It is the already widely discussed rebranding of Pepsi & company. I was never a big fan of Pepsi as a occasional consumer of carbonated belch-inducing colored water and even less of their marketing campaigns which were tacky, poor in taste and seemed like coming from the mind of a teenager who has smoked way too much pot. It seems like that teenager has just entered college and is getting wasted in every conceivable party he can get to- and Pepsi has hired him again.
First of all I wouldn't call it a full rebrand as it fails in the way it transformed the whole company as a unit- its early days but by what we have seen so far, it doesn't seem to go more beyond this. But lets discuss what damage Arnell has done to the second most popular soft-drinks brand.
The circular Pepsi logo was quite likable and had a million possibilities to be redeveloped- its reinterpretations before this redesign has been quite nice and imaginative. I think they thought that the new design is fun and imaginative. To be fair it is. No, it truly is. For a fifth grader! Smileys? Really? I already thought that Pepsi marketed itself as some wannabe teenage brand and now they are just stepping back even more! The first time I saw the logo, I thought it was a cheap knockoff or something. And then the truth dawned on me. Pepsi screwed up. Big time. It could have made itself more "cool" and "sophisticated" at the same time by employing better sensibilities- for instance the way at&t was rebranded. The two-dimensional logo transformed into a three dimensional globe, lower case, softer colors and addiotion of the color orange- to give a friendlier image and it looks like it will live for the next 10 years. I can understand that Pepsi did not want to look like it copied their rebranding from at&t (expert perhaps the lower case type) but I wish they did. I am also guessing this was probably the decision that Arnell did not make but the Pepsi executives- or I am just hoping, for the sake of design studios everywhere.
The xerox rebrand was similar- the globish-button is not particularly to my liking but I think the whole project was still in better taste and it was sort of a more 'true' rebrand.
One of the more tasteful and complete rebrands-
Pepsi was always associated with blue, white and red (Americana anyone?) but I don't think they ever used it to the full effect or consistently. Look at Coca Cola- u see the bright red and sweeping white letters or forms and you instantly think of them- even if it is not Coke itself! The new redesigned packages Now the new redesign takes pages from Coke's branding- look at the package redesigns- the plain blue, silver and black backs- sure they mean different things but come on, who are you kidding? Its a direct lift off- more or less. Losing some more imagination here Arnell?
Spot the similarities?
Some saving grace comes from the redesign of Mountain Dew but still how much the brand values have changed is really questionable.
Then the other change I saw on the shelves was of Tropicana and realized that it was part of the bigger exercise by Pepsi! Again, the first reaction to the new package was that it looked like a cheap knock off- a new brand that did not seem so confident inspiring in its dull (unripe?) orange with a glass wrapped around the corner. I am sorry but it does not look appetizing one tiny bit- it reminds me more of what happens after you mix too many drinks and do not eat a ounce of solid food. The old package was so much better and friendly- and no, its not one of those random cases where it's hard to accept the new. I love redesigns but this, I am sorry to say, is a step backward.
The entire (supposed) attempted progression to a supposed simplicity seems incomplete and the work- well, lets just say a sophomore could probably pull out a better one out of his/her hat. I don't think that enough research or concept building was done for this whole exercise and perhaps only focus groups were relied upon (if at all) for feedback and study. I think the biggest positive out of this huge miscalculation is that it can be taught as a valuable lesson about how not to go about rebranding something that is already so big in the market. The only reason that the brand will live on and not be affected much is because it is already so big and familiar- and that is the problem. A rebranding exercise is to excite and entice more people but it probably may put off more than few- like me and apparently a big chunk of the design fraternity. If you prefer Pepsi over coke, you probably will still have Pepsi regardless- and that's how it is going to be. The status quo has not been disturbed and that is where the whole exercise fails. And why is that such a big problem? It makes young designers like me disillusioned about what all crap can make it to final production and how much money companies will pay for it! It is, I repeat, not an outrage over something new, but a reflection on the mockery of the values that designers have been told to inculcate every single day of their lives.
And again, I hope it was just the suits who chose the designs though I shudder to think, like my brother pointed out, that if this was considered the best set of designs, how bad were the other designs?
