New Starbucks Logo Is Just Old Starbucks Logo Without Outdated Reference To Coffee

Starbucks has a new logo! It’s basically just the same one they currently have, minus those pesky words that say Starbucks Coffee. Coffee, we assume, was the primary problem. Why? Because Starbucks is a fast food joint.

We’ll let Howard Schultz, chairman, president and chief executive officer, take it from here:

Starbucks will continue to offer the highest-quality coffee, but we will offer other products as well – and while the integrity, quality and consistency of these products must remain true to who we are, our new brand identity will give us the freedom and flexibility to explore innovations and new channels of distribution that will keep us in step with our current customers and build strong connections with new customers.

What say you, consumer?

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. caradrake says:

    Where’s the option for “stop selling overpriced and half-assed food?”

  2. JoeXJoe says:

    Wish there was a don’t care option.

    • YouDidWhatNow? says:

      Wish there was a “you’re OK with $5 coffee but are hung up about a freaking logo?” option.

    • minjche says:

      There is. Not voting in the poll accomplishes that quite easily.

      • YouDidWhatNow? says:

        Actually, it doesn’t – if 50% of viewers were absolutely ambivalent about it, and had an option to vote that way, the the poll results would show that 50% don’t care. As it is, the poll denies you the ability to voice your don’t-care opinion.

        • minjche says:

          You should probably write to your congressperson about this grave injustice.

          No but really, try taking yourself and your “don’t care but care enough to vote about it” a little less seriously.

          • YouDidWhatNow? says:

            I see you failed statistics.

            If you tried to present the results of this poll, you’d say something like:

            50% of all respondents Liked it.
            30% of all respondents Didn’t like it.
            20% said Stop selling half-assed food.

            That makes it appear that 100% of the population agreed with one of those options – however, if 50% of the population looked at those options and said “I don’t care…but there’s no IDC option, so I’m just not going to vote” then the results are wildly skewed. In reality, they’d be more like:

            50% said they Didn’t care one way or the other.
            25% said they liked it
            15% said they didn’t like it
            10% said stop selling half-assed food.

            Makes a big difference doesn’t it?

            • minjche says:

              Whether or not I passed or failed statistics doesn’t really matter here, but thanks for that anyway.

              What is clear here is your feeling of self-importance, that if an option you’d like to have seen in the poll is not present, it should have been present so that you may properly register your opinion. What you forget, though, is that this is not your website or mine, and we do not control the poll choices, and that if a “do not care” option was not included, it would apparently suggest that the maker of the poll “did not care” to have that opinion considered in the poll.

              By extension, there’s really many opinions not considered in the poll. For example, I happen to prefer Wawa and Dunkin Donuts coffee to Starbucks coffee, but I did not find a poll option for either of those choices. Hence why I didn’t vote in the poll. Your suggestion that an informal poll on a consumer blog with approximately 2400 votes as of this comment would be representative of the entire population of coffee drinkers certainly says something about your understanding of statistics.

              So I reiterate, now with more examples kindly provided by you, that you should try taking yourself less seriously.

              I won’t insult your intelligence by showing you that I know how to add numbers that sum to 100, but I will thank you for the refresher. I had forgotten.

              • YouDidWhatNow? says:

                Be pissy all you want to. I pointed out that you were wrong about “There is. Not voting in the poll accomplishes that quite easily.” and sound reasoning that shows that you were wrong. Being pissy serves naught but to make you seem even wronger.

                • minjche says:

                  Translation: “I’m right because I said so and you hurt my feelings.”

                  Sound reasoning indeed.

    • dangermike says:

      I agree. I’ve spent a total of maybe $30 in starbucks over the span of the entire time they’ve been in southern california. I just don’t care that much.

      That said, lacking the option, I chose “I don’t like it” in the poll. It’s not going to get them any more or any less business from me, for whatever that’s worth. But the logo really looks like it needs some kind of border and it’s really too busy to stand on its own without a name there.

      But I still don’t really care.

  3. GrammatonCleric says:

    The logos better, but not the business plan. I actually just went to Starbucks today to meet a friend over a couple drinks, wasn’t bad but honestly just keep the coffee and don’t bother with anything else. I just feel like it’ll make these ‘barista’ people feel more entitled to tips they don’t deserve.

