1. My first reaction to it was, “Huh?”
    My second reaction was, “They stole that from the Grateful Dead!”
    My third was “They stole that from Obama!”

    Now I kinda like it. I think I like the font choice more than the logo itself. I enjoy the thin seriffed goodness. I hate what they did to the Mountain Dew logo/branding though. That sucks.

  2. I am dazzled by the “science” and the “story” that led to their ultimate conclusion. Unfortunately, I simply don’t like the logo … I would have preferred a more retro/classic logo given their “soda pop, sody popy” campaign …

    I can only assume the market research and customer feedback studies are housed somewhere else.

  3. It’s good branding. I think it is definitely a “twist” on the Obama logo, but it is still consistent with their branding over the years. They’ve worked hard to be the Taste of the Next Generation and building off the momentum achieved by Obama’s Change logo is just smart.

  4. Great question. I’d like to know when it was debuted as it does have an Obama tint to it. Then again, it’s consistent with their own theme over past logos. My question would be this: The logo is so dominant, does it not push the “Pepsi” branding, which is also a thinner font, down? Or have we come to see that logo as being Obama, and we thus buy it? I’d like to know sales since the move as a number of neighbors not in the marketing/journalism biz have commented on it.
    Again, good debate.

  5. no comments on the subtle difference between Pepsi and Diet Pepsi logos now? Personally, I think they’ve overthought and subjugated the pepsi name, but if it get’s them a wee bit of share it’ll be declared a success.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *