Looking Forward to Starbucks Next Chapter

We’ve always believed the best days of Starbucks are ahead of us. So we’re excited to share with you where we’re going.

Nearly forty years ago – in a small retail space in Seattle’s Pike Place Market – Starbucks began its journey as a roaster and retailer of high-quality coffees from around the world. Back then, we sold only whole bean coffee – we wouldn’t begin offering espresso beverages in our stores until more than a decade later – but the Siren was as much a part of the Starbucks story as she is today.

On any given day here in Seattle, I might visit that original Pike Place store – but I might also drop in at our newly refurbished Olive Way store. The two store designs couldn’t be any more different – one harkens back to our heritage, the other looks boldly ahead to our future – but at their core, they’re identical, in that they retain the elements that have been true about Starbucks since the very beginning:

- A unique retail experience that creates a Third Place for our customers between their homes and places of work
- A carefully crafted offering of the finest, high-quality coffees from around the world
- The emotional connection that our partners make daily with our customers.

Throughout the last four decades, the Siren has been there through it all. And now, we’ve given her a small but meaningful update to ensure that the Starbucks brand continues to embrace our heritage in ways that are true to our core values and that also ensure we remain relevant and poised for future growth.

As we look forward to Starbucks next chapter, we see a world in which we are a vital part of over 16,000 neighborhoods around the world, in more than 50 countries, forming connections with millions of customers every day in our stores, in grocery aisles, at home and at work. Starbucks will continue to offer the highest-quality coffee, but we will offer other products as well – and while the integrity, quality and consistency of these products must remain true to who we are, our new brand identity will give us the freedom and flexibility to explore innovations and new channels of distribution that will keep us in step with our current customers and build strong connections with new customers.

You’ll begin to see our evolution starting this Spring. And there will be much more to come, as we celebrate our 40th anniversary by honoring the millions of customers and thousands of partners who’ve made Starbucks such a welcoming presence around the world. We think you’ll like what you see.

Thank you for continuing to make Starbucks part of your life.

comments (893)

Comment FAQ

    • MimiKatz
    • 1/5/2011 10:39 AM

    Who's the bonehead in your marketing department that removed the world-famous name of Starbucks Coffee from your new logo? This gold card user isn't impressed!

      • cjsvendsen
      • 1/5/2011 10:43 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Wow... What a beautiful and compelling way to move the company into the new millennium. I always thought that the harsh black band around the siren represented the shackles of history past. I applaud your efforts to bring change to the coffee industry in such a monumental way.

        • melawshe
        • 1/5/2011 2:00 PM

        In reply to: cjsvendsen

        "Wow... What a beautiful and compelling way to move the company into the new millennium." WOW how long have YOU worked for Starbucks?? The removal of words from the logo is ridiculous. We still use written and spoken language to communicate. You are diluting your message and Corporate identity with this change. Bad idea.

        • wangmi
        • 1/5/2011 3:04 PM

        In reply to: melawshe

        Unfortunately, I do not agree with the new logo. It's almost like the scenerio where GAP changed their corporate logo look, and the backlash against the design made management rethink. Although, I love Starbucks, the new logo isn't for me. It feels like the Siren is lonely...

        • heramb22
        • 1/5/2011 3:26 PM

        In reply to: wangmi

        email me if someone starts a facebook page against this new logo and I'll definitely become a fan of it. sbucks-new-logo@heramb.net

        • heramb22
        • 1/5/2011 3:25 PM

        In reply to: cjsvendsen

        I could understand it possibly if the space for text didn't work well when you translate the company name to other languages, but I still think this logo change was not very well thought out. If I had to pick between the text "ring" and the siren, I'd say I remember the text ring much more than the lady. I used to think it was a stream running down from a mountain. (symbolizing the freshness of the water used to make the drinks or maybe the serene place in nature where the beans

        • EdwardCannata
        • 1/5/2011 5:43 PM

        In reply to: cjsvendsen

        Although I am not a fan of this new logo, I do find it more palatable by adding an addition green circle around the design, which makes it less painfull to look at. If you look at my slight alteration - www dot 86it dot biz slash starbucks , I think you might agree.

        • frenchroasts
        • 1/5/2011 9:37 PM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        It looks cheap and tacky... Starbucks is losing its class

        • normsch1
        • 3/9/2011 11:00 AM

        In reply to: frenchroasts

        Class? Its a coffee store. Get over it.

        • eric@sarjeant.com
        • 1/6/2011 5:29 AM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        Much better with the additional circle around it, I strongly recommend looking at the slight modification EdwardCannata made and considering that in the final design.

        • derekoxley
        • 1/6/2011 6:50 PM

        In reply to: eric@sarjeant.com

        Eric you're dead on.. Edward Cannata slight modification makes a vast improvemt.

        • emiliekk
        • 1/6/2011 5:32 AM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        Edward, I do like your rendition of it far better...not very impressed by the change otherwise. Maybe they will consider it. Having been a barista for close to ten years & customer for longer, the familiar logo will be missed. I hope they took note of what happened to the brilliant Gap logo change....

        • bluechris11
        • 1/6/2011 11:10 AM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        I really like Edward Cannata's idea. I think that they should look at it. It makes it look much better I think. And I do like the new design but I like it much better with Edward's idea.

        • joycebok
        • 1/6/2011 1:39 PM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        I didn't think the siren logo could be changed that much by a thin green line, but boy, does it make a difference! I would hope that the Starbucks execs would have a look at your logo, Edward. It does ground the siren and give her substance, instead of her just floating on the cup. AND it brings the logo back to the original Starbucks logo "look" and branding. I didn't realize how important the green ring was to the Starbucks brand until I saw your logo for myself.

        • andrhamm
        • 1/6/2011 6:47 PM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        I agree, the green ring makes it much better. Although I think this new logo is a bad decision and won't be surprised when they revert back or continue pairing it with the words Starbucks Coffee.

        • derekoxley
        • 1/6/2011 6:47 PM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        Edward I agree that little ring makes a huge difference

        • iamsarahjoy
        • 1/7/2011 8:32 AM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        really like the additional ring.. without the ring, its just incomplete.
        but then again, ring or not ring, new or old logo, its the drinks and atmosphere that i've loved.. so, i hope the new changes Starbucks is bringing will just make the experience a whole lot better!

        but please, design team, consider the green ring :D

        • kathyv1019
        • 1/13/2011 9:49 AM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        WOW, that green circle completes it. If it must change, I vote for this logo!

        • mrimpel
        • 1/14/2011 2:56 PM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        Why do so many people feel the need to change something when it's not broken? I do not like the new logo at all. It looks like a printing mistake. Maybe they ARE trying to save money on printing and go from a two color cup to a one color cup. I DO like the slightly altered version from one blogger named Edward Cannata. I too, think Starbucks should consider that.

        • neobart
        • 1/6/2011 6:26 AM

        In reply to: cjsvendsen

        Hard to believe you're not a member of the design team that did this... :-/

        • shelleyjo99
        • 1/6/2011 11:11 AM

        In reply to: cjsvendsen

        I think it is bold, brave, and beautiful! Admittedly, I was jarred by it at first glance, but upon viewing it again this morning, I find I am attracted to it—both as a longtime customer, and as a professional graphic designer for 30 years. That said, I believe that the most recognizable image associated with Starbucks _coffee_ is not the siren but the green ring. The hint at "beyond coffee" in the CEO's intro video provides a clue for the redesign rationale... can't wait to watc

        • EdwardCannata
        • 1/7/2011 9:21 AM

        In reply to: shelleyjo99

        Thank you everyone for your kind words and thoughts in regards to my Logo alteration. I hope they adopt it, as I too believe that this slight adjustment will make a tremendous difference in it's acceptance... http://www.86it.biz/starbucks

        • fred.rochat
        • 1/7/2011 11:24 AM
        • doublestuff-oreo
        • 1/7/2011 11:44 AM

        In reply to: EdwardCannata

        I like the line. Count me in but I also agree with others that the words should not be removed. Maybe arranged differently or something.

      • jsiegel2001@yahoo.com
      • 1/5/2011 10:59 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      probably the same one who turned the great balck card into the lousy gold card and can't seem to figure out how to mail out the reward cards in a consistnat timely manner. It must be Progress if it is a step backwards!

        • andrewle
        • 1/5/2011 11:58 AM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        That has soured me to Starbucks more than any other single action. The morphing of the black card to the joke that is the gold card shows how Starbuck has lost their focus on those who frequent her most.

        • mhjones2
        • 1/5/2011 1:00 PM

        In reply to: andrewle

        I agree they seem to be going backwards.

        • lintns4980
        • 1/5/2011 12:39 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        they can't send out the free drink cards on time because they can't keep track of purchases. i have yet to see an online balance that matches what my card balance really is. it's usually only off by $50 or more!

        • tnoebel
        • 1/5/2011 1:37 PM

        In reply to: lintns4980

        My balance is always current and correct - even when I check it from my smart phone.

        • sonagi@me.com
        • 1/5/2011 12:47 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        I still don't get why the reward cards can't be emailed with a unique promo code, or sent to my phone, for that matter. What a waste of paper. Agree also that the gold card is a step down from the black. I miss my black card. As for the logo, it definitely loses visual punctuation without the "stamp" look and feel. The green ring is actually a smart way to frame the siren, which really should be kept black to emphasize the curved lines of her hair and body in white.

