The GAP Logo Redesign Fail

GAP is a brand that needs no introduction. The globally acclaimed clothing and accessories retailer was established in 1969 and has long been popular among a broad demographic of consumers.?

In 2010, GAP unveiled a new logo, much to the surprise and dismay of its loyal customers. The revamped design, which replaced the iconic blue box and white letters that had been the company's identity for over 20 years, was an uninspired attempt at modernisation.

The new logo was a plain, black Helvetica font against a white background, with a small blue square above the 'p.' It looked like something that somebody could have put together on Wordart in a matter of minutes. The reaction from customers and designers alike was swift and overwhelmingly negative.

One of the biggest criticisms of the new logo was that it completely abandoned the brand's history and identity. The blue box and white letters were instantly recognisable and had become synonymous with GAP. On the other hand, the new design could have been more memorable and lacked personality or character, as many of the brand loyalists said.

Design experts were also quick to point out the flaws in the new logo. It was poorly executed, with uneven spacing and awkward proportions. The font was also a poor choice, as Helvetica is widely used and generic and lacks distinctiveness.

Owing to the overwhelming backlash, GAP was forced to backtrack and revert to its original logo just one week after unveiling the new design. The company acknowledged that it had 'missed the mark' with the redesign and promised to involve customers in any future branding decisions.

The GAP logo redesign was a case study of how not to rebrand a company. It demonstrated the importance of staying true to a brand's identity and history and the need to involve customers in any significant branding decisions.

The GAP logo redesign failure offers several valuable lessons for companies looking to rebrand or redesign their logos:

1. Build on the existing identity and history of the brand.
2. Involve customers in major branding decisions to ensure the new design resonates with them.
3. Choose the right font and design elements that are unique and represent the brand's values and personality. In GAP's case, the choice of Helvetica as the font was also criticised for being too generic.
4. Admit when you've made a mistake and take steps to correct it to uphold your customers' trust and credibility. GAP was quick to acknowledge its mistake and regain its brand credibility.?

The GAP logo redesign failure is a cautionary case for companies looking to rebrand or redesign their logos. Taking a valuable lesson from one of the biggest global brands, companies can avoid similar missteps and rebrand to make a lasting impression.?

Looking to create a winning brand? Let moonbox.ae help you with that!

.

#GAP #GAPFashion #Clothing #Fashion #FashionBrands #LogoRedesign #Rebranding #CaseStudies