Gap Already Admitting That New Logo Sorta Sucks

Earlier today, we wrote about the harsh criticism already being heaped upon the new — but not exactly improved — Gap logo. And apparently the negative feedback already has the retail chain on the lookout for something newer and improveder.

Last night on its Facebook page (which still features the old logo), the Gap issued this half-hearted statement, which attempts to both spin the branding update into something positive while also asking people to send in new logo ideas:

Thanks for everyone’s input on the new logo! We’ve had the same logo for 20+ years, and this is just one of the things we’re changing. We know this logo created a lot of buzz and we’re thrilled to see passionate debates unfolding! So much so we’re asking you to share your designs. We love our version, but we’d like to see other ideas. Stay tuned for details in the next few days on this crowd sourcing project.

The folks at are hypothesizing that the crappy new logo was possibly just a stunt to draw some attention to The Gap. “And the whole logo ‘redesign’ was meant to drum up media attention so Gap could engage consumers in another PR stunt to redesign its logo?” asks the site. “We smell a contest in the near future. Free khakis for life?”

What do you think — crappy design work or savvy PR stunt? (Or maybe it’s a crappy PR stunt?)

Gap Logo Redesign a Stunt? Joke is on Brand []


Edit Your Comment

  1. blinky says:

    probably designed by a committee.

    • midwestkel says:

      +1, I hate committee design projects because stuff like this happens with them.

    • Dullboy30 says:

      Yes, with the final decision made by someones spouse or child. This happens ALL THE TIME, and it saddens me (I’m a designer).

  2. 99 1/2 Days says:

    It’s like the New Coke conspiracy thing, and like that I doubt it was planned in advance. Never underestimate the stupidity of marketers.

    That said, I gotta say, the logo isn’t bad. For budgeting software or the like anyway. For a fashion company it’s a disaster.

    • MFfan310 says:

      Donald Keough, a former executive of The Coca-Cola Company, was asked about the (bogus) New Coke switcheroo conspiracy once.

      His response was a good one: “We’re not that smart, and we’re not that dumb.”

  3. Joe-TFW says:

    The logo is so bad that I can’t imagine it was ever really going to be used. If it was, then someone should, in all seriousness, be removed from the creative department. I’m all for simplicity in logo design, but you can’t simply throw a random shape behind a standard font and think you’ve got a winner.

    This thing probably gave graphic designers the world over a heart attack.

  4. ARP says:

    How many meetings, how much money did they spend to develop this thing? My guess is around $2M+. That’s not even including the costs of changeover (signage, labels, letterhead, etc.) , which would be significant.

    • richcreamerybutter says:

      Exactly. It makes my head hurt to think of all the resources they used to look like American Apparel.

    • joe23521 says:

      I refuse to believe any money was spent on this…thing. It’s worse than the London2012 logo (never thought I’d say that, ever), at least that one wasn’t done in Word.

      This HAS to be a stunt.

    • dantsea says:

      I’m thinking the new logo cost about five bucks to “develop” and another eight hundred thousand to represent “the spirit of the old logo” in the blue box in the corner.

    • Rena says:

      And for all that money, it still has anti-aliasing artifacts!

  5. crons says:

    Smokey says: Just say no to spec work!

  6. rpm773 says:

    It looks like something that was designed for SAP, not Gap.

    Maybe the design firm screwed up.

    • nopirates says:

      that’s what i was thinking. looks like a logo for a software or consulting company.

      silly gap…

  7. PLATTWORX says:

    “We know this logo created a lot of buzz and we’re thrilled to see passionate debates unfolding!”

    I always LOVE Public Relations people. They spin a disaster into a press release not a single person except them can believe. “passionate debate” = “this blew up in our face”. Just say you screwed up…. don’t treat the public like idiots.

    • ellemdee says:

      Exactly. “Passionate debate” implies that there are people with opinions on both sides of the issue. I don’t see a big “SAVE THE NEW GAP LOGO!” movement any time soon.

      Also, I doubt people feel passionate about anything related to a mall store people used to buy khakis from 20 years ago.

  8. UltimateOutsider says:

    “Stay tuned for details in the next few days on this crowd sourcing project.”

    I literally shuddered reading that sentence.

  9. Oranges w/ Cheese says:

    This blog has a lot of really innovative concepts in the comments. They should’ve hired these people!

    • Angus99 says:

      Some of those are as bad as the proposed change, but many are amazingly clever. Thanks for sharing the link. (especially LOL at #95). The Gap/Baby Gap/Maternity Gap example is just brilliant, I think. Give that person a job.

