guard next time they fly/drive in to react to a union(or start playing dirty pool with the community).”
You just don’t get it, do you? Walmart’s customers – who far, far outnumber the nation’s entire union membership – don’t give a damn about unions. You can rant all you wish, but politicians are not going to screw over the Walmart that America has proven – through its dollars – that it loves. Yeah, a few cities such as Chicago may try, but it’s those cities that lose as the sales tax revenues just go to the next community over.
I don’t like the star. The font is ok though.
“Walmart’s huge edge over its competitors for 20 years has been its extensive use of computerized inventory control and automated warehouses.”
Wrong. Walmart’s huge edge over its competitors has been its sheer size, allowing it to impose price controls on its suppliers.
meter: “Wrong. Walmart’s huge edge over its competitors has been its sheer size, allowing it to impose price controls on its suppliers.”
Meter, you are correct that Walmart’s current economies of scale enable the company to negotiate lower prices with its suppliers. But Walmart was not always the largest retailer. Sears, Kmart, and Target were all bigger in the 70′s and through most of the 80′s. They had the purchasing economies of scale, not Walmart.
One of the key success factors for Walmart in the 80′s and the 90′s was its computer-driven logistics systems. Most researchers agree on this point. Walmart invested many millions in perfecting its inventory and ordering systems, and linking them to its suppliers’ systems. Walmart also invested in leading edge distribution center automation. All these systems ensured that Walmart managers were on top of changing consumer preferences. Walmart managers knew instantly what was selling and what was not.
The ability to always know what’s selling – the ability to ensure an adequate inventory of what sells – the ability to adjust prices based on known consumer preferences – the ability to reduce inventory carrying costs through hyper-efficient just-in-time systems – these are huge advantages for retail managers. For Walmart, thess advantages as much as any other enabled the company to leapfrog over KMart, Sears, and Target.
Looks exactly like created by Marginal Revolution’s Commenter Committee. Howard Luck Gossage said new logos should always look like created two decades ago.
Blaming Detroit’s problems primarily on unions is silly.
That doesn’t stop some from using the tired old lines from the 1980′s. They would bash GM, Ford, and Chrysler. When they were done, they bashed the unions for standing their ground. Rinse and repeat in 2003 when they aimed upwards at citizens who had superior talent, but were citizens. Is it not a rational response to defend against those who wish to remove your livelihood (business, not government)?
John Dewey:
I’ve been there when Sam (and not the current Benedict Arnolds) ran a pro-US business. One could get something that was of the US and it was well-made, worth the cost. For what they’ve done, I have no apologies to offer – the National Guard is quite correct in responding to a threat to the area they cover. They are not an entity that is willing to even negotiate in good faith – they merely wish to find a suitable mark.
Yeah, a few cities such as Chicago may try, but it’s those cities that lose as the sales tax revenues just go to the next community over.
Thus a need to act on a larger scale. Their PR community can do quite a job to demonize people. That and that alone is what makes the low quality and prices palatable. They won’t explain their dirty deeds on air.
Walmart’s customers – who far, far outnumber the nation’s entire union membership – don’t give a damn about unions.
It doesn’t take much when they’ve been conditioned to (still) think “Italian mobster” when they hear the words “Labor union”.
As for Detroit, it will not die as they put performance in a car, not just reliability. The imports require a very huge outlay of $20,000-$25,000 before you see anything that was not underpowered for the body. They deliver something to a US population that cannot simply be ignored.
Seriously… a splash of color won’t correct some correct business practices. Take the money spent on Photoshop and kick it over to people not getting paid for overtime.
We are professional cheap kids shoes online store .We provide Nike shoes cheap ,Nike air jordan,cheap kids clothing
cheap womens clothing,Nike shoes online store,Nike shoes cheap,Nike shoes for kids,air jordan sneakers,nike air jordan,air jordans,brand shoe,shoes brand, dropship Nike shoes , brand clothes,brand clothes ,shoes brand,cheap kids clothing for cheap wholesale Air Jordans shoes for kids & women.
Comments on this entry are closed.