Opinion BY Armin

Hertz Loses its Shadow

With 8,100 locations in 147 countries and approximately 30 million reservations annually, Hertz is one of the world’s largest rental car services. It’s also the most yellow. Since early this year, Hertz has slowly been introducing a new logo first brought in February from a customer survey. With the logo now on Hertz’s web site and the cover of the 2008 annual report I would have expected a little more fanfare or at least more information, but there is none unfortunately.

The previous logo had its charms. There was something convincing about the pronounced italic and the heavy-handed shadow. It at least stood out like a monolith in an airport amidst all the other car rental logos. It was impossible to miss. Again, the yellow helped, so it might be safe to say that Hertz could change to comic sans and as long as they kept that yellow they would still have a recognizable identity within the car rental category. A thin theory I guess, but I digress. The new logo is more in tune with today’s sensibilities and I like that it is an evolution and not a complete redesign. The letterforms are friendly and there is a very nice rhythm to the “rtz” part. Compared to the old logo, the new one feels flimsy and delicate but overall it’s a nice contemporary update.

Update: The correct logo has been updated in the image above; as some noted, the crossbar of the “H” should have been lower. Also, the logo was designed by Landor.

Thanks to Nick Gow for the tip.

DATE: Oct.05.2009CATEGORY: Transportation 78 COMMENTS

Tom Petty’s comment is:

I really like this. As you said, the new logo wasn't without it's charms, but this new one feels much more 'together' and appropriate for today's market. My only criticism would be that the 'rtz' sit together so well, that they seem to be almost distancing themselves from the 'He'.

On Oct.05.2009 at 07:08 AM

Adam Bestwick’s comment is:

Agree Tom.
'He' needs tightening a tad.

On Oct.05.2009 at 07:54 AM

Nathan McKinney’s comment is:

So sue me, but I like the old one better. Saying it's dated just because it has a couple of older styles isn't an excuse to replace a logo that had more impact and recognizability. Unless Hertz is trying to turn over a new leaf and take a fresh approach at business beyond it's branding, there really isn't any need for this. The new logo has some merits, but I don't think it stands out enough and actually has made the company feel more "taxiesque" to me.

On Oct.05.2009 at 07:55 AM

Dale Campbell’s comment is:

I like it as well.

Cleanliness is the first thing that came to my mind with respect to execution. Dropping the shadow (ha!) is a great idea.

Keep well,
Dale

On Oct.05.2009 at 07:56 AM

jonno’s comment is:

The logo was in dire need of a refresh, but I'm not too sure whether the new logo is distinctive enough. There's nothing particularly bad about it, it's just very plain and easy to miss.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:10 AM

Jason’s comment is:

I think they really missed an opportunity by not continuing the "rtz" flow with the "He". That flow to me implies movement; a street, pathway, directional element, etc. The "He" interrupts that rhythm. (And the kerning is a bit too loose as well.) Overall a decent redesign, but certainly nothing to write home about.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:14 AM

Sylvain Lemire’s comment is:

Hertz had a "3D" logo for a long time. Other big companies, like UPS, have opted to add a third dimension to their logo recently.
While I agree that the new Hertz logo looks more modern, it has lost its unique look, opting for cleanliness above recognition.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:17 AM

PJ’s comment is:

I agree that the 'he' could do with tightening up a little...

Overall it works though, thinking as a consumer, the change in logo / branding feels seamless. As soon as I saw the new logo I instantly knew who it was. Yes the name 'hertz' holds a great deal of its own cache but its quite a feat to take an incredibly well established brand, redesign it and retain the feeling of the original instantly recognisable and established brand.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:34 AM

Todd’s comment is:

I disagree with remarks made about the older logo. A recent project of mine left me dealing with its aesthetic a few times, and I found it difficult get around it. The shadow, while bold, comes off as "Word art" to me.

The continuing black and yellow color scheme could have been neutralized a little. It comes off as harsh and discomforting, which is not good when trying convince customers that their out-of-town experience will be a comfortable transition. Not to mention notions that could be made about its connection to (presumably dirty) taxis.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:38 AM

jonathan’s comment is:

Hey, at least the didn't go all lowercase. I suppose it could be worse.