        • sonagi@me.com
        • 1/5/2011 12:53 PM

        In reply to: sonagi@me.com

        The circular shape and stars also aid in evoking a maritime feel (think a sheep's wheel or a life preserver). The extra stars (2) besides the one in her crown also help to add punch and tie everything together. The new logo looks washed out with just the green and the siren actually gets lost, despite the fact that it's the only thing that's there to represent the brand.

        • runningwithscissors
        • 1/5/2011 1:23 PM

        In reply to: sonagi@me.com

        The new logo leaves me with a "blah" feeling when I see it. I realize that Starbucks has done a good job with "branding" their image, but without the Starbucks name on the logo, there seems to be a disconnect with seeing it. I have to go hmmm...coffee cup-->mermaid-->green-->Starbucks. And I agree that discontinuation of the black card was a lousy move on Starbucks part. The appeal of discount, makes customers frequent your stores more often.

        • basildave
        • 1/5/2011 1:59 PM

        In reply to: runningwithscissors

        I totally agree. Not very exciting.

        • misto88
        • 1/5/2011 2:21 PM

        In reply to: runningwithscissors

        YES!!! the blah feeling is exactly what I thought. I never really looked at the mermaid. I love the name and words STARBUCKS. It makes me wonder what are they planning on doing if they no longer want the name Starbucks or Coffee on their logo?

        • mariaboangiu
        • 1/5/2011 2:58 PM

        In reply to: runningwithscissors

        I agree with runningwithscissors. The new logo is not appealing. The branding is gone. I hope Starbucks will reconsider removing its name from the new logo

        • greenbeangirl
        • 1/5/2011 1:59 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        Geez, you guys! It's all about the stupid discount. The coffee is wonderful and I'm sad the name is disappearing from the logo!

        • Jaga30
        • 1/5/2011 2:36 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        I agree that it's a step backwards. The logo is one of the most powerful marketing tools a company has. I understand the removal of "coffee" from the logo, but by removing the name it won't work as well. Like Jack-in-the-Box removing all text from their logo and just leaving a red box. The former logo looks like a stamp, a seal, like it added value to my $4 cup of coffee. The new one makes my cup of coffee look cheap. I have to say this though, major kudos to starbucks for posti

        • scottheitmann
        • 1/5/2011 2:52 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        I totally agree! From the video , it appears they are trying to move past their roots of coffee & branch out to other revenue streams. As a shareholder I applaud that; however, it doesn't make sense to dilute your trademark by removing the name! It would be insane to re-brand the company to Starbuck's fast food... The gold card has become a joke - it looks cheap, the rewards do not equate to the old program, & they just gave away the internet reward. Why am I letting them use my

        • reviekevie
        • 1/5/2011 7:46 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        I don't think they should even mail the cards. I think the computer system should just know when you have met the # of points for the free drink and then put it on the receipt for the next time or make the drink you are buying when it has been fulfilled ring up free. THey could save postage and the paper of the postcard

        • biggestteddy
        • 1/5/2011 8:11 PM

        In reply to: reviekevie

        I completely agree, maybe this is the kind of idea that the marketing 'experts' should be working on!!!

        • neobart
        • 1/6/2011 6:15 AM

        In reply to: reviekevie

        +1 this is a great idea...

        • littlereillyc
        • 1/6/2011 11:18 AM

        In reply to: reviekevie

        D'Angelo/Papa Gino's does this already & it is GREAT! free sandwiches are loaded onto your rewards card :) More points = more free sandwiches

        • kindertj
        • 1/5/2011 8:02 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        I would like my black card back as well as the old logo. The new gold card is as unappealing as the new logo - the so called "loyal customer" benefits that are sent out in postcard form seldom make it to the mailbox. Don't bother complaining to Starbucks as they told me to take my complaint to the postal service. Give us lower prices instead of new logos and wasted postage.

        • amandalia
        • 1/6/2011 2:58 AM

        In reply to: kindertj

        This just in - prices for EVERYTHING are increasing. It's the world we live in, not Starbucks. This is a post about the new logo, not about how your rewards card is a different color. MOVE ON.

        • Rbailer
        • 1/5/2011 8:58 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        I whole-heartedly agree with you & MimiKatz. I am a stockholder and avid customer. I guess I'll have to buy more cups with the logo that I love quickly before they disappear. Why is that companies always take away products or change them when eveythings going along smoothly. "if it's not broke, don't fix it!". I am so angry -- I love the logo Mr. CEO!!!!

        • JitterbugLOL
        • 1/5/2011 9:27 PM

        In reply to: jsiegel2001@yahoo.com

        Folks, Starbucks sells decaf as well -- look into it....black rewards cards are not going to cure cancer and a slight logo change isn't going to cause deaths. And seriously? "I guess I'll have to buy more cups with the logo that I love quickly before they disappear." - I LOL'd

        • shandizzle
        • 1/6/2011 7:43 PM

        In reply to: JitterbugLOL

        Agreed. It's time to take a chill pill and relax. I don't know if you guys realized this, but Howie has brought our stock up from the 7/8 dollar range back up to the lower 30s. I think he's on to something. With that being said, it's amazing how sensitive people are to this change. That, or people just love to complain. I personally love the new design. Minimalistic and chic. No need for the green ring. It's perfect the way they designed the new one.

        • DavidTLea
        • 1/7/2011 11:12 PM
      • happi2bee
      • 1/5/2011 11:04 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I have to agree; I prefer the old logo. I've been a Starbucks fan since I lived in Portland, OR in the late 80's and I've been in Mississippi for the past 11 years enjoying Starbucks. I'm all for change...I think it's great, but I'm not impressed with the new logo. I like the old one much better!!

      • astrogirl59
      • 1/5/2011 11:13 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Interesting. Why is it that when a company has any kind of milestone (good or bad), their executives feel its necessary to ***** around with the company logo? I've seen the same thing happen when a company has financial problems too. Don't get me wrong—I'm a graphic designer and love to design logos. But when it comes to brand identity, its best to not constantly mess with trademarks. In this case, I'm thinking that the removal of the company name is because Starsbucks is so overe

        • astrogirl59
        • 1/5/2011 11:24 AM

        In reply to: astrogirl59

        lol! this blog removed the word "sc-re-w" around as if it were a curse. It also cut off my comment about the overexposure of Starbucks. I don't think that there is anyplace in the world that don't have a Starbucks coffee shop. I'm thinking that the bonehead who made the decision to remove the name was an exec/CEO and not the poor folks in marketing who have to figure out how to make a bad decision work.

      • ersheri
      • 1/5/2011 11:15 AM
      • gerberfranz
      • 1/5/2011 11:21 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I am in agreement with Mimi Katz. Removing the Starbucks name off your logo does not make any sense. I have been a big supporter of SBUX since the early days, taken expensive rides in taxis to get my morning coffee, even waded through two feet of snow in my business suit and my business manager in tow, but I do not see the logic of your Business Development folks for the removal of the Starbucks name. Free advertisement on every cup, every day. Think about it.

        • scarletdisco
        • 1/5/2011 1:39 PM

        In reply to: gerberfranz

        I totally agree. To remove the name is absolute corporate suicide. Does starbucks company want the 40th anniversary year to be the year that starbucks fell from grace? I also agree with the above comments that the design leaves you having to make several brain connections as to what it is, as well as the fact that the new logo actually makes you lose focus on the mermaid, rather than sharpen it. It is an altogether dumb idea. THE dumbest I have seen from any company in a while.

      • momdgp
      • 1/5/2011 11:31 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree wholeheartedly ... bad idea to remove the Starbucks name. cjsvendsen is just a touch too lavish in praise ... I bet he/she works in their marketing dept.

      • btanzr
      • 1/5/2011 11:31 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      If it ain't broke don't "fix" it. Lose the change, or at least keep the name!

      • doug.gayton@vch.ca
      • 1/5/2011 11:43 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Concur - foolishness. Fire the MBAs and use some common sense. Certainly hate to see profit used to pay for bad advice such as this. Pure foolishness.

      • ilanakb
      • 1/5/2011 11:43 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      no one likes change....myself included! i prefer the iconic brand!

      • dmmeltzer
      • 1/5/2011 11:58 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Plenty of companies have readily-recognizable logos without names (Apple, Nike, Target, to name a few). It's a monument to Starbucks marketing success that they are recognizable without their name. I just personally hope that the storefront signage is eventually done too, not just the coffee cups.

        • jimcarrington
        • 1/5/2011 12:12 PM

        In reply to: dmmeltzer

        What makes you think that the logo is recognizable by itself? they have done no advertising the focuses on that logo. the others cited have done so. plus, the logo is obscure, expect perhaps to intellectuals.

        • scottheitmann
        • 1/5/2011 2:57 PM

        In reply to: dmmeltzer

        The Target log of the bullseye is almost always with the Target name besides it.

      • KC4455
      • 1/5/2011 12:20 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Wow - how disapointing. Strange concept. I am not impressed that you would remove the Starbucks Coffee name from the visual branding. I will be honest, I spend minimum $500 a month on Starbucks - this in not including when I buy merchandise or supply my 45+ staff members food from Starbucks monthly at meetings. I work for a company that has long prided itself on its logo (sometimes I think it means more than the product itself to our customers). Prince though he was just a symbol ..........

