A lot of people have already stated that the new Pepsi logo looks rather a lot like the Obama logo. If these billboards are any indication this is not a coincidence. Hope? It's a sugary drink not a cancer cure. They haven't introduced it in the Netherlands yet so I don't know what it looks like "in the wild" but so far I am not a fan. Looking at it kind of makes me pitch forward and get a mild case of logo induced vertigo. This is a first as far as I have experienced and although being affected by a brand is always good, I doubt that this was what they had in mind. Furthermore even though the font and layout is very clean it is also very clinical looking and made me realize just how silly and medicinal the word pepsi actually is.
So apart from torpedoing any chances of ever working for Pepsico why this blog post? I became very interested in the logo because of this post on Adverlab that discusses a pdf document that has surfaced discussing the Pepsi gavitational field. Sadly the document is not a confirmation that my pepsi logo vertigo affects other people. The document is a fascinating look into the thinking behind the logo and how it came about by the Arnell group, who created the logo. It looks to be to be a high level pitch document for their client Pepsico and is a great read for anyone interested in design or marketing.
The high point for me in the list thats starts with, "BREATHTAKING is a strategy based on the evolution of 5000+ years of shared ideas in design philosophy creating an authentic Constitution of Design. This chart documents the origin and evolution of intellectual property." The chart itself lists: Feng Shui, the Vitruvian Principle, the cartesian coordinate system and the Möbius Strip before ending at the logical conclusion of this 5000 year development: "Pepsi introduces Breathtaking."
Later on in the document it shows you the "Perimeter Oscillations" of Pepsi logos through the years before showing you the gravitational pull of the new logo. It ends with showing us the Pepsi universe which is apparently derived from looking at the exponential expansion of the universe.
After skimming through that design doc all I can see when I look at the logo is a screwed up PacMan, or those creepy smily faces.
I think it's a pretty poor rebranding. I think one problem is that the logo and company name have so much separation. One doesn't relate at all to the other. Previously it was like the wavy ball was just tossed in there. The rebranding tries to bring everything together by simplifying the design and updating the font, but overall I think it comes off as even more disassociated. Maybe they're trying to diminish the name and go by the logo alone. Incidentally, Apple, Inc. pulls this off because the "apple logo" is so easily associated as "an apple".
It's the same with the Tropicana brand. The new font is nice, but the modern glass of OJ just doesn't have the same impact that the old branding did. The old logo had a very classic appearance and went very well with the orange and straw, similar to how the globe is integrated with Universal Studios.
Shapeways has a great logo as well. The extended character bars emphasize the custom modeling aspect and tie very well to the association with the company name. Somewhat similar to other logo-ized brands like Coke.
As for the similarity with the Obama "O", I don't see it. There's actually a clear connection with the Obama logo and it looks nice.
Pepsi would have been better off placing the old globe behind a new fonted text.
I agree with the separation: it just feels like two clean design-y forms rather than one thing.
I loved the Tropicana: Orange with straw in it, logo. It made a lot of sense to me.
I'm glad you like our logo: I personally love it but I might be biased. I really like the fact that our logo changes over time and that we incorporate user designs in it. It is a rather obvious thing to do perhaps but I like the evolution of it.