I agree, the "H e" could use some kerning, but overall I think I'm liking the old better. The new one just absolutely has NO presence.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:39 AM

André’s comment is:

For a logo that is displayed in many airports it just looks like one of the normal signs.
I don't know if that's supposed to be good, by looking standardized and thus becoming "natural", or bad, by looking like a washroom sign.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:44 AM

Sal’s comment is:

What's with the e? It's larger than the other lowercase letters and it's got an unnaturally flat bottom. The whole mark seems like it's scared to be oblique. At least they kept the color.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:52 AM

Nate B’s comment is:

The kerning! The goggles do nothing!

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:00 AM

Barkley’s comment is:

There is definately some work left to do on the lowercase e. I think if they had choosen an "e" that was more boxy (similliar to the one in the original logo) then the spacing, kerning, letter width would be alot more balanced.

Those that say its a bit plain are on to something. Lets hope that this is a stick in the ground to be advanced at a hopefully near-future point. As is, It is a contemporary refresh and a good step forward

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:06 AM

Albyantoniazzi’s comment is:

Definitely better the old one.

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:10 AM

Lemon’s comment is:

Without doubt the new one is a nice, clean logo.

Even though it has some issues (e.g. kerning) visually is nice
but is is just another logo.

I feel that Hertz lost its identity by picking this logo.

My opinion is that they could have changed the typeface to
something more contemporary (as they did) but this shadow was so distinctive for the brand that was practically yelling to remain.

As Barkley says it is a step forward but I feel that something is missing to complete this step!

Have a nice week everybody

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:29 AM

Geoff’s comment is:

To me, this is another example of 'updating' ruining a good logo. The old one was admittedly a little clunky by current standards, but the fact is, if every company 'updates' their logo to a friendly, sans-serif, then EVERY COMPANY WILL HAVE A FRIENDLY, SANS SERIF LOGO.

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:38 AM

Matthew’s comment is:

Wow, the kerning is horrible. The previous identity was definitely better conceptually. I don't see any reason to change it.

This is what happens when a company wants to update their logo to match current trends. What happened to originality and uniqueness? I'm so tired of everyone wanting to look like everyone else.

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:44 AM

Michael Huen’s comment is:

The old one is better. I don't get why everyone is trying to update today's "aesthetics". Rather than trying to be authentic to their own brand, Hertz is following a trend. Undoubtedly this will only make Hertz blend into the noise of the "slimming down" logos. There's completely nothing wrong with their original logo as it demonstrates recognizability and immediate emphasis – exactly the thing you need in the monotony of airport signage.

I also don't agree with taxi dirtiness. Today taxis are relatively kept as well as a useful utility.

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:49 AM

Dennis Van Staalduinen’s comment is:

I think the new logo is a massive step backward. Yes the old shadow was heavy-handed, and if you were launching from scratch, you might not even consider doing it like this. But with decades of brand equity in a bold approach that it was far from broken or embarassing, they've killed an easy visual differentiator.

Also, Andre makes a fantastic point about looking like yellow directional signage. They did already, but with more "pop".

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:50 AM

Justin’s comment is:

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? The new logo is un-original, un-defined, and un-interesting. Terrible re-design.

The old logo was recognizable and bold. The yellow was "kept in check" by the black shadow (and the fact that only the letters were colored).

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:51 AM

Trey Porter’s comment is:

The 'H' and 'e' look real lonely in the new wordmark.

Otherwise, the newer version is certainly more attractive (but not exactly 'friendlier' in my eyes). I still feel though, that the older version has more merit and strength.

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:55 AM

rolfsf’s comment is:

I guess I'll have to see it in context - as others have pointed out, it's a lot like your average caution-yellow sign on the road or the airport. The old logo was very distinctive... ugly, perhaps, but distinctive. This new logo could be one of those knock-off yellow cabs with it's poor kerning.

On Oct.05.2009 at 09:59 AM

damon’s comment is:

not bad, but I would have liked to see a Z with a more rounded look to match the r and to somehow try and tie the rest of the letters into the flow they've established in the latter half and to tighten up the whole block.

overall it's better though.

On Oct.05.2009 at 10:09 AM

Robb Irrgang’s comment is:

i'd say it's pretty ok but when i hit the website all the enthousiasm I had for it kind of vanished. It's lost in that sea of bad UI. They should be taking MAJOR advantage of the yellow vs white contrast.

Also, does the 'r' feel hella narrow?