    • angienessyo says:

      I’m a barista and I don’t feel “entitled” to tips. If you want to tip, great, if you don’t, whatever. I know we’re not working luxurious high paying serious business jobs or anything but there’s no need to look down on us the way you assume we look down on you. It’s a job.

    • mike6545 says:

      I’m a barista as well and we definatly don’t think we’re entitled to tips. We don’t even write the word “tips” on our tip jars. It’s a plastic cube in which people freely throw money if they feel that they were provided good service. No one asks for tips or assumes each customer will throw something in. I will serve you the same way as everyone else and if you throw in a tip, i will say “thank you”.

  4. Red Cat Linux says:

    erhmmm… Okay. So. Same thing without the words. I like the old version better.

    Why do companies feel the need to re-do their logos? Like the picture somehow means that they’ve reinvented themselves.

    I don’t drink the coffee at Starbucks now. I like the teas and the breakfast sandwiches. Maybe that’s why this means diddly poo to me. Except that they will spend a bundle on re-branding everything.

    And that maybe people will pay a bit on eBay/Amazon for old logo merchandise if it turns into a ‘new Coke’ style disaster.

  5. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    Because the old logo somehow prevented you from selling non-coffee products? I wasn’t aware of that law…

    • SG-Cleve says:

      Does anyone remember Boston Chicken?

      • "I Like Potatoes" says:

        If that’s the same thing as Boston Market then yes – we still have one in our town.

        • nbs2 says:

          That’s the point. Although, I think that most people already realize that Starbucks sells non-coffee products. In the case of Boston Chicken, I think it was a valid point that they wanted consumers to realize that they offer more than chicken entrees. It would be like if Chicken Out started offering more than chicken entrees.

  6. Rebecca K-S says:

    The new logo is weaker. The borders on the old one provided a clear end to the design, whereas the new one seems like there might be more you’re missing. Plus, the concentric rings were emblematic of the old design, not, imo, the coffee lady, so it’s less recognizable as “Starbucks: V.2.”

    But I don’t eat/drink at Starbucks, no matter what their logo.

    • Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

      A very astute observation. I never pay attention to the center of the logo, so if I saw this I could easily mistake it for another brand. The original brand’s border around the lady is, to me, the hallmark of their brand.

    • ARP says:

      Agreed, it looks like its been cut off. Also, the tail of the mermaid accentuates that due to the perpendicular lines.

      They should go back to one of their original logos, boobies and all.

    • dorianh49 says:

      The new Starbucks logo kinda looks like a logo for store brand tuna, now.

    • Hoss says:

      I assume there is more that we’re missing; the company name!

    • kenj0418 says:

      The logo still has the drawing of Katee Sackhoff, so I’m fine with it.
      (That’s where they got the name right? :-)

  7. danmac says:

    Anyone else wonder how pervy the logo would be if it extended about an inch lower?

  8. Michael Belisle says:

    I think they should put the nipples back in the logo.

  9. supersarah says:

    I wonder how much money went into this minor/useless change.

  10. chiieddy says:

    STARBUCKS COFFEE

    You see, there’s a little trick this now prevents.
    Take a marker and cross out the following letters:
    STARSCEE
    Now fill in the bottom of the B.

    Someone in corporate got wind of it.

  11. SoFlaSnowMan says:

    “Because Starbucks is a fast food joint.”

    “fast” is the last adjective I’d ascribe to Starbucks.

  12. psikic says:

    The new logo should have been black to signify the burnt taste of their coffee.

    • redskull says:

      Thank you. I was waiting for the inevitable “burnt coffee” post that always accompanies any Starbucks post.

      Now all we need is the obligatory “I make my own coffee at home” post.

    • parv says:

      I think it is the bold or “xtra-bold” roasts which taste burnt. Why, last weekend I enjoyed a free cup of medium roast Pike Place.

      Pike Place aftertaste was worse, however, compared to Columbia (medium roast).

      • Silverhawk says:

        Except that even Starbucks light and medium roasts (they still bother with that?) are really just dark roasts. They’ve gradually taken everything darker and darker as they’ve gotten larger. It helps the coffee taste the same from batch to batch.

        • parv says:

          I see.

          What I don’t see is a way to do a taste test without keeping open simultaneously two ground coffee bags. When both are open, will take about two months to finish them. I would have to find somebody else around the office to take part in the test.

