Thursday, December 1, 2011

Morgan Henson’s Post

One thing I've been noticing lately is how so many companies are beginning to recreate or "rebrand" themselves, either to keep up with the times or create a new identity for themselves. I've found plenty of examples lately but these are the ones that stuck out to me the most.

The first one is the Florida Marlins major league baseball team, newly renamed the Miami Marlins. In my opinion, there is no better time to rebrand than when the company changes names. 

Although the new logo slightly resembles the Super Mario M, I am convinced that this new logo will be very effective and distinct to the team.

I am sure that we are all familiar with the second one: AOL Instant Messenger. Honestly I was not aware that AOL was even in existence, but it appears that with their new logo they are trying to stay afloat! I do enjoy the new logo and it is much more modern, but I will miss the yellow buddy.

I have conflicted feelings about the new Doubletree logo. When I first saw it advertised in Springdale, I remember initially thinking that it was terribly ugly. But after looking at the old one I cannot decide which one is better (or worse!) The new one is definitely more noticeable than the original, but that may not necessarily be a good thing. However, I do think that it is wise that they associate themselves with Hilton Hotels, which they successfully do with the "by Hilton" placed strategically underneath. There are plenty more examples of companies recreating themselves (and many, many opinions on them) at


  1. I have to say that I really like the new double tree logo. Although the double tree is not an extremely nice hotel, it tries to portray itself as such. I believe the intent of this new logo was to look fancier. I have always wondered why they had a logo that ,in my opinion, looked so cheap. I think the new one is clean, good looking, and it better represents the company. The new tree and the "By Hilton" helps with this message a lot.

    It really gets me how much time and money big companies like this spend on redesigning a logo.

  2. I agree that there is no better time to re-do a logo than when the company changes directions, or names, but I really don't like the marlins new logo that much. Everyone knows the old logo, even though I don't really like baseball I still knew the logo. The new one doesn't scare "baseball" to looks more like a resort logo to me.
    I love the new typeface for the aim logo but I really do miss the yellow guy. He was the icon for the messenger and they just got rid of it. I don't think that was the best decision because people recognized aim by him. But I do think the new typeface is quirky and I like it a lot.
    Just like Morgan, I'm conflicted by the doubletree redo. While the old logo wasn't the most attractive, it was still simple and to the point. I think that I like the trees on the old logo better but the typeface on the new logo better. I think that they should somehow combine the two logos.

  3. I think the new Marlins logo is no better than the previous one. It may be worse actually, but it is definitely a completely new brand. It is very interesting how much they are changing the image and style of the team. The logo looks to me as if it belongs on a minor league team or possibly arena football. Both of these are things known for bad design. The Marlins are also building a new stadium in Miami that will be just as gaudy and tacky as the new logo.

    but hey..... the backstop is going to be an aquarium! That's cool.... right?