On Oct.05.2009 at 10:21 AM

Juan Manuel’s comment is:

I can't believe what they have done with Hertz Brand. One of the diferential things of the logo was the strong black shadow and the type style, an old style may be, but something that makes the difference. The problem is what the brand resigned, as Rolfsf and Justin said, the new logo is un-original, un-defined, and un-interesting. The company leave behind a representative logo for a new and current logo that says nothing. Why? 'Cause is just like all the others.

I always think in this cases: why fix something if it's not broken? The old logo works, and I'm sure the business to. So, why did they make a decision that, of course, costs millions of dollars to be implemented all over the several countries where Hertz do business? May be, someone of marketing thought that the brand looks old and needed to be more modern and current, or may be someone needed to justify his work by claiming the re-branding of the company as a personal achievement.

On Oct.05.2009 at 10:47 AM

Joel’s comment is:

Blah. Typographical logos are simple and all, but jeez this is about a generic as you can get. I wish I could have sat in on the brainstorming session for this one. I wonder how much they paid for this? I wonder WHY they paid for this? It seems like a "do it yourselfer" kind of logo.

On Oct.05.2009 at 10:51 AM

Bill Dawson (XK9)’s comment is:

OK, here's my take. Right idea; wrong execution.

Hertz was ripe for a redesign. Maintaining the color and the "italic" nature of the mark was a nice nod to the past. But beyond that this brandmark is a glaring failure.

Quibble all you want about the "kerning" typophiles. I seriously doubt this is a typeface. And the designer who created it is responsible for the letter-fit and character design whether or not it was drawn or typed in Illustrator or MS Paint. The whole of this mark is a disjointed mess.

That "e" sticks out like a sore thumb. Not just because it floats disconnected from the H and r, it's character is inconsistent with the rest of the letterforms. It's too tall, too fat and too varied in form to mesh with the other geometrically constrained forms.

The "rtz" was an opportunity for a ligature, but that's not necessary. It's remarkable how disconnected they are considering all of the similarities in the strokes.

The mark as a whole also seems woefully inadequate. It languishes in the yellow field, lost and alone. I imagine that some form of drop shadow, 3D homage was attempted and abandoned. And perhaps some creative director preached the "less is more" doctrine of beauty through simplicity. A note on that: when the mark is less than successful, less is not more; it's less, more or less.

The root problem is that as a logotype this mark fails.

On Oct.05.2009 at 11:02 AM

Michael Tyznik’s comment is:

I do really like the new logo. I just don't think it works as an evolution of the old one. It just doesn't have the weight or presence that the old one did.

On Oct.05.2009 at 11:25 AM

jason Parry’s comment is:

It needs to be about 10 weights heavier.

On Oct.05.2009 at 11:34 AM

Jared Ray Scott Ramey’s comment is:

Back in the 90's, i used to work for Avis rental car and of course, where there is Avis, there is Hertz. I always envied them because they had a much more recognizable sign than Avis did, and black and yellow is just pretty cool (it certainly killed Enterprise at the time). So, as I envied it, the Hertz logo ended up having a special place in my life, and so its disheartening to see it finally go.

The new one is pretty nice, but it seems like the redesign could have been a little closer to the original version.

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:08 PM

BJN’s comment is:

The logo on the website's header has the horizontal stroke in the H below the stroke on the lowercase e. The annual report vector graphic doesn't show a flat bottomed e.

Generic, poorly executed, and — based on the website — poorly controlled.

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:17 PM

Dave’s comment is:

Did anyone notice that the logo on the site and the logo on this page are slightly different? The cross bar on the H appears to align with the e on their web site. Maybe it is a work in progress! Probably should update that favico too...

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:20 PM

Kári Emil Helgason’s comment is:

The e looks odd. The bottom has been shaven off and it looks way taller than it should be. But I like it though.

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:21 PM

Ivan’s comment is:

sadly...another xerox-like wordmark. Thumbs down...what's next:

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:22 PM

John Mindiola III’s comment is:

Another one bites the dust. The old Hertz logo was iconic and relevant every day, and now it's a memory. I wish there was greater focus on fresh campaigns or updating the brand's look and feel, instead of changing the logo. This new logo feels wimpy, techy-ish, and forgettable. Years from now, the design textbooks will point back to this decade and lament over the brand-killing that took place.