      • parv says:

        Make that “Columbia” to be “Colombia” (should of^Whave consulted the ground coffee packet).

  13. Consumeristing says:

    More accurately they should be called Starbucks Frappucino.

  14. redskull says:

    The new logo looks incomplete without some kind of border around it.

  15. brinks says:

    I patronize the Starbucks at the mall where I work and they don’t even HAVE food. They just have overpriced baked goods which aren’t even that good. I’ll overpay for my soy chai because it really IS better than the alternatives in the mall, but that semi-decent banana bread or pastry isn’t worth anywhere near what they charge. Half-ass indeed.

    • nutbastard says:

      Best first-world problem ever.

    • angienessyo says:

      If only we were responsible for the pastries :( they send us that “burnt” banana bread frozen, that’s the distributor’s fault if the pastries aren’t good.

      • pythonspam says:

        When our suppliers send us bad product that we sell in our stores (especially if it is sold as a store brand) and it is less than the standard/expected quality, we send it back and get a refund. If not, our customers would perceive the quality of product to be lower and buy less/complain to others.
        You sell it to the customers, thus you are responsible for the product.

    • webweazel says:

      Our local one sells only the pastries, also. I’ve tried them a few times. Dried out and hard on the edges, bland and flavorless, and costing at least 3 times what they are actually worth. Whenever I do go there it’s mostly towards night and I bring my own GOOD treats from home instead and enjoy them with my coffee.

  16. MacUser1986 says:

    The CEO’s explanation of the new logo makes absolutely no sense.

    I guess it’s well suited for the regular Starbucks customers though, I mean they do overpay for…coffee…

  17. seamer says:

    They need to bring back the bewbz if theyre going to futz around with it. They weren’t exactly Pamela Anderson-style.

  18. Griking says:

    If they still sell all the products that they used to sell plus now they’ll care new items then I don’t see it effecting me in any negative way.

  19. Warble says:

    I hope they didn’t pay too much for that. Somehow I think they did.

  20. danic512 says:

    I was thinking the removal of the words allows for the use of the logo anywhere in the world without translating the text. That way you don’t need to maintain a few dozen different logos as the company expands into nations that either use a plurality of languages or uses a language in a non-western character set.

    Other than that, the change isn’t that drastic at all. I can’t image that anyone reasonable would get worked up about this.

    • Rebecca K-S says:

      All the Starbucks I’ve seen (pictures of) in countries that use a different character set had the exact same logo, “Starbucks Coffee” and all.

    • Erika'sPowerMinute says:

      I can personally attest to having patronized several Starbucks in Japan and there was no translation/Japanese characters involved. (As there generally isn’t with Western products.) And even though my Japanese is limited to a handful of words, and none of the baristas I encountered spoke English, there was no language barrier at work when I said, “Grande nonfat vanilla latte; arigato!”

      Starbucks: another dialect of the international language of commerce : )

    • danic512 says:

      Huh, I guess that takes care of that, thanks for the heads up.

  21. cromartie says:

    The chocolate chip cookies are excellent. The rest of the food, however, is overpriced crap.

  22. halo969 says:

    I prefer the original logo. Have they not learned anything from The Gap incident?

  23. andyross says:

    Possibly a bit of cost-cutting, too. Being a single color, it may reduce printing costs if they don’t need other colors for whatever it is on.

  24. Buckus says:

    “Finally, Starbucks is fixed!”

  25. michaelpbull says:

    If only a new logo would enhance and improve them GETTING THE FING ORDER RIGHT. I mean, really, the “new” production method put in a few months ago was supposed to slow baristas down to get the orders right. However, the amount of orders done incorrect hasn’t changed.

    But obviously Shultz & Co. believe that the omission of the brandname will equate to a better overall customer experience. And since they are sitting atop the old Sears building, or in their million-dollar homes, I can only assume the corporate bigwigs of Sbux know what they’re doing.

    • angienessyo says:

      Then don’t order something complicated. And if you do, say it slowly instead of this whole saying it a mile a minute bs. Or you could realize you know, mistakes happen. Until the baristas are all replaced by robots, it’s gonna happen. I went to Wendy’s one time and ordered a grilled chicken sandwich and baked potato and they gave me a breaded chicken club with fries and it was hardly the end of the world. I still go to Wendy’s and if someone gets something wrong I don’t care. But then again I understand that people are human and will make mistakes and all.

