IDblog: A new logo for UPS

A new logo for UPS

A wrrl from DCWW alerted list members to UPS's recent change in logo:

old: new:

Some were sorry to see an icon (the original UPS logo was designed in 1961 by Paul Rand) go. Others made comments to support why logo design is such a tricky business. One thought that adding the new logo to the front of redesigned UPS logos might suggest the impression of superheroes. Another thought the new logo reminded her of a fingernail. Oops!

This kind of comment reminds me of my first reaction to the revised Lucent logo (of a few years back) which reminded me of a soggy Cheerio. At the time, I'd heard that the cost for this logo was in the seven figures. In more recent times, I've heard the story that this logo was inspired by Carly Fiorina's mother.

Now if only someone could explain why USAir went to all the expense and trouble to become USAirways?

10:25 PM | linkme | home

Comments

UPS wanted to take the package out of its brand identity, to get away from a package-centric brand. At least, that's what I heard from someone on the inside :)

-- Posted by Joe on April 4, 2003 01:54 PM

That makes sense. Shades of KFC and, dare I say, AARP.

-- Posted by Beth on April 4, 2003 02:34 PM

they should have kept the old logo

-- Posted by keith knutsson on April 6, 2003 02:33 PM

The old UPS logo has one annoying flaw. For the past several years, UPS has required that packages submitted for shipping not have any string. So if UPS doesn't want any string on its boxes, why did it have a logo showing a box tied with string? I'm quite certain the "no string" requirement was already in effect for many years while at the same time the company retained its familiar string-tied box logo. Did this bother anyone else?

-- Posted by on April 12, 2003 12:37 PM

hey, okay listen Ernie, you made a post wondering why there is no string on the packages. I believe the string is a mere design trick that lets us know that it is a package. Maybe they dont really put string on packages now, but it was Rand's way of showing that it's a package. Its simple, and its sweet, and it displays the message thats needed to be displayed. If there was no string do you think it would still look like a package?

-- Posted by on April 15, 2003 11:33 AM

Ernie R.,

Yes, your point is well taken. I agree, without string, the graphic wouldn't look like a package. My point was that it seemed hypocritical to use a string-tied box graphic while at the same time telling customers "We don't want you to use string when shipping with us." I realize that the old logo was designed back in the days when string on boxes was still acceptable and did not interfere with automated package-handling equipment. But certainly by 1990, this became a problem.

I don't necessarily believe the new logo is a good one, especially with the swoosh effect; but at least it is not hypocritical. Or rather, it does not work against UPS's own recommendation to avoid string usage. I'm going to miss the old logo for that reason: I can no longer point out the amusing irony, that of a company with an important customer policy on the one hand (please, no string) while on the other hand displaying a graphic contradiction of that policy. Do you not at least see the irony in that?

-- Posted by on April 17, 2003 01:38 PM

I forgot to mention that this entire topic of logo renovation for UPS is similar to other company brands which have become obsolete with the passage of time. For example, 20th Century Fox and Century 21 Real Estate. Could we not have 21st Century Fox and Century 22? Or maybe remove the "century" reference altogether. It wouldn't surprise me if it happens in the coming years.

-- Posted by on April 17, 2003 01:48 PM

Does anyone know what font is used in the old UPS logo?

-- Posted by Nick on August 2, 2003 04:48 PM

does anyone know what font the NEW UP Slogo is IN>>???

-- Posted by on September 30, 2003 10:15 PM