My Intro to Computer Graphics course starts tomorrow night. "...students, in the news today, an instantly recognizable and familiar brand crumbles under marketing peer pressure and the result is this aseptic wordmark..."

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:41 PM

Koyo’s comment is:

Simple.

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:45 PM

Kevin S.’s comment is:

A point was made about the previous logo's "weight" compared to the new one. I'm fairly certain that when strategy was considered for the rebrand, the negative connotation of visual weight may have been brought up (i.e. weight=slow and clunky while lack of which=expediency and convenience). Yes, it's no secret the older one stood out more (pardon the pun). Don't know about you, but I don't want to be at that counter any longer than I have to. All said, the new one has it's shortcomings. And let's just say the vastness of that yellow bg is for illustration purposes only.

B-

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:45 PM

toby’s comment is:

Actually the website logo has the horizontal strokes of the "He" at the same level, different from the one shown here.

A horizontal ending of the "e" would connect it better to the "r" and help to join all letters nicely.

Note that the favicon is still the shadowed "H" from the old logo.

By the way, the old logo was not shadowed in some applications: On black background and when using 3D lighted letters.

We will see how they do the new logo in those applications - black letters on a yellow square or will there be a yellow on black variant too?

On Oct.05.2009 at 12:54 PM

jj’s comment is:

There's not much wrong with it, especially if the kerning was adjusted a bit, and the crossbar on the H balances that of the e as in the one of the samples above.

Unfortunately, there's not a lot right with it either. It's just nothing special and I believe an identity should convey something, communicate something, or just be special in some way.

The good news is this: We'll all be redesigning these in a few years when everyone turns around and they all have the same logo.

On Oct.05.2009 at 01:08 PM

Darrel’s comment is:

You'd think a rebrand would be a chance to address this:

hertz = hurts

On Oct.05.2009 at 01:16 PM

Elisa’s comment is:

I like the new logo, but I think it could be better. I think Jason said it best, "nothing to write home about"

On Oct.05.2009 at 01:36 PM

JD Morley’s comment is:

Ahhhhhh, this kerning hurts my eyes.

On Oct.05.2009 at 02:54 PM

Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:

NOt a great solution. Looks like a pile-up on the 405.

On Oct.05.2009 at 03:13 PM

Brian’s comment is:

I like it overall. I'm amused by the number of people that noticed the kerning between the H and e as it was the first thing I noticed as well.

On Oct.05.2009 at 03:20 PM

Brandy’s comment is:

I agree with Ivan…Come on people! The 90's called; they want their overworked, over-styled, strangely weighted type back. The shadow was what they had going for them!

On Oct.05.2009 at 05:31 PM

Blue Buddha’s comment is:

I feel like I'm missing something with this design. It feels like a start in the right direction, but not finally executed. Where is it going?

It also very much reminds me of the flont feature on Veer—like they wanted to find a nice new typeface for their logo and just took the screen grab of one of the fonts they liked, thus the poorly kerned letters.

That flat bottomed "e" is really bugging me too. The "H" also has a weird kink out of it. Perhaps this is just an on-screen issue?

On Oct.05.2009 at 06:21 PM

Armin’s comment is:

Update: The correct logo has been updated in the image above; as some noted, the crossbar of the "H" should have been lower. Also, the logo was designed by Landor.

On Oct.05.2009 at 08:56 PM

mmatyus’s comment is:

The old logo was endearing

On Oct.05.2009 at 10:08 PM

jmk’s comment is:

seems many companies are shedding their big blocky letters and going with friendlier thinner word mark solutions. the old shadow actually made it more iconic though, what this new one lacks is anything iconic (memorable). like, when memorex changed it's word mark to the thinner font they at least added that dotty icon. maybe they could have added a nice simple icon to add memorability to the clean font.

also, i would make that registration mark MUCH smaller.

On Oct.05.2009 at 11:00 PM

Jukes’s comment is:

I thought of Sprint immediately.

Seeing the presentation of the new logo made me conceptually study the name of the company for the first time. Although I knew exactly what "Hertz" was, I keep looking for something to tie it into the audio science industry.

But anyway, as it stands now, with no context it seems a little bland, but the marketing potential is so much higher than with the gaudy 3D logo. Much better.

