So, when AT&T and SBC became one flesh, they decided to ditch the Saul Bass AT&T logo and go with a new one. They did it for all the reasons you would guess: they want to be fresh, communicate vitality and all that stuff. Instead of really developing a new strategy, or maybe hiring freshness consultants, they decided a new logo would do the trick.
From the press release:
The revitalized mark symbolizes these attributes—innovation, integrity, quality, reliability and unsurpassed customer care… The new logo reinvigorates the AT&T globe.
snort
If someone tells me that they need a new logo, immediately I say “why?”. I resist change here. Usually I’m all for change, I love tweaking and adjusting my routine to incorporate new things, but logos are different. To change a logo, I firmly believe that you need to determine that there is something very wrong with the old logo. Changing a logo is expensive and it waters down your corporate image. You are telling the entire population of earth that you aren’t to be known by the old look and that they should adjust their thinking to the new look.
Have you ever dyed your hair, shaved your head or done something to radically change your appearance? Do you remember how shocking it is to look yourself in the mirror, even a day or two later? Can you imagine how hard it is for people to recognize you in a crowd? Let’s say you tell someone to meet you at a party, but you were in disguise. Let’s say you also wore a name tag, that said your name, but in someone else’s handwriting. How is that someone going to find you? In the same way, switching logos is disorienting to the market. Sure, we will all get used to the new logo, but is it really necessary?
AT&T and SBC claim that the new logo symbolizes “innovation, integrity, quality, reliability and unsurpassed customer care”. Good gravy, what about this logo change brings about the feelings of “unsurpassed customer care”? If by customer care, you mean “wavy rendition of the death star”, then sure, I gotcha, but if not, then this stinks of marketing nonsense.
Who made the decision to change the logo? Is this just AT&T trying to get publicity? Are they really thinking that rebranding the company would gain enough positive publicity in this press release so that people say that “yes indeed, AT&T and SBC have unsurpassed customer care”. Mind you, this is at the cost of diluting the visual brand, market disorientation, and we haven’t even talked about the economics of the switch.
This logo switch will require new branding on the following: Nearly 50,000 vehicles, over 6,000 buildings, about 40,000 uniforms and hardhats, over 30,000,000 monthly customer bills, millions of business documents and various company websites.
Who pays for this? Well, that would be AT&T and SBC customers. No, they didn’t ask you. But then again, you’re only customers.
I welcome your opinion. Do you like the new logo? Is it worth it to have a logo that today’s market would consider more modern?
All articles on this site are licenced under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike license. All design, code, etc are All Rights Reserved.
Icons by iconbuffet and FAMFAMFAM.
Be Good Not Bad is all about really good web design, based on the utmost respect for web standards, accessibility and respect for the user. Based in Denver, Colorado, Be Good Not Bad is run by Brian Warren, freelance designer, blogger, homebrewer and coffee nut.
I totally agree. A logo should not be messed with unless someone did a poor job to begin with and it looks horribly dated, offensive, etc. Replacing your logo just to try to freshen up your image a little is like setting fire to the carpet to make the room more attention-getting. Yeah, you got my attention. But now what?
Saul Bass’ logo was simple, timeless, beautiful, memorable. In contrast, the new logo looks like something a sophomore digital media student came up with while playing around with 3-D modeling software. Ugh.
The idea the new logo symbolizes integrity, innovation, or any of that list of tripe, is just utterly disgusting corporate-speak. Shame on them.
§ #1 By Casey Letellier at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
I find it interesting that companies that use Saul Bass logos have pretty much all kept them for the last 30 (ish) years. He was a brilliant designer. This ‘new’ logo is a ripoff on his logo, and not an improvement. Why did they choose such a lousy font? sigh
§ #2 By JohnH at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
I guess I’m in the minority among you guys…I like the new logo.
§ #3 By Matt Martin at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
I think I know why the typography bugs me. I see either “at and t” or “a tnt” (boom!).
Still better that the terrible SBC identity, tho.
§ #4 By JohnH at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
Because you asked…that logo reminds me of Pepsi (but wavy Death Star is even better!). Don’t like the new font either. But, as a bonus, I cannot remember what the old one looked like either…so maybe that was a marketing failure, even if it was elegant. And are you just being rhetorical about why there’s a new logo? Because they have marketing people to pay! Shareholders to annoy! Oh wait… Ask John about the running man sometime.
§ #5 By AmyH at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
I like the graphic, but not the text – the lower case thing is fresh and innovative but I didn’t say – “OH – AT&T when I saw it”
§ #6 By David Fields at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
I guess the SBC and AT&T folks felt they needed something that said we are no longer AT&T nor are we SBC. We are no longer the Old Crusty; we are the new Hotness. You know you want our services…blah, blah! I agree with the “they have marketeers to pay” post. For some insane reason, image is everything in this day and age, and substance is tripe. The marketeers are here to make sure you look good, even if the “innovation, integrity, quality, reliability and unsurpassed customer care” are questionable. That doesn’t matter because it all sounds and looks good. As an SBC customer, here’s to hoping the bill doesn’t go up!
§ #7 By RobertB at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
Not so much marketers, they hire outside Identity Consultant Firms to to this sort of thing. The new logo is the product of Intrabrand .
The old Saul Bass logo is here, at the bottom of the page.
§ #8 By JohnH at 8:43pm on November 28 2005
I think this is strange. One company uses of logo of Saul Bass and they allow to do it.
§ #9 By SEO Company India at 4:02am on June 19 2008