Comments on: It’s merged, but is it United?

By: Keith

Keith — Sat, 04 Aug 2012 21:23:18 +0000

Such outstanding thinking and work! It’s a pleasure to see your process and its very smart and satisfying outcomes! Thanks for sharing.

By: Goro

Goro — Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:04:25 +0000

John, as I commented on in the elriaer discussion about the thrift store, I think most businesses benefit from having a visual logo over a signature logo . . . including this thrift store.A visual logo can help telegraph a promise or state of mind that’s integral to the brand: the Playboy bunny, re: lifestyle/mindset . . . the NBC peacock, re: multi-color in a then-b/w TV world.A signature logo for this thrift store would not be working as hard as a visual logo would be. A visual logo, done well, can communicate one or more things to targeted consumers about the business that a signature logo cannot. On a billboard. On stationery. On price tags. On t-shirts. As a visual shorthand equivalent to an elevator speech.I guess I just disagree that understated is the best approach to take for most small businesses selling themselves with limited financial resources. I would try to develop a logo that helps convey the purpose or attitude of the brand, to help create rapid sympatico with both prospective and repeat customers that helps promote sales.Signature-type logos require more (and more expensive) advertising around them to convey a brand message beyond reserved, exclusive, or what have you. I’m sure a business can succeed due to other factors using either approach. But I would think that marketplace acceptance can be achieved fastest and most affordably if one can create a visual logo that works its hardest to help telegraph the unique selling proposition and/or mindset of the brand.Keith

By: My wish list for the NEW UNITED - Page 3 - FlyerTalk Forums

My wish list for the NEW UNITED - Page 3 - FlyerTalk Forums — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:19:45 +0000

[...] be like for it though. A full write-up by the folks who rethought the logo and branding here: http://subjectiveobject.com/2010/05/…-is-it-united/ __________________ 2010 EUAs (on eligible segments): 18/20 (90%) – Y-UPs: [...]

By: Evan G

Evan G — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 20:56:43 +0000

Needs a little gold in there too to resemble Continental as well…

By: dave

dave — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 16:09:18 +0000

your design is actually the best idea i’ve seen out there.

i still think it’s a shame that the “U” is going away. I hope they bring it back some day.

but i really enjoyed the pictures you put of the designs and uniforms from the 70′s. hilarious. thanks for sharing.

By: United / Continental Rebranding – A Failed Compromise « Stodgy Blog

United / Continental Rebranding – A Failed Compromise « Stodgy Blog — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:54:05 +0000

[...] they wanted a change, they should have done some real work like David at the “Subjective Objective” blog. He goes into a bit of the history of the two logos, and finds a common background with Saul [...]

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:36:34 +0000

I agree that the choice for the branding is so bland. If want people to believe that with this merger you are creating a new and improved corporation. Then beginning with an uninspiring identity, is not a good start.

By: Jesse

Jesse — Mon, 31 May 2010 06:23:12 +0000

The new arrangement is revolting. Continental’s globe logo looks like the most uninspired early-90s clip art and should have gone long ago.

By: hannes lindert

hannes lindert — Mon, 24 May 2010 17:13:33 +0000

how does the new combined logo looks like? have not seen it, but think since UA is the major in the deal, it should be close if not be the 100% UA logo. I think it is even known in more places than the continental one.

By: Catbus

Catbus — Sat, 15 May 2010 15:45:43 +0000

Eh. For me, this merger means I only have to avoid one airline instead of two.