      • linditak
      • 1/5/2011 12:22 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I was extremely disappointed to see that the Starbucks Coffee words around the siren were removed from the logo. Why Starbucks want to remove its name. I always loved to see name around the siren. I think it is a bad bad idea. Please, whoever is in charge, take people's take on this, do not take the name off the logo.

      • wdwacker@aol.com
      • 1/5/2011 12:29 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree 100%. This is the kind of thing that overpaid executives do to fluff their resumes before moving on to the next company. Memories of the "New" Coke.

      • kschertzer1
      • 1/5/2011 1:04 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      although not impressed too much either logically and business minded they will save oodles of money by going to one color on their cup instead of two colors.

        • wecallis
        • 1/5/2011 2:05 PM

        In reply to: kschertzer1

        THANK YOU for recognizing the *real* reason here: it's no longer a two-color process. The cups go through one color (coated PMS color #3425); just green ink, so there's no need to go through another color pass for black ink. Additionally, there's less scrap due to alignment issues (inevitably, every press will occassionally have an alignment issue where the black doesn't center perfectly on the green, and the whole printed batch is thrown out).

        • hans@gerwitz.com
        • 1/5/2011 2:21 PM

        In reply to: wecallis

        I had the same reaction: the redesign says "cheaper printing" to me much more than "looking forward (to 2004)". Ironic, isn't it, that Seattle's Best will now have more "upscale" cups?

        • scottheitmann
        • 1/5/2011 3:02 PM

        In reply to: wecallis

        Sure, but risk recognition for the saving of a few cents that are ALWAYS passed on to the consumer??? Not worth it. First think I learned at my very first job, "A large coke is 99 cents, the cup costs 15 cents, the ice is another 5, and the soda is a penny - the rest is pure profit!"

        • Gerwig
        • 1/5/2011 3:16 PM

        In reply to: wecallis

        Cost avoidance may be part of the story, but this longtime javahead thinks SBUX wants to move more heavily into non-coffee goods and/or services. Howard said as much. ... For someone (like me) who likes black, bold coffee and plain espresso, this move away from the basics (coffee) has been going on for some time. This is nothing new, just more of the same. EPS growth won't come from coffee revenue increasing. SBUX is removing the coffee bond/tie.

        • heramb22
        • 1/5/2011 3:18 PM

        In reply to: wecallis

        I agree the cost-cutting is more the real reason. Just like Wal-Mart and their thinner bags that always break in the parking lot...this is a way to make the cups cheaper. Not a fan of the logo at all, but the brand is so strong already that I doubt it'll hurt sales enough for the decision-makers to listen.

        • heramb22
        • 1/5/2011 3:18 PM

        In reply to: wecallis

        I agree the cost-cutting is more the real reason. Just like Wal-Mart and their thinner bags that always break in the parking lot...this is a way to make the cups cheaper. Not a fan of the logo at all, but the brand is so strong already that I doubt it'll hurt sales enough for the decision-makers to listen.

      • paulnal@shaw.ca
      • 1/5/2011 1:14 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I totally agree with MimiKatz. In fact, I would much rather see the siren lost and keep the name. I am a very regular Starbucks customer and I really didn't give any thought to the picture. The actual name says it all. The visible brand should the "name" not the siren.

        • heramb22
        • 1/5/2011 3:15 PM

        In reply to: paulnal@shaw.ca

        The siren was interchangeable with almost any other squiggly image. The name is what was recognizable in the logo. Definitely not purchasing any new branded mugs or shirts...No one would know it was the Starbucks logo.

      • jdstorch
      • 1/5/2011 1:20 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I think it's nothing more than paying homage to the fact that Starbucks truly has evolved into an internationally recognized brand, with or without its name stamped on every single cup! The siren has been there from the beginning, and so will the coffee!

      • CurlySue49
      • 1/5/2011 1:23 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree. I HATE the new logo. I do not associate Starbucks with the white cup. I associate the Starbucks brand with the Siren surrounded by the green Starbucks circle. Starbucks truly needs to rethink this marketing move. The new logo is just too simple and does not say anything about Starbucks. If they are looking for effective marketing, then they are not achieving it with the new log.

      • laurie1040
      • 1/5/2011 1:45 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      this is simply a herd mentality marketing- trend to move away from branding with words and just use symbols for branding. Also, he should have listened to his mother when she told him "sit up straight". David, you present like a faux recalcitrant teenager.

      • kjellms1
      • 1/5/2011 1:46 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      MimiKatz, that was my first thought as well. Who the h... would mess up one of the most recognized logos by removing the most recognizable item in it. It now looks like the logo for a group of people singing Christmas carols. Hopefully, they will change the logo again shortly.

      • wingless44
      • 1/5/2011 1:55 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Starbucks is on the brink. It could go good, or very very bad. Really? That's the best they could come up with? The new logo looks like they're trying to save costs on ink/printing. That's how I see it. I've always thought of Starbucks as a cut above, but seeing the new logo shows me that's not where they're heading. There is nothing high-class about that logo. We'll see the merchandise in dollar stores in no time. I wish them luck this year.

      • marshallmb
      • 1/5/2011 1:56 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree this logo is awful. The point of branding is to get your "NAME" out there. There are only a couple companies that can solely rely on a symbol and I don't believe Starbucks it one. McDonalds and Nike seem to be able to do it. Frankly, I've never much paid attention to the inside of the circle I think they'd be better blanking the inside and leaving the Starbucks Coffee. My guess is that their is a cost savings by eliminating the two-tone color structure.

      • elgin72
      • 1/5/2011 1:56 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      MimiKatz, it is called evolution. For better or worse, things change with time. So don't get stuck in the past. Starbucks needs to reinvent itself with the time. Otherwise, something new and exciting will replace it.

      • josephhanko
      • 1/5/2011 1:57 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I disagree. Branding is deeper than that. I'm all for the new logo and I support their efforts to keep up with the times. After all, change is more than necessary, its essential. As gold card members, we understand that Starbucks is not only a place to grab a cup, but a place to relax when we're out of the office or away from home. The feeling and experience we get from a well-crafted cup of coffee is a product of Starbucks' adaptation to consumer and marketplace climates. Good job St

      • melawshe
      • 1/5/2011 2:02 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Agreed - Not impressed. Good to go with only one color of ink. Don't remove the words.

      • andy.rumpelt
      • 1/5/2011 2:02 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      OUCH! Marketers, marketers, marketers. I hope they have a strategy cause without the "Starbuck's Coffee" wording in the logo, brand equity will be more difficult to maintain & grow. Only real avid/heavy users know what the lady stands for, the rest of the world see's the whole logo...which means PREMIUM. Why in the world would you take the brand name off an advertising platform that gets seen by hundreds of millions ofusers a day? It is like selling a box of Cracker Jac

      • yvestuck
      • 1/5/2011 2:20 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Agreed! It's unbelievable they would make such a dramtic change -- the new logo doesn't show the old coffee-company brand, it's just a company trying to be something they're not....you're doing amazing...why change? Devestating

      • dag_gano
      • 1/5/2011 2:22 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Amen! The new logo looks unfinished and plain. The border around the edge is a major part of your brand, which you've spent millions to build over the years. It's every bit as important and recognizable as the siren - perhaps more so. This new logo is NOT a good idea. As someone with an MBA in Marketing I must say, once again, "I hate Marketing people! What boneheads they are!"

      • mcantrell611
      • 1/5/2011 2:23 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I was a little dishearten to say the least when I saw the new logo. We are all dishearten to change of things we have grown to love. Changing a logo will not make me stop going to Starbucks. It is the COFFEE I LOVE THAT BRINGS ME IN and the WONDERFUL STAFF I see everyday. I am a proud Gold Card Member and Hope to stay one for as long as I can.

      • kwajsailor
      • 1/5/2011 2:27 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree... BONEHEAD is the correct term! If Starbucks plans on venturing out in to product lines other than coffee, at least keep the name Starbucks in the logo. Drop the word coffe if you feel it limits your product line, but at least keep the name in there. Honestly, the new logo is ugly. It may have needed updating, but this logo was over-simplified and looks like the work of a middle school art student! Keeping the siren may have been a requirement but sheesh..... Ask a high school art s

      • mcburkey
      • 1/5/2011 2:42 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I can't believe that you would dare to remove the most-recognized coffee brand name & logo from your cups. Nobody pays attention to the Siren in the center of the logo--I never noticed it until today and I am at Starbucks 6-7 days/week. If you want a change, change the font or add another color to the green, but don't remove the words that everyone around the world recognizes. It doesn't make sense to me!

      • JDSMITH296
      • 1/5/2011 3:01 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Boo! I like the current logo. Fire your brand manager! It looks like you're trying to save money on ink.

      • Burganr
      • 1/5/2011 3:07 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Ditto - why would you take your name unless your planning to start seeking something other than coffee. If it's an issue of cutting down printing costs using one color instead of two on the cups etc. then just print the current logo in all green. The new logo is modern but looks like it belongs on a new outboard motor or a new cruise ship. Oh great I just gave them a new idea.

      • srench
      • 1/5/2011 3:13 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I think the marketing department totally missed the boat on this one. The logo is very boring, and Starbucks isn't listed any where on it. I, too, am not impressed.

      • dao0806
      • 1/5/2011 3:18 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Not liking it so much! My daughter says the same thing. BLAH!!! And what's wrong with the old anyway?

      • debannegilbert
      • 1/5/2011 3:20 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I can't believe a company as successful as Starbucks, which also has had a successful logo, would even think to change it at this stage in the game! Your logo is what has become familiar, and believe it or not, not everyone is so familiar with Starbucks that they would associate the "picture" to the name. Bad, bad marketing move!!! I hope this isn't the downfall of the company, because I am a HUGE fan of Starbuck's!

      • pbeerman
      • 1/5/2011 4:53 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I think the brand is developed enough that the logo itself is enough and the people know the brand of Starbucks Coffee well enough to see what this represents. This gold card user loves it!

      • ryanfred
      • 1/5/2011 4:55 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I strongly disagree with @MimiKatz. This is an evolution of their brand, which further simplifies it and distills it into a meaningful icon for consumers. While the new 'lonely siren' logo will be used most of the time, there is always the option to layer in the other, older elements (text, black ring) for various purposes. This method is time tested and works well for expanding brand recognition and versatility. Examples: Target, McDonald's, Nike, Adidas, etc.

      • starbucksgirl692
      • 1/5/2011 4:56 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree. Why fix it if it's not broken. Keep the logo the way it is.

      • cmkalm
      • 1/5/2011 5:07 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I won't go as far as to call someone in marketing a name but MimiKatz is spot on with her comments. And, I, too, a gold card user am definitely NOT impressed. Please redo...

      • bill_walker@pobox.com
      • 1/5/2011 5:54 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I'm with you. I can recognize that green ring with the Starbucks name in it on a sign from a mile away, and I've hardly noticed what's inside the center of the ring. Now they want to take away the ring and leave the center. Dumb.

      • LauraV94415
      • 1/5/2011 6:10 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I must agree with MimiKatz and the rest of the posters that do not like the new logo. They took away the most recognizable part of the brand, the name. I certainly will not be collecting "green lady" mugs from all over the country, nor will I purchase any of the STARBUCKS mugs (that fill my kitchen cabinets) if they don't have the name on them! Totally agree, it wasn't marketing that approved this, the CEO needs to make the shareholders happy, so beer, wine & a new logo i

      • pauleena
      • 1/5/2011 6:30 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      The name Starbucks is on the back of the cup in BOLD print...bonehead :)

      • snappyb
      • 1/5/2011 6:32 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Sorry. HATE the new logo. Miss the Starbucks Name from the logo. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

      • jourdanmarie
      • 1/5/2011 6:32 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree 100% with your comment. Not many people recognize the siren and associate it with Starbucks... but everyone knows and recognizes the NAME! I am not impressed either.

        • j_grube
        • 1/5/2011 11:18 PM

        In reply to: jourdanmarie

        Great statistics. Where did you get them?

        • shandizzle
        • 1/6/2011 7:55 PM

        In reply to: jourdanmarie

        So...you're telling me that if someone goes into a Starbucks, and sees the new logo, they will stop ordering their drink right then and there and walk out? You may not like the new logo, but it's not going to change a consumer's decision to purchase the product. Also, it won't take much time at all for Starbucks to be recognized and associated with the siren.

      • GailCooperman
      • 1/5/2011 7:06 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      It's not that unusual for companies with brands that are very well recognized to use a symbol without their name (Nike, Pepsi, Lululemon, etc) I don't oppose that so much, especially because the name is still on the cup, but I think that the "updated" siren's scales are too prominent now. My gut reaction was "Eww, fishy coffee!" The company provided explanation about releasing of the circle to open up the way for more products - makes sense though.

      • jdubrox
      • 1/5/2011 7:12 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I have to agree with you MimiKatz. I can't endorse this new logo. I've been a gold card member for quite some time now, but I will probably be embarrassed to carry around such an obnoxious logo on my coffee cups. Perhaps the controversy over this change will actually get people to recognize the logo even easie, because it's something they aren't fond of. It's just fine to use a less coffee-centric logo in order to brand non-coffee products, but think about your core consti

      • dblumensheid
      • 1/5/2011 7:27 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Very generic cup for a company that is anything but generic. Just don't change your products. :D

      • trewblue
      • 1/5/2011 8:26 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I really love the new logo and I work for Starbucks! Those of you who think it is so easy to do all the things you are talking about should try thinking about it on a global scale and give the company some credit- they have done a lot of great things including taking great care of their customers and their partners- I find it sad that it is so easy for people to pick out such little petty things. We should be thankful instead! It looks awesome and I am excited about what is ahead!

        • Jaga30
        • 1/6/2011 7:48 AM

        In reply to: trewblue

        Trewblue, I think I speak for everyone when I say that we also LOVE Starbucks. And we give Starbucks all the credit in the world for their success. But let's not kid ourselves--Starbucks has never been the brilliant marketing mastermind of the Northwest. We all want to see Starbucks do well. THAT'S why so many of us do not like the new logo--because we think it will hurt Starbucks more than help it. We think Starbucks deserves better than this logo. Was it designed in-house or by a PR or

        • ccanton
        • 1/8/2011 11:39 AM

        In reply to: Jaga30

        Jaga30 - correct. And how amazing that customers...those people buying the stuff and making the company successful...actually have an opinion.

        • always_smiling_247
        • 1/6/2011 11:43 AM

        In reply to: trewblue

        YES!!! This is the best thing I have seen as far as comments! I am also a partner, and I COMPLETELY agree with you!!!!

      • mrerchul
      • 1/5/2011 8:42 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I have been drinking Starbuck's now since I have been born it seems. It is not so much a great coffee (which it definitely is otherwise I would not drink it everyday) but a culture. It is about your people and the fact that everyday they greet me with "hey what up", or "how was your weekend" or "love the new haircut". But beyond that is about the fact they always know what I want to drink and have it ready before I can even pay. They are my family and if this

      • pmprez99
      • 1/5/2011 8:48 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Don't see where to leave a a fresh comment so will use reply on this one...hate this new logo! Why must companies feel compelled to tinker with what is already working?!? The new logo looks unfinished an incomplete without the Starbucks name around that awful picture of the siren! What was wrong with the old logo and why did you feel the need to waste money designing a new one? Will your already overpriced beverages now cost us more now that you have replaced a logo which already worked an u

      • bamboo212
      • 1/5/2011 8:53 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Please listen to your customers and halt the printing of this new logo!!!
      It's really boring and cheap looking.
      It doesn't project the coffeehouse feel, you say you want to retain.
      It says "fast food dollar menu"!

      • simdawg
      • 1/5/2011 9:09 PM
      • ronschloss
      • 1/5/2011 11:26 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Starbucks is not worldwide, ubiquitous like Nike yet. Michael Jordon was required to pull that off. You can't leave off the name. >90% of your customers recognize the logo from the circles and the name. Less than 10% could even say what was inside the circles to begin with. Hmmm. Might this become a business school case study in the future.

      • jamesyoungdrum
      • 1/6/2011 12:20 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      McDonald's has removed their name from its logo for years now. This is a bold step which also says to the world that Starbucks no longer needs an introduction. Remember why most of you like the logo as it is: Your cup is a status symbol and fashion accessory.

        • shandizzle
        • 1/6/2011 8:03 PM

        In reply to: jamesyoungdrum

        Exactly. They're worried about "recognition." For the company? Or for them? Because really, it'll only take about a week after they come out and teachers bring their cups into work, desk jockeys bring their cups into work, and gophers bring in trays upon trays for their bosses of cups. It'll be recognized in a hot minute!

      • Bswiss22
      • 1/6/2011 12:27 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I personally agree...while this does present a more simple approach to the logo I find the removal of the words "Starbucks Coffee" distasteful to me. As goes Starbuck's drink policy: I ask that this logo to be corrected till made right.

      • joellenprice
      • 1/6/2011 5:30 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      While I like the updated Siren, I am shocked to see the Starbucks name gone. I can understand dropping "coffee" as you've moved well beyond that as your only product offering. But, it's the name "Starbucks", not the Siren that identifies your brand.

      • neobart
      • 1/6/2011 6:23 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I was pretty disappointed when I saw the new "cheap-knockoff" logo in the email.
      I hope this is just another silly publicity stunt to get folks talking about Starbucks (like the menus?) through the desecration of the logo... and after having received enough negative feedback from the "loyal customers" they'll revert back to something closer to the current version. Or, maybe they're branching out from coffee and don't want it so prominenty displayed on the log

      • jillballard
      • 1/6/2011 7:13 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      The outer ring IS the most recognizable part of the logo! Your reason for updating the logo sounds very loosely conceived. People have as much of a relationship with the letters and font as they do to the image in the centre. The siren floats there ungrounded now and the design feels thin. I am actually infuriated that I will have to look at this lesser logo!

      • tipi4starbucks
      • 1/6/2011 7:36 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I'm surprised reading everyone's negative feedback; I really like the new logo. The hallmark of a distinguished brand is when consumers recognize the logo without the brand's name; doesn't everyone know the Nike swoosh without "Nike" written on it, and the Shell symbol without "Shell Oil"? I like the openness that comes from the removal of the green ring, and I love that the logo is still balanced and symmetrical. Congrats on 40 years!