      Having sat through my share of these kind of management meetings, it really does beg the question of what they threw away to arrive at the “new” choice (assuming the whole thing wasn’t a stunt, and I do fall into the camp of never underestimate the stupidity of the corporate process when it’s supposedly functioning, so I think the stunt hypothesis is not likely). It looks like a handful of creative people generated about 20X better alternatives in a matter of a few hours.

    • Bativac says:

      Actually a lot of those are cool, despite other designers hating on them in the blog comments. Designers like to hate on stuff that looks cool and is accessible and that they had nothing to do with.

  10. larrymac thinks testing should have occurred says:

    And now we’re going to hornswaggle some poor sucker, errrr, fan, into doing design work for free! Yay us.

    Mind the Gap, indeed.

    • cash_da_pibble says:

      All those desperate for work, straight-out-of-trade-school Graphic Artists are gonna jump on this like white on rice.

    • Bohemian says:

      Bingo. They will call it a contest and maybe toss an iPod as a prize. I guess that is nicer than just coming out right that they are too cheap to pay for a new logo.

  11. Theodore says:

    I say crappy design.

    And on top of that I’m sure they paid a graphic artist company $500,000 for the design, which seems to involve nothing more than changing the font size from 12 to 48.

  12. Cleo256 says:

    Savvy PR stunt. The logo’s too bad to be anything else.

    Totally attention-getting, totally harnessing the Internet to put their brand in front of people who would otherwise never see it or remotely care. Like me. If it had been a good logo, I’d have never heard of it. A bad logo gets in front of my eyes, though.

    Well played, Gap.

  13. drburk says:

    Looks like a game logo from the days NES.

  14. Vogue007 says:

    It looks like a cheap business card someone would order off of Vista print

  15. sopmodm14 says:

    they either have to fire the logo designer or promote the advertising person

    and if its the same person, let the october sales numbers decide their fate

  16. axiomatic says:

    Are we sure this wasn’t an exercise in “design a logo in 30 seconds or less”?

    Because that’s exactly how long it took me to mimic this logo in Photoshop on my PC.

    Dear Gap,

    I bet you paid millions to the ad campaign company for this turd… didn’t you?

    • lukesdad says:

      Well, there’s your problem. I knocked it out in about 20 in MS Word with clip art! Saved 10 whole seconds!

  17. StutiCebriones says:

    It’s a wonderful logo. American Apparel has used it for years. (Although they’ve spelled it a little differently.)

  18. prezuiwf says:

    I can’t wait to get all my color copies done at Gap! Or maybe they’ll help you with your taxes? Or maybe they just produce food additives. The one thing the new logo doesn’t convey is that they sell clothes.

  19. Rectilinear Propagation says:

    Stay tuned for details in the next few days on this crowd sourcing project.

    We’re too cheap to hire someone to do this for us! Fix it for free or we’ll keep the crap one we made ourselves!

  20. MFfan310 says:

    There’s already a “redesign” site:

    And I have only bought one thing from the Gap in the past five years (a hoodie, back when I needed one). And it was on sale.

  21. backinpgh says:

    More like engage the plethora of unemployed and underemployed graphic designers looking for some kind of payday and/or publicity. I think it was a big stunt to get their logo design crowdsourced for free.

  22. NightStalker3 says:

    G AP , there done.

  23. sweaterhogans says:

    As a designer, nothing makes me angrier than crowdsourcing. This is so incredibly insulting! Why is it that major corporations can’t afford to hire a competent design team? Instead they pay $0-$50 for a logo because a bunch of saps are willing to do it. INFURIATING!!

    • RackDaddy says:

      This is why you’re a designer and not a corporate mogul. Why pay $30,000 for something when you can pay $50?

  24. czarrie says:

    Ugh. Just awful. Looks like someone put it together in Word.

  25. rav3 says:

    they will keep it for a while and then when people start complaining they will release Gap classic, with the original logo

  26. Lollerface says:

    Who really cares? The old logo didn’t exactly give me wood. The new one is just a change of pace. It’s still clearly recognizable as The Gap. Are people really that heartbroken over the change?

  27. gman863 says:

    I shop based on style and quality – not a store logo.

    This is a debate on what color lipstick should go on the pig.

    • PsiCop says:


      I feel like posting … in BIG letters … the following:

      It’s. Just. A. Logo.

      In the end, it doesn’t mean anything.

  28. snobum says:

    It’s just annoying. I didn’t really realize how bad it was until I looked at their website. They are using the same font all over the place. Now it makes sense that it’s a PR stunt.