Starbucks gives logo a new look

And didn't SB spend loads of money to fight a trademark infringement against Excelsior for their similar logo? I think they won.

dropping your name from the logo is a bit of overconfidence. You should not assume that everyone in the world knows who you are. Lots of American companies famous in the West have made that mistake over the years, and they are no longer here.

Like Addias, Nike, Apple...?

Does this mean Excelsior Cafe and Mount Rainer Coffee will change their logos too?

I'm with Ranger Miffy also. But really, dropping your name from the logo is a bit of overconfidence. You should not assume that everyone in the world knows who you are. Lots of American companies famous in the West have made that mistake over the years, and they are no longer here. Don't take things for granted. They did pioneer no-smoking (against the strong objections of their Japanese partner), and I like the pastry and chai (I don't like coffee).

I'm with Ranger Miffy.

Personally, I do not care what the logo is, as long as I can find the store. WHY? Because Starbucks is NONSMOKING. Not some bogus "room for smokers, but with no door so the smoke flows out into the rest of the blasted place". Starbucks was (I am pretty sure) the first coffee shop in Japan to go nonsmoking totally. For that reason alone I go there instead of some cancer-cloud filled Doutors. (People who thing their coffee is weak should try the Arabia or African varieties. I agree the House Blend is nothing special.)

I like both logos, for different reasons, and I think they should continue using the old one as an option for 'old fashioned' tumblers and the new one on products not coffee-related.

As for the coffee itself, it's WAY to strong in Japan, and as one poster said, it always tastes like they burned it, even though they have timers on how long the coffee is good for, etc. I like Starbucks because, for the most part, the atmosphere is a lot better than most coffee shops in Japan (save rip-offs like Excelsior, or the other Seattle shops). I like the sandwiches and better at Dotour, but those places are smoke dens, and even Seattle's Best and Tully's usually have smoking areas (usually closest to the entrance, as seems to be the rule here -- half to walk through the smoking section to get to the non). Forget about local Kissaten... those places are equally expensive, serve very small cups by comparison, and once again are smoking dens (usually pretty dank as well).

Regardless, if the new logo doesn't work out, they'll quickly turn back to the old one. No worries.

The previous design looked MUCH better, more sophisticated and also more recognizable. If they wanted to do away with the word COFFEE, they should have replaced it with 3 stars or some other symbol for balance and left the rest of the design as is. Also, the previous 2-color scheme provided more contrast and visibility and as such was superior, IMO. If they wanted to save on printing (a valid consideration), they could have made the whole thing green but kept the STARBUCKS lettering and the wheelbarrow rims. All in all, the new logo lacks punch. It went from screaming BRAND to BLAND (which might work in Japan--just joking ;).

As far as taste goes, I'll take Starbucks over Doutor's dishwater (jus de chaussettes, anyone?), which is invariably strengthened with a hearty dollop of nicotine, any day!

I like the current logo as it conveys a level of luxury and prestige that separates Starbucks from other low cost coffee shops.

That's your idea of a logo that "conveys a level of luxury and prestige"???

A lot of us walk 3 minutes up the road, rain or shine, to get our coffee from a DuTour by the station...and that is saying a lot.

Dotour offers the best coffee. But it smells of cigarettes,

Oh I see. The one on the right is the new logo. Not an improvement. Maybe they're doing the Gap thing and intentionally releasing a bad logo to stir up some attention...

I don't like it. Using only one color looks cheap. Changing the background color of the mermaid makes the brand less recognizable. The CEO's vision of a new logo being a metaphor for company transformation could have been realized by simply removing the word COFFEE from the current logo.

Overpriced mediocre coffee served to pretentious people who want to interface with their laptops in public. The name "Starbucks" comes from a character in the novel Moby Dick. Not Battlestar Galactica.

Starbucks straight coffee is quite average in my experience. Lattes are better but all the competition are better. The scones and atmosphere quite good though. Mermaid logo - kinda like it.

The one in our building lobby is so convenient, but the coffee tastes like they burnt it, like the first cup of the day out of a cheap home espresso maker. Horrible. It must be the equipment or the water...it's been this way for over 7 years, the staff and manager have changed a few times, but not the coffee. A lot of us walk 3 minutes up the road, rain or shine, to get our coffee from a DuTour by the station...and that is saying a lot.

Supposedly a backlash against the new logo happening according to news reports.. I do prefer the old logo too, but some customers are going hysterical about the change. Couldn't they keep the "Starbucks" on it? I mean the Nike Swoosh and Apple Apple are recognizable, but a mermaid is kinda hard to associate with Starbucks (I associated more with the brand name running around the border and the color). My opinion, they haven't built up enough brand recognition yet, haven't displayed it too prominently in their traditional media advertising to properly implant it into the public consciousness.

Still one of the weirder logos out there. Way up there with Proctor and Gamble's moon guy thingee.

That said, I like Starbucks; i just can't bring myself to pay the premiums more than once a month or so. Local company Doutor is the one that gets my business: More than twice a week sometimes. Plus they belong to the T-Point system. Those add up.

The new logo reminds me of similar logos of small hole in the wall coffee stands around NYU in lower Manhatten, NY. It may be greener but it looks cheap.

Never been to starbucks, and do not plan to ever. Coffee should be cheap like in Delis in NY City.

win win for them, printing costs down and appear 'greener'. are ppl that stoopid? well, yeah.

I think the bad coffee cheapens the brand.

The coffee hasn't changed, it's always been "bad".

The new logo is a bad idea. They've removed the most recognizable parts of the logo.

I think the new logo cheapens the brand

I think the bad coffee cheapens the brand.

I think the new logo cheapens the brand. I like the current logo as it conveys a level of luxury and prestige that separates Starbucks from other low cost coffee shops. I think the new logo is a mistake. Time will tell...