      • huru031
      • 1/6/2011 10:08 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      The quicker you admit your mistake with this new logo - the quicker it will be to get onto something meaningful in moving your company forward. You have just played into one of the sure ways to know a company is on the downhill slide and doesn't know what to do.... Duh, lets change the logo....

      • erg4044
      • 1/6/2011 10:19 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I do not like it at all.

      • MountainBikerForever
      • 1/6/2011 11:08 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      My friend Lenka and I, as we drank our Starbucks coffee, decided we are definitely strongly opposed to the change. As a shareholder, am even less happy. Follow in the wise decision of GAP clothiers. Abandon this proposed new logo.

        • shandizzle
        • 1/6/2011 8:07 PM

        In reply to: MountainBikerForever

        GAP logo was a different case altogether. The GAP doesn't have people walking around with GAP bags into work every morning. Starbucks culture has infiltrated people's lives enough to drop the name.

        • goflykite
        • 1/7/2011 10:25 AM

        In reply to: MountainBikerForever

        Agree with MountainBikerForever wholeheartedly. Also a shareholder and dedicated customer - might consider having my investment and coffee elsewhere. The GAP case illustrated the crisis managment and how this company listened to its customers. It is not as simple as dropping the name and being green. I am seriously doubting the management capability by looking at the stock performance and strategic initiatives for the recent year.

      • txbutterfly
      • 1/6/2011 11:29 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I totally agree. i understand the company is not all coffee but the name Starbucks needs to stay on the cups!

      • always_smiling_247
      • 1/6/2011 11:32 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      The name has not been removed from the cup, just positioned in a different place. I think that it is a classy step for the company, and shows where we are going. It has been a huge year of growth for Starbucks, first with VIA, then with the refocus on partner experience. It is time for an update to the logo. Is it really going to stop you from getting your morning cup of coffee? No. Move on and don't insult the marketing guys :-)

        • shandizzle
        • 1/6/2011 8:08 PM
        • luann_phillips
        • 1/8/2011 8:46 PM

        In reply to: always_smiling_247

        Has marketing ever polled customers about whether or not they liked the siren in the logo? I personally have never liked that portion of the logo & appreciated the fact that the Starbucks Coffee ring helped to downplay the siren. I'm glad I get my coffee in the stainless thermal mugs that only have the words Starbucks Coffee as the logo. That said, I really enjoy Starbucks (not the siren symbol formally known as Starbucks), especially the wonderful employees and the atmosphere they create

      • tallc23
      • 1/6/2011 11:52 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Poor Howard Schultz. He really wanted to have his mug on the face of the StarBucks Logo because he's not getting enough attention. Well, good or Bad, he is getting the attention he wants! And this one is a **** poor decision.

      • Fefiee
      • 1/6/2011 1:17 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Oh, no, no, no....I like the siren but the Starbucks coffee ring is what completes it. I hope the old logo stays. It is like a mysterious world of its own that invites everyone to experience it. Without it, the siren looks like just a fish vendor. It must be less costly to print the new logo. Oh well, if it must happen just don't change the best product ever and the great customer service (my only bad experience for customer service was in New York).

      • tkovets
      • 1/6/2011 4:19 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Read through quite a few comment - quite honestly - WHO CARES about the logo. Do you drink the coffee for the logo or the quality/taste? If you are that shallow that you MUST advertise to everyone that you spent $4 + on a cup of java then you have more problems than the logo. Get over it - embrace the change. I think the design is beautiful, but I would get my daily latte regardless of the pic on the cup. :)

        • 5022398
        • 1/8/2011 4:50 PM

        In reply to: tkovets

        Very true love this comment! I feel exactly the same way, people really need to understand that this is a great thing Starbucks is doing one because it looks modern and fresh and two because is there any other coffee shop which advertise purely by pictue? none that initially come to mind, Starbucks will still be uniqe even for those who like to brag :)

      • liberty3
      • 1/6/2011 5:17 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Ditto...the "creative" guy needs to go back to school. You need to rethink this one>

      • kafitz1
      • 1/6/2011 6:31 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lemredpEd61qzqpk6o1_500.jpg

      • ccmyersiii
      • 1/6/2011 7:21 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I now think that the CEO and the Marketing Director don't understand what is behind the success of the company to a sizable degree. The answer lies in Vincent Van Gogh's paintings. The key is "energy". The current logo exhibits abundant, vibrant, balanced energy from the wavy hair and lines in the tail and the three stars. This energy feeds and is surrounded by the key critical word, "STARBUCKS". The energy feeds the symbol of the company and the experience. The n

      • jennie-bean
      • 1/6/2011 8:03 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree. The old logo seemed classy, as one would expect from Starbucks. This new logo looks cheap. I realize complaining about this seems petty to some, but in a world where a logo is the first thing you identify with a company, there are bound to be strong opinions on changing something this important. We are not here to criticize; we are sharing how we feel about a decision which affects a company we are fanatically loyal to. Please reconsider this change!

      • steenolsen
      • 1/6/2011 11:54 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I can only agree with MimiKatz! Loosing the name in the logo is a disaster! EdwardCannata's improved the logo, but you need to add the name somehow, to make it perfect.

      • langelotti63
      • 1/7/2011 10:10 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Brands evolve and with evolution comes change. I don't think the change to the logo is that drastic. It works and as long as the quality of my beverage doesn't change, I am good with it!

      • langelotti63
      • 1/7/2011 10:20 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      The logo change isn't that drastic. As long as the quality of my favorite beverage doesn't change and the price doesn't go up too much - I am happy.

      • amylange
      • 1/7/2011 11:25 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I would like to suggest to you a simple test. Print out your old logo on a sheet of 8.5"x11" paper. Walk 25 feet away from the paper and talk to one another about what you see FIRST. My guess is that you will not see the lady--she will be a black mass to you. Instead what will stick out is your name "Starbucks". Any real designer will know that color images trump black images first to the eye. The consumer recognizes YOUR NAME--not your image. For the sake of the consumer--cha

        • ccanton
        • 1/8/2011 11:35 AM
        • 5022398
        • 1/8/2011 4:57 PM

        In reply to: amylange

        If you walk 25 feet away the writing becomes a blur and you cant see it, its the round green logo you really see and thats what starbucks are keeping i think its a great move to simplify the logo, is there any other coffee shops that come to mind that advertise purely by a stong image? none that come to mind initially, therefore satbucks will continue to stand out as the leading beverage perveyor.

      • ksugard
      • 1/8/2011 8:48 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I completely agree with Mimi. Remove the word coffee but for heavens sake keep the word "Starbucks". I understand that you're branching out with more food but OMG, why discard Starbucks???? It makes me wonder if the usual corporate suits know what the people really want? I'm also a gold card member & spend a lot of money @ Starbucks & would still like to know that it continues to be Starbucks!

      • ksugard
      • 1/8/2011 9:01 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      You're so correct Mimi. Have the corporate suits lost their minds celebrating 40 years by taking the name Starbucks off their cups. I know you're branching out into more food products but be smart, just remove the word "Coffee" and please leave the word Starbucks. Where is your pride & who the heck is in charge of marketing?

      • ccanton
      • 1/8/2011 11:34 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Agreed, Mimi. This gold carder is not either...why not remove just the COFFEE if that is your objective - to remove the "coffee only" stigma?

      • droopydog
      • 1/8/2011 2:58 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Is boneheaded. Why remove the company name from the logo. This does nothing to advance the brand. Only line the pockets of advertising and marketing people, and all the sign and cup makers.

      • jeramiahyoung
      • 1/8/2011 7:13 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree. I do not like it at all. In fact every Barista I talk to hates it. You're taking away a globally recognized icon because you need to stay hip? Come on. I'm against it.

      • skmoyle
      • 1/9/2011 4:18 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Ditto for this gold card user. The new logo looks cheap and banal. This is the next chapter for Starbucks - seriously? And don't think the new logo distracts us from the fact that you've also raised the cost of drinks! Really - we aren't stupid.

      • rellim123
      • 1/9/2011 5:11 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree...what happened to our great logo...Why on earth wouldn't a company seek every opportunity to use its NAME...its BRAND so to speak. This new logo is weak, lacking and afraid to stand for anything. The former logo had strength and respect!

      • tizzell
      • 1/10/2011 5:31 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Ok, I love Starbucks and I love their cups even more, I have three on my work desk right now. I have a ton at home as well. I completely dislike the change in the logo. THe starbucks band needs to remain, as its absence leaves the logo empty and unfinished. I understand that you may want to make a change, but please leave the starbucks band. I won't be buying any more cups for my home with that logo at all. Guess I'll just stick with my old classic ones.

      • Tuffsport
      • 1/10/2011 8:50 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Do your homework the name hasn't been removed just relocated. And as a gold card user myself; I don't need the words on there, I can spot a Starbucks cup from a mile away!

      • trschell1
      • 1/10/2011 2:41 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      It seems the old adage of " if it's working let's fix it " applies here. The marketing dept. should get out more and talk to the people they are trying to market to.

      • dj_cpa
      • 1/16/2011 11:48 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      I agree with MimiKatz, it seems like a very obvious mistake! Don't remove your brand identity.

      • ahoefer3rd
      • 1/17/2011 12:13 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Has anyone else read the 3 blogs here (6 Jan and 2 on 10 Jan)? http://thebrandbuilder.wordpress.com/ about how to use the logo in a different way?