      • Hoot says:

        You are just being a very good example of the snotty baristas that everyone here complains about. Stop sticking up for every bad occurrence that goes on at Starbucks. Take your righteous indignation elsewhere. The grown ups here know that not everyone who works there is slow as molasses.

  26. phira says:

    Yeah, uh …

    First off, is Starbucks having a problem selling non-coffee products? Like, is it actually a problem, where people don’t realize there’s food at the Starbucks they’re in?

    Second off, does Starbucks realize that in New England, especially Massachusetts, Dunkin Donuts sells PLENTY of coffee, even though their name suggests they sell … donuts?

  27. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    KFC

  28. Johnny Longtorso says:

    …But it’s got a new hat!

  29. eatyourchildren says:

    I wonder if this means they will stop sending out cease and desist letters to people who try to register logo trademarks with nesting concentric circles. Seriously, never trust a company that thinks it owns the concept of circles.

  30. There's room to move as a fry cook says:

    The wordless logo make sense if they want to branch into the airline business, electronics, or selling shoes or motor oils.

  31. Jane_Gage says:

    This is the badass branding goal we all fantasize about. The Nike swoosh, the Coke swirl. Language is superfluous, the boarders of countries meaningless. One day the craters of the moon will be filled with litter with this very image. This is the Alexander the Great of our day: aproned hordes spending half their lives in its service, advancing its power and glory past human lifespans. /awe

  32. TouchMyMonkey says:

    One day, somebody is going to register a trademark consisting of a single black dot. Then we’ll all be in big trouble.

  33. Firevine says:

    “Starbucks will continue to offer the highest-quality coffee”

    I already think this guy is loony.

  34. cloudedknife says:

    I think they need to bring back her nipples.

  35. PhilFR says:

    I like it because they haven’t been known for their coffee for some time.

  36. Talisker says:

    I’ve said it before. In five years Starbucks will be to coffee what MTV is to music videos.

  37. gman863 says:

    Food?

    Panara Bread sells food. Starbucks sells prepackaged stuff with quality and prices that make the crap sold on airlines seem halfway decent.

    Logo?

    The Gap just called. They want their trainable art director back.

  38. anobara says:

    She looks like a Christmas tree with a star on top.

  39. Jerem43 says:

    This isn’t the original Starbuck’s logo. The original had a topless mermaid with two tales, showing averything…

  40. polishhillbilly says:

    trying to care, while drinking my $1 sweet tea from McDonalds…

  41. larrymac thinks testing should have occurred says:

    Starbucks sells milk. Lots and lots of milk. Coffee is just an ingredient.

  42. ZakiSea horse says:

    Looks like a gas station sign from the 30′s or something like that…

  43. Rocket says:

    Starbucks, home of the Gentleman’s Latte.

  44. erinpac says:

    They should have just lost the word coffee. The black ring looked better.
    However, I could see why they’d not want the word coffee. Everyone just says “Starbucks” not “Starbucks Coffee”. Also, my family does not drink coffee and none of us tried Starbucks for a long time, even after they were everywhere. Due to friends going there a ton, I now like some of their teas… A good chai and oatmeal when running late in the morning is very nice. I do not drink any coffee though.

  45. Brunette Bookworm says:

    I stopped at Starbucks this morning for breakfast. I don’t stop there too often, usually when I spend the night at my boyfriend’s since he doesn’t like coffe. I like their breakfast sandwiches, they are a nice change from McDonald’s and since the town I work in doesn’t have a Panera, Starbucks is the best option.

    I wish they would bring back their tasty, fudgy, chocolatey Espresso Fudge Brownie though. *sigh* That thing was a great chocolate fix.

  46. Mr Grey says:

    I seem to remember a few years back people up in arms over the apparent nakedness of the woman in the logo.

    http://www.startribune.com/nation/18969709.html

    Now its bigger, and more apparent. Helen Lovejoy does not approve!!
    Won’t someone please think of the children!!!

  47. rdclark says:

    It doesn’t matter if we like it. It matters that it draws attention to Starbucks, and gets people talking (as we are all doing).

    As for the knee-jerk Starbucks-bashing on Consumerist: yawn. The lines at my local Starbucks aren’t getting any shorter.

  48. halo969 says: