• http://www.kirkmarketing.com James H

    Heidi, No doubt Ries and Trout would have agreed with you – I like the old version of the logo as well. But if the business strategy has changed significantly then maybe it’s worth giving up some of the ground they have in order to gently change course and build loyalty around the new look? Since we know the stores are going to change, but we don’t know what the average Starbuck’s ‘shop’ and / or ‘experience’ will be in 5 years, I feel it’s hard to judge the new look by today’s standard.

  • @erkramer

    Heidi, I think you raise some great points. The “Gap fiasco” should have been more than enough evidence. In my opinion, why not ask your customers for their feedback at least initially? They even had an ideal channel already in place to extract insights from their most loyal evangelists (The Starbucks Digital Network). They come off as overly confident as if they are making a statement to their competition. For a company that has gone out of its way to provide a welcoming experience and connect with the local community I am not impressed by this decision.

    • http://riversidemarketingstrategies.com/ Heidi Cohen

      Eric–I totally agree that the “Gap Fiasco” should have raised awareness for a company like Starbucks that has a good reputation for listening to its customers and fans this wasn’t the way to change or modify your brand. Further, like Gap, Starbucks has lots of customer and public interaction in real life why integrate that into your efforts? I’m always surprised that companies overlook the ability to leverage their retail presence to enhance their marketing.

      SInce you’re not impressed with Starbucks’ marketing move, what would you have recommended that they do? Obviously, they wanted to do something major for their 40th Anniversary.

      Happy marketing,
      Heidi Cohen