      • kgiunta816
      • 1/17/2011 9:13 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      The whole reason "Starbucks Coffee" was removed from the logo was because the company is removing "Coffee" from its name. Since they will now be selling retail items that aren't necessarily coffee, the company will now be known only as "Starbucks".

      • zmgill
      • 1/18/2011 12:07 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Hey people who think they are smarter than everyone, The words "Starbucks Coffee Company" is still on the cup, just not around the Siren. Don't knock it until you experience it.

      • starbuckscoffeejunkie420years
      • 2/2/2011 9:08 AM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Dear Mr. Schultz,
      As a Starbucks Coffee drinker for 20 years, I have to say I was very surprised and appalled by your new logo. We all love the siren and identify with the symbol as belonging to Starbucks, but the exclusion of the name Starbucks Coffee from the logo denudes the corporate brand of Starbucks rather than enhances it. Of course, there are symbols such as the golden arches of McDonald's that are easily recognizable symbols but calling Starbucks by a symbol is wrong. Even at

      • goldenbeachgirl
      • 3/1/2011 8:55 PM

      In reply to: MimiKatz

      Violently hate ridiculous, boring green spot on the white cup. Looking at this everyday may prompt me to rethink my coffee choice.

    • pbh444
    • 1/5/2011 10:44 AM

    I agree that the removal of the name stinks. I know of several other companies that have gone the route of removing their name from their logos. In many cases the reason was that the company was to be sold.

    • powellbk@gmail.com
    • 1/5/2011 10:47 AM

    I love this! Reminds me of when Apple changed their name from Apple Computer to Apple, Inc. The core competencies have been built upon, and there is room for growth on top of the quality associated with the Starbucks name!

      • Eldorado45
      • 1/5/2011 1:46 PM

      In reply to: powellbk@gmail.com

      Well, let the Siren remain with the simple name: "STARBUCKS" in a band, or bold face letters around her (in green, even). The Siren without the store name will lose the store's visibility, and she alone would be lost on some of the packaging of different colors. Nike & Apple can change the graphics on their unique simple simbol, and you know who they are. How often on TV are you reminded of Starbucks on a sponsorship badge, patch, or other graphic. "Nada."

    • pelboy123
    • 1/5/2011 10:49 AM

    typical marketing! Why change something that has been an icon on the UK high street? Obvioulsy Starbucks are making too much money to concentrate on something so petty

      • Jaga30
      • 1/5/2011 3:05 PM

      In reply to: pelboy123

      No, this isn't typical marketing. When a brand is reinforced as Eldorado45 said, you can consistently remind the public of your brand via TV, billboards, etc. But that's not how Starbucks markets so they won't see the same success as Shell did with the shell icon or Pepsi with the Pepsi ball. It's something Starbucks has convinced themselves is a good idea, fits in with their identity and vision, and they're deluded expecting everyone else to drink the kool-aid. Not likely goi

      • kafitz1
      • 1/6/2011 6:37 PM

      In reply to: pelboy123

      http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lemredpEd61qzqpk6o1_500.jpg

    • CupOJoseph
    • 1/5/2011 10:50 AM

    Aside from a new logo scheme and global domination, i mean, expansion--what do you have in mind for even more environmental sustainability in 2011 and beyond?

    • PGCelebration
    • 1/5/2011 10:50 AM

    Thought you might enjoy this link of Starbucks as a "third place" http://www.outofur.com/archives/2011/01/on_holy_ground.html

      • astrogirl59
      • 1/5/2011 11:20 AM

      In reply to: PGCelebration

      Great article! That's for sharing the link.

      • kathleenbeth
      • 1/6/2011 12:25 PM

      In reply to: PGCelebration

      PGCelebration, leave your website about church out of this (and any other blogs for that matter). It's an embarrassment to other Christians when you attempt to subvert the issue to your churchy writings. Try to stick to the subject that we're all interested in - the Starbucks blog. Back to the new Starbucks LOGO commentary --> If Starbucks has completely removed their Name from the logo, maybe they are adding another or being added to another Company. Corporations do this all t

    • layerd
    • 1/5/2011 10:52 AM

    Wow! I like it but why remove the name?? I guess they assume the siren is synonymous with Starbucks and most individuals will get the connection between the siren on the cup and the company behind it.

    • DAKTV3
    • 1/5/2011 10:53 AM

    I have to agree with mimi katz and pbh444...and add to them...what a total waste of time, energy and money...do you honestly think changing the logo really matters ?..and fire the "bonehead" in marketing...often times we consumers sit at home and see TV commercials and wonder..."who approved that" ?...Love the coffee...don't need a new logo

    • juju4321
    • 1/5/2011 10:54 AM

    That was lame.

    • Darstar
    • 1/5/2011 10:55 AM

    I think many companies in world envy the position of your brand - to be able to move the Starbucks Coffee words off the logo marks a massive accomplishment and becoming a brand icon. You are as ubiquitous to coffee as Kleenex is to tissue. I suspect consumers around the globe will still know who you are with the name removed.

      • joysanchez
      • 1/5/2011 11:18 AM

      In reply to: Darstar

      If you look at the pictures of the cups, the name is on the side. The logo doesnt have the name any more but the cup does. I dont think its that big of a deal. This is the 4th logo so they must have gone through this before. I liked the first logo my self. What will the new aprons look like?

      • Eldorado45
      • 1/5/2011 1:51 PM

      In reply to: Darstar

      Yeah, right. But Kleenex still puts their brand on every box.

    • Evaile
    • 1/5/2011 10:56 AM

    In regards to the logo...Why try to fix what is not broken..Those of us at my company, well to put it plainly, WE ARE NOT IMPRESSED..We do not mind change where change is warranted...This change in the logo is not a step forward, rather a step to no where...So who's hair brain idea was this and what was the logic behind this change? We are designers here at my company and we fail to see the design reason for this logo let alone a need for change...Just our thought

    • maplecarton
    • 1/5/2011 10:59 AM

    Love the new look. It's fresh and simple. Even though the Starbucks Coffee band around it is gone you can still tell its Starbucks. Anyone who is a loyal Starbucks fan will and should know Starbucks by it's siren logo anyway.

    • smoecan
    • 1/5/2011 11:00 AM

    I agree with comments suggesting no change is needed to the logo. Many of us want some consistency in our coffee world while there is some much happening around us. Why not focus efforts on people bringing their own cups - which lots do in my neighborhood? And the small card which could go on the key chain has increased my use of Starbucks. Why did you give that up?

    • asparagusbear
    • 1/5/2011 11:02 AM

    One gets the impression that you want to drop the restriction of "Coffee". Now that Starbucks has added a whole range of teas, sandwiches and other hot non-coffee beverages, dropping the "Coffee" in the logo makes sense. This gives Starbucks the freedom to move into all these other areas without having peoples mindsets thinking its just another coffee company trying to make it in other products and services. I think it is a stellar move!

      • Eldorado45
      • 1/5/2011 1:54 PM

      In reply to: asparagusbear

      Fine: remove the 'Coffee' from the band, but leave the STARBUCKS. Then you can incorporate the other products, but not lose your brand identity, and keep the Siren as well.

    • ttliu88
    • 1/5/2011 11:02 AM

    No! the new logo is way worse then the old one. Who's idea? Did Starbucks do the research? Don't waste money on logo. I think free coffee is more tempting then logo.

    • chixmon
    • 1/5/2011 11:04 AM

    The loss of the ring is purely cost cutting - The green ring around the black siren is two colours _Remove the ring and make the siren green - Voila! They have removed 50% of the color they need to print on every cup and piece of merch. If they had just went to a one color logo with their name and logo as it currently is, it would have looked cheap but snazz it up in a bit of marketing mumbo jumbo and 'Starbucks looks boldly ahead to our future"

      • dag_gano
      • 1/5/2011 2:28 PM

      In reply to: chixmon

      Great observation, chixmon. I think you nailed it right on the head. But if the Starbuck's cups get any cheaper, they won't hold anything at all. Ever have one imploded on your lap in the car? My daughter had to replace the entire nav center in her Prius after a Mochachino imploded all over it. But I digress. I think you're right about the printing costs. But, seriously... are margins THAT tight?? Giving up a major part of a brand that's been built for 40 years at great expense ca

      • pbeerman
      • 1/5/2011 5:02 PM

      In reply to: chixmon

      there isn't less ink on the logo though so they're still using just as much. also they have black for the Starbucks name and modifier boxes on back so they are still using two different types of ink. Just in different places

    • jarisill
    • 1/5/2011 11:04 AM

    New Logo looks cold.

    • Cassy202
    • 1/5/2011 11:10 AM

    I really don't like the new logo. I used to be able to spot the Starbucks logo from miles away and this one is a little to bland to be spotted. Too mild, too boring and absolutely too useless to be used. Please change your mind.

      • cindybugs@aol.com
      • 1/5/2011 11:36 AM

      In reply to: Cassy202

      I agree that it is important to be able to spot the Starbucks, especially when you're traveling. The new logo is very bland, not noticeable and it is cold and unwelcoming. If Starbucks is going to change from a coffee house into something else maybe it doesn't matter if we don't spot it.