On Oct.06.2009 at 12:38 AM

Emilio’s comment is:

I truly believe this is a big mistake...

On Oct.06.2009 at 12:45 AM

The_Mainlander’s comment is:

Does not inspire me, bit boring, can you patent Yellow & Black for HERTZ? ... prolly not.

Looks like 90's retro, I am sorry but this looks really old. Maybe that is what they are looking for trusted, stayed and reliable!

Still, that said it is an improvement on the old logo... but did they really need to change it when you look at the new vs. old?

On Oct.06.2009 at 12:46 AM

Freddy’s comment is:

It is a pity to throw a well-established, iconic logo into the bin for what looks like something thrown together with a substandard free font.

What hurts me most is that they wasted the opportunity to build upon their old logo. Yes, by today's standards, the old logo's type is a bit dated and the shadow is a bit clunky (and points into the wrong direction nowadays that everything is either lighted from the top left or straight from the top). So? Redraw the type, make it a bit more rounded if you wish to do so, re-do the shadow/3d effect in a sensible way.

Then they wouldn't have to refurnish all their signs with the new logo over night, and could slowly fade out the old version. Some people would notice, many would not, and most would immediately accept the new version. And noone would get confused at the airport.

On Oct.06.2009 at 01:57 AM

Michael L’s comment is:

No, Hertz, you still cannot join the cool kids' table.
I like the old logo better. As others have said, this one is just following the trend. And then, what? When a new trend arises, will they spend money to change to that again? And again? (I guess the same goes for other brands that want to be "cool" when they already have something on their own.)

On Oct.06.2009 at 06:10 AM

Joseph Maguire’s comment is:

I think this might be a major issue with their corporate branding. The color yellow and black although worked with the other mark, in this case looks more and more like a TAXI logo. the other mark because it was so unique and stuck out in a 3d form got away with using these colors. I think this is the case where they went tooo far away from the original look and feel and tried to use too much of that original color palette. IMO if you're going to go this far away mark wise you may as well reinvent the color palette as well.

On Oct.06.2009 at 07:27 AM

awesomerobot’s comment is:

I like it, but the "rtz" seem to be having some fun and leaving on the "he"

On Oct.06.2009 at 07:47 AM

awesomerobot’s comment is:

*edit* leaving OUT the "he", blarg

On Oct.06.2009 at 08:15 AM

Dogg’s comment is:

I was beginning to question all the squawking about kerning on the previous posts, but I guess the updated logo addressed the issue? I don't know, the spacing doesn't strike me as egregious.

On a whole, I'm not a huge fan of the makeover. I was never a fan of the old logo either, but at least there was equity in the previous branding as well as the visual "pop" of the old school blockbuster type. Kind of a lateral, slightly downward diagonal move in my opinion.

Hertz does seem to do a good job of exploiting yellow to the best of their ability. According to the Hertz website, John Hertz was the president of Yellow Cab and Truck when he purchased Hertz, so any connection to taxi cabs is logical.

It's fair to point out that Hertz as a rental car company is pretty groundbreaking (no I don't work at Hertz). They are one of the only agencies to have a "rent a racer" car lineup--the old Shelby in the '60s to the present day Vette. Get the insurance and beat the hell out of it.

On Oct.06.2009 at 10:57 AM

John’s comment is:

For what it's worth, as I returned my Hertz rental to the Boston Logan rental car return today, I noted the new logo is already being rolled out in preliminary signage applications. My first thought: that's hard to see. Navigating through a sea of directional signage (Where am I going? Right? Left? Straight? Avis/Alamo/Dollar/Budget?) I couldn't help but be grateful for a bold logo that was easy to see and recognize. This slimmed down redesign might get lost in a crowded visual space.

On Oct.06.2009 at 01:24 PM

Zia Khan’s comment is:

I wonder what the strategic intent of this change was. Might we see a different kind of rental car company down the road? Without that context my sense is that Herz is responding to the success of the zipcar business model.

On Oct.06.2009 at 02:45 PM

Brent Morris’s comment is:

It's a clean, simple update of the old.

I also think they are trying to distance themselves from the O.J. Days.

On Oct.06.2009 at 03:25 PM

Scott’s comment is:

Not bad, really but couldn't the registered mark be made smaller? Seems awfully big and distracting. Oh well.