    • jabellringer@gmail.com
    • 1/5/2011 11:12 AM

    I'm sorry but I just don't get 'Branding' - why eliminate the trademark name on the products? Drop the name 'Coffee' if you must, but please leave Starbucks as part of the logo. Besides, Starbucks is the 'brand', just like Coca Cola (Coke) and Pepsi are; The picture and the name are an integral part of the complete logo.

    • rm1983
    • 1/5/2011 11:13 AM

    I actually created an account JUST to comment on how much I don't like the new logo. I know that the "creatives" at HQ have ants in their pants and are itching to change something, but seriously.... leave the logo alone. I could deal with this as a new cup-logo only, but to start changing the signs, well, it's kind of sad really. I thought that you guys would have learned your lesson after the whole retro-logo fiasco with the Pike Place launch - that one didnt exactly take eithe

      • Gerwig
      • 1/5/2011 3:25 PM

      In reply to: rm1983

      Love your passion (creating account just to comment)!!! LOL

      • eightiesmania
      • 1/5/2011 7:05 PM

      In reply to: rm1983

      The only thing I agree with among the posts in opposition to the new logo: changing of so much signage, products, etc. It seems environmentally irresponsible to take down thousands upon thousands of perfectly good signs to replace them with new ones. I guess that's big business for you, though.

        • rainbowsmileys
        • 1/7/2011 9:40 AM

        In reply to: eightiesmania

        The new logo is going to coexist with the old for a long time, according to Howard Schultz. I don't know if you've noticed this, but we change our signs every three months anyways.

    • paulmarchildon
    • 1/5/2011 11:13 AM

    Its hard to embrace a new logo when you're already in love with the old. I think you need to share with us more of the creative rationale for the change...you've told us nothing of what the future of Starbucks will be...so hard to really appreciate the new design.

    • valeriemalone
    • 1/5/2011 11:15 AM

    BIG mistake Starbucks!!!!! I know a lot of people who still do not know the difference between a Starbucks or a Coffe Bean and Tea Leaf or a Seattles' Best. These are mostly seniors with a lot of time on their hands to try out coffee shops and the cash to do so. You are crazy to leave off the Starbucks name. If it causes a conflict on your other products simply drop the word "coffee" and use just Starbucks Tea or whatever. I am another Gold Card Customer who is not impressed!

    • twarkent
    • 1/5/2011 11:16 AM

    I am so disappointed with this change. Not only does it seem like an inappropriate allocation of resources in this economy, it's a shame that the name "Starbucks" has been removed. While I agree that most will still recognize the logo, it saddens me that words (and typography!) are deemed irrelevant. Sure, "coffee" could be construed as a bit of a misnomer, but that hardly justifies removal of "Starbucks." This "update" is no more modern or aestheticall

      • pauleena
      • 1/5/2011 6:45 PM

      In reply to: twarkent

      Okay, so ONE person says they removed the Starbucks name on the cup and people FREAK!!! Did you people even WATCH the video?!! Starbucks is in BOLD print on the back of the cup! Do you actually think this will effect Starbucks in any form, financially or not? You and everyone else who thinks this will effect the largest coffee company in the WORLD is "OFF YOUR ROCKER".

        • eightiesmania
        • 1/5/2011 7:07 PM

        In reply to: pauleena

        I totally agree pauleena! This is not going to negatively affect Starbucks whatsoever. I think the same thing about the Gap and their logo change, too. It's a shame the Gap caved and went back to their old logo because anyone who actually shops there on a regular basis would just have gotten used to it.

        • pmprez99
        • 1/5/2011 9:01 PM

        In reply to: pauleena

        The name may be on the back of the cup but it doesn't change the fact that the siren is obnoxious as a stand alone symbol as well as it looks cheap and incomplete without the familar Starbucks circling the picture. But most annoying is the unnecessary effort and expense on the part of Starbucks to change a logo that did not need to be changed!

    • sonnalynn
    • 1/5/2011 11:17 AM

    Although the concept is great, I will say that my preference is for the old logo. I love the logo becuase it is eye catching and definately sends me a statement that this is where I can get a good cup of coffee. Changing the logo makes me wonder if the quality is also going to change. I agree with rm1983... put it on a cup and keep the signs.

    • dyelton
    • 1/5/2011 11:17 AM

    Absolutely horrid logo! Getting rid of the name Starbucks and the word coffee is a HUGE blunder that you'll come to regret. I think you need to scrap it like Gap did with their new logo and go back to the drawing board. The $4.00 I pay for coffee deserves to go toward better marketing people than I see in this result.

      • michele462
      • 1/5/2011 11:22 AM

      In reply to: dyelton

      I agree with dyelton. Absolutely hate the new logo and the words Starbucks Coffee should remain. I think this is simply a cost cutting measure by saving on ink. Don't mess with a good thing!

    • tatterededge
    • 1/5/2011 11:18 AM

    To be truthful, if you hadn't told me it had changed, I wouldn't have noticed. Will it affect my willingness to fork over my hard earned money for a $5 latte? No, I'll still be a loyal customer. I get the whole philisophy around branding, but really, thousands will pass and never notice.

      • eightiesmania
      • 1/5/2011 7:09 PM

      In reply to: tatterededge

      I completely agree tatterededge. If this wasn't so heavily publicized a lot of people would not even notice or care! They would just keep going to Starbucks like always and maybe notice it a year from now. So many companies change their logos all of the time, for better (Bath & Body Works) or for worse (L.L. Bean). That's just how it goes and customers generally don't notice or even care enough for it to alter their shopping and spending patterns.

      • ambernicole628
      • 1/5/2011 11:33 PM

      In reply to: tatterededge

      i'm glad there are some reasonable people in this world. I agree wholeheartedly with this. everyone is going bonkers assuming that just because they change the cup that the drink itself will somehow lack in quality. that is insanely ridiculous. :)

    • delbigger
    • 1/5/2011 11:19 AM

    But what about the propaganda printed on the back?. This new logo and wearing nothing else would better over the currently used series of "You." blah blah blah cups

    • angelarharrison
    • 1/5/2011 11:20 AM

    I hate the new cup. Bring the old one back.

    • myemmy
    • 1/5/2011 11:20 AM

    The reason Starbucks has changed the logo is because they are going to be serving beer and wine in the evenings. So It can't really be considered a coffee house anymore. Here is a link to see an article about the new era (or error?) of Starbucks. http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2010-10-18-starbucks18_CV_N.htm

    • hwtrebor
    • 1/5/2011 11:20 AM

    This is a great update, The NEW Siren Logo encompasses culturally vast languages and crosses borders easily. If anything it will make paperwork and Corporate imagery cleaner. As far as FREE coffee goes... I get a free coffee every 15, and a few stores I visit sometimes give me a treat! I think people expect too much for free. I don't see any Banks handing out free money!

    • ersheri
    • 1/5/2011 11:23 AM

    I don't get it. It's like so what! You change something that works? Remember Coca Cola!!! Really isn't a good idea to change the "branding". That is unless it's being sold and/or in some legal or financial trouble. Changing the recognized ICON is a way for 'lousy" businesses to disguise themselves. Is there something Starbucks isn't telling us?

    • annavedo
    • 1/5/2011 11:23 AM

    What a crock. Do these a$$hats sit around dreaming up ways to waste money? Focus on the coffee....all the rest is BS.

    • iszcross
    • 1/5/2011 11:28 AM

    It's now gone from nice piece of company logo'd marketing to an oversized Dixie cup for a 3rd graders Birthday Princess Party! Also, whose bright idea was it to continue the magnification of the Siren on the cup? By the time we get to Starbucks 100th anniversary we're just going to have a picture of the inside of her left nostril as the logo! If you ask for my opinion, which you're not, the original cup was the best. At least 50% of the country would agree that nipples on a co

    • Wahanowin
    • 1/5/2011 11:28 AM

    Starbucks has a great brand and although I don't care for the new logo I will get used to it. What is disappointing is that the core elements that build the brand seem to be fragmenting. Specifically great cofee, friendly and knowlegable staff, a sense of community and an "escape" from the complexity of our daily lives. While the coffee is still good, the experience is not what it used to be. When I pay that much for a coffee I expect the experience to be part of the equation.

    • btanzr
    • 1/5/2011 11:32 AM

    If it ain't broke, don't "fix" it. Lose the change or at least retain the name.

    • zakourz
    • 1/5/2011 11:33 AM

    OMG - Stop the presses!!! Jsiegel2001 echoed the 1st boneheaded move - changing the Back Apron card to a non-distinctive gold one. Now you're planning on changing a WORLD RECOGNIZED icon for what reason!!?? The military had an old saying "If it ain't broke, DON'T fix it!!" Take some advice from CocaCola... you don't see THEM changing the well recognized script, do you? A loyal, yet disgusted card holder!

    • symonsez
    • 1/5/2011 11:34 AM

    That siren symbol has always given me the creeps. It's even worse without the Starbucks name and the black & green colors. Probably more importantly, the new logo makes one wonder if the company is hurting financially. It looks cheap, bland, blah, AND creepy.