On Oct.06.2009 at 04:12 PM

Daniel’s comment is:

I like it. Far improved IMO. when u want a rental car, I want to feel like the company has a modern fleet and modern booking technology, and the new Hertz logo reflects this.

On Oct.06.2009 at 07:14 PM

Mark’s comment is:

It looks good. I'm glad they kept some of the design from the old logo and kept the yellow while updating the classiness of it.

I will undoubtedly miss the old logo though, it's been around since who knows when and is immediately recognizable. But I'm happy what they did with it.

On Oct.07.2009 at 12:44 PM

toby’s comment is:

Here is an experimental "fused" version:

On Oct.07.2009 at 04:23 PM

Macdougal’s comment is:

I used to print them when I was still working in a labeling store 5years ago...the new logo looks nice and it is appropriate for today's market. toby's experimental "fused" version is much nicer though...

On Oct.07.2009 at 08:44 PM

Bodero’s comment is:

This looks like the very same typeface that RIM uses for their BlackBerry wordmark.

On Oct.08.2009 at 12:07 PM

Pablo Valentini’s comment is:

I really loved the "rtz" part, it seems to be lovingly so close to each other! But the letter "e" is the ugly duckling among the swans. Anyway, I consider a pretty well done job! Congrats!

On Oct.08.2009 at 10:36 PM

Matt C.’s comment is:

That's the funny thing about change: people hate it. Especially when they think it is unnecessary or it should be undone. But the fact that a brand appeals to an audience larger than your own, is evidence in itself that change, fundamentally, keeps a product fresh. If it's bad, it will garnish criticism and debate. If it's good, then it will do itself justice. Either way, refreshes come with time. Before this post, you probably didn't think twice about the last time you saw a Hertz. That's not good.

Now you will. See? It worked whether you liked it or not.

M

On Oct.08.2009 at 11:55 PM

Todd P’s comment is:

I could drive a rented Buick between those letters.

On Oct.09.2009 at 05:45 AM

Brandon S. Adkins’s comment is:

This one feels a little more modern, but I think it loses a little bit of recognition and character. At least they retained the yellow color, which is arguably the most recognizable element of their identity.

It's not bad, but was it really necessary?

On Oct.09.2009 at 03:46 PM

Brandon S. Adkins’s comment is:

Michael Tyznik’s comment is:
I do really like the new logo. I just don't think it works as an evolution of the old one. It just doesn't have the weight or presence that the old one did.

I think this says it best. It's missing the weight and presence.

On Oct.09.2009 at 03:50 PM

barb’s comment is:

The fused version would benefit from a smoother letter connection — it's rather bumpy from 'e' to 'r' and 'r' to 't' even at this small size. Surely that will be more pronounced on a huge sign. Regarding the first, unfused version, the gaping space between the tops of the 'e' and 'r' is not working and the yellow square is too big in relation to the word. Trimming to a tighter rectangle would give back some of its now missing presence. Granted, the letter forms in the original are tough to beat, however, it is time for an update.

On Oct.11.2009 at 07:05 AM

toby’s comment is:

right, barb - the letters have a bit of "overshoot" and the "fusing" is a quick and dirty pixelwork, it would need some finetuning with a scaleable source. It was just to get a rough idea and see whether an idea may work or not.

(i have nothing to do with Hertz or their logo designers!)

On Oct.12.2009 at 04:00 PM

Nick Gow’s comment is:

There's an article in Brand Week with some info on Hertz's rebranding...

http://www.brandweek.com/bw/content_display/esearch/e3iea9ebb170ad87d301c90092d39d6e667

On Oct.22.2009 at 03:45 PM

Chaz Forster’s comment is:

I think this rebrand gets a solid "meh" from me. I don't really like it compared to the old one. I like the old look much better compared to the boring new wordmark. There's no real personality to the new logo, it just kind of... is. It also doesn't seem like that much of an evolution either, more of a complete redirection. I think you can do the monolothic shadow in a modern, understated way, but it's not reflected here.

Also, it's kind of funny to note the website sports the new logo, but the favicon is the "H" from the old

On Oct.30.2009 at 01:24 PM

Levinson-Axelrod’s comment is:

Don't think it's that bad, and if it was a new company I'd really like it per se. However the problem is that I think they're losing a ton of recognition.

On Nov.09.2009 at 01:37 PM