    • zorro2828
    • 1/5/2011 11:36 AM

    There are two things that are paramount in my experience at Starbucks.. product and people.. I buy from people so the staff knows me, know my order and are always glad to help out. Products are overpriced but I like the people so that overrides a choice of Tim's or another . The second issue is the one I have with the greeting Season's Greetings! Howard, it is Christmas so Merry Christmas is the Greeting and US and Canadian retailers are hearing this loud & clear. DO NOT MESS WITH

    • decatur_guy
    • 1/5/2011 11:36 AM

    It's a business decision: 1. They simplified the design from 2 colors to one (saves money). 2. They removed "Coffee" from the logo, so they can sell other stuff. 3. By removing English language text, they can sell in international environments more easily. Personally, I would have kept the Starbucks name in the logo, because it has a lot name recognition, but they are following in the footsteps of a lot of other well-known brands which also removed the name.

    • s2sweetsakura
    • 1/5/2011 11:39 AM

    The old one was a lot better. I'm seriously disappointed by this change. It looks really ugly and a big waste of money.

    • sjwhit
    • 1/5/2011 11:40 AM

    Lame move! Why do people feel the need to mess with something that is just fine the way it is? Change it back!!

    • HaylPen
    • 1/5/2011 11:41 AM

    I HATE the new logo. It's essentially un-branding the Starbucks brand. McDonalds, Burger King, even KFC have the same logo everywhere in the world - in China the sign still says McDonalds. Now it's as if your company is nameless. Expansion seems like a foolish reason to un-brand. Do you know that in China people carry Starbucks cups with the logos facing out so that others know they can afford Starbucks. The 'siren only' symbol just doesn't have that effect.

    • damian@dbgdi.com
    • 1/5/2011 11:42 AM

    As a long time Starbucks customer AND graphic designer, the logo change is weak and unimpressive. Removing the name from the logo is ill conceived, even with the name at the side of the cup. I don't think many people associate the siren illustration with Starbucks - it's too complicated an image to resonate. Only the word "coffee" should have been removed. That would have allowed for the new direction to grow. I'm dying to find out how much this cost - even it it was done in

    • ncfitch
    • 1/5/2011 11:42 AM

    Not so happy when i got the news about the new logo. It probably takes time for it to sink in though. I appreciate the innovative motive behind the Starbucks company however. Keep it up.

    • mariel7378
    • 1/5/2011 11:47 AM

    I'm really surprised by the passionate opinions about the logo! I am curious about what, exactly, we're looking forward to, but as long as Starbucks continues to serve great coffee, offer cool merchandise, and appreciate my business a la "gold status", I couldn't care less what their logo looks like.

    • k_vine
    • 1/5/2011 11:48 AM

    So with this new 'brand evolution', does this mean that your incredibely outdated, and unbeleivablely discriminatory policies regarding hair coulour, piercings and tattoos will be changed and relaxed? Or is this 'new' starbucks movement just lip service?

      • Eldorado45
      • 1/5/2011 2:02 PM

      In reply to: k_vine

      If you're saying that the discriminatory policies are in the Hiring process, well, I say keep them. I don't like buying anything I put in my mouth from a tatoo'd pierced man or woman. I find it as repulsive as someone picking their nose at the job.

    • icntdv55@aol.com
    • 1/5/2011 11:48 AM

    I am sorry, but I DO NOT LIKE IT! The words are part of your Brand and brand recognition. I own stock in this company and I believe in it. But I'm not sure you understand the power of the written words and the ramafications of removing it. I've worked with Brands and Image building for the past 13 years and am currently an editor. I think you made a BIG Mistake. Put the words back and find another way to update yourselves.

    • aquavirgo29
    • 1/5/2011 11:49 AM

    I like that the company cares enough to always want to stay motivated....but I really do not like this new logo... the starbucks logo is so signature it just doesn't need to be changed!!

    • csumnerstarbucks
    • 1/5/2011 11:49 AM

    I like the new design. I just wish that after 40 years of service, The Siren had an actual name.

    • artistsyl
    • 1/5/2011 11:50 AM

    I think the new design looks unfinished without the brand name and ring around the Siren. I prefer the current logo and agree with a previous comment stating that like GAP you guys should scrap this new look and stick with the current look. If you are trying to save ink, print the entire logo in green, it will look fine. If you are going to sell spirits at night then instead of "starbucks coffee" on the logo, try "starbucks cafe" or just "starbucks" on the top and bo

    • GloriaRN
    • 1/5/2011 11:53 AM

    Two foreigners walking down the street who do not recognize siren on the nameless cup of a passerby (I'd been drinking it for years before I noticed (or cared) it was a siren)... suddenly they think "coffee." They stop another stranger on the street and instead of asking 'where is Starbucks?'' they ask "where can we get a cup of coffee?" Stranger says "there's a McDonald's right around the corner....." Your name is EVERYTHING. "Starbucks

    • amkerr412
    • 1/5/2011 11:54 AM

    Hate it! I've been a loyal customer for many years, and the new logo is an awful change. The font used in the logo and on company signs is great -- strong and simple. You ditched the best part of your logo.

    • mlowenstein3
    • 1/5/2011 11:54 AM

    My two cents: Improve the food. It's the same crummy food, centrally processed and frozen, that Starbucks has had for years. I buy coffee there all the time but never the food. How about fresh baked goods, sourced locally, supporting local bakeries? How about decent bagels rather than 500-calorie bread-with-******? How about real oatmeal, rather than $3 for a package that I can buy for $0.20 per package at the grocery store?

    • fbb243
    • 1/5/2011 11:54 AM
    • AmericanoDad
    • 1/5/2011 11:55 AM

    The Starbucks name is as much a part of the Starbucks reputation and experience as the siren. Howard, you paid someone way too much for this inadequate design. I hope the rest of your new plans are more fully thought out.

    • sjdenham26@yahoo.ca
    • 1/5/2011 11:55 AM

    I agree with the other posters...why on earth would you remove the company name??! I think that is an awful decision. We're proud drinkers of STARBUCKS coffee...not some no name brand. Announce it loudly and proudly!

    • DanWall
    • 1/5/2011 11:59 AM

    It's arrogant to assume that users the world over will know what the logo symbolizes. Leave the words Starbucks coffee on the logo. This ranks up with other stupid (and tacky) ideas such as selling instant coffee (the ridiculously bad VIA) and having Starbucks kiosks at Safeway. Consumers go to Starbucks for great coffee and a coffee house experience. The coffee is suffering, the coffee house experience is waning, Starbucks is sliding into mediocrity. Bad moves, all.

    • mochapink
    • 1/5/2011 12:00 PM

    I am a long time customer of Starbucks and I come in once if not twice a day to buy a drink. I am shocked that you would take such a beautiful logo with a great past (I love the first one and always have) and change her to not even include the Starbucks name is disheartning to me. I know all about change as I live it daily for the good and the bad! And is soothes me through the hard times and the good times to see the beautiful mermaid and the Starbucks logo on my cup when I look at it. very sad!

    • MarcRThompson
    • 1/5/2011 12:04 PM

    WOW! You all need to have a cup of decaf and relax.. It's a coffee cup....

    • michail4579
    • 1/5/2011 12:04 PM

    Sorry, but I never liked this «siren»: hair's too long, face impression borderline stupid, crown with the Magen David (of the Capernaum origin) too monarchistic; did I forget something? I'd prefer the image of Mona Lisa on a cup of coffee, like on mine at home (which I shlepp, from time to time, to Starbucks, for a 10-cent-bring-your-own-cup discount), then we'd finally all know why she's smiling; yep, give me Mona Lisa any day of the week, but then again, that't

      • michail4579
      • 1/5/2011 12:21 PM

      In reply to: michail4579

      but then again (!), that' just me. Oh no, now I have 343 characters left. The new members of Congress in D.C. were just sworn in, so in their spirit: I yield!

    • madajenka
    • 1/5/2011 12:04 PM

    Hi, I will be celebrating my 40th ann this year/spring as well. Let me know what is the exact date of the opening of Starbucks, please! :) Best! :)

    • h2ohfall@hotmail.com
    • 1/5/2011 12:07 PM

    WOW.....bad move kids....seriously who thought this one up. Taking the Starbucks name off the logo is a terrible move. You have such a recognizable brand....why mess with something that works. Call me shallow but one of the things I enjoy about your company is the logo....I'll be rethinking which coffee house door I will be walking through once this "next chapter" hits the cups.........didn't you learn anything from the GAP.........

    • JESlawson
    • 1/5/2011 12:08 PM

    I sense the Starbucks name will soon be lost...why else would you leave it off the logo? Reading a lot of the comments on this board (e.g. black card foul-up, bad food, closing of neighborhood stores so you can go into less "coffeehouse" markets) the brand is changing, but not for the good. Maybe that's why you want to lose the name? Go figure. I used to dream of retiring to work at Starbucks...but the company of today seems so far away from the initial corporate philosophy that

    • rzaiontz
    • 1/5/2011 12:11 PM

    I prefer the old logo; I do not like the new one. I like seeing the STARBUCKS name.

    • michail4579
    • 1/5/2011 12:11 PM

    but then again (!), that' just me. Oh no, now I have 343 characters left. The new members of Congress in D.C. were just sworn in, so in their spirit: I yield!

    • GmaMeMe2
    • 1/5/2011 12:12 PM

    I agree with the majority. Removing the Starbucks NAME from the logo bothers me. I'm sure the extreme religious right will jump on some satanic sign in the new logo. You should not mess with success.

    • ssgreen@charter.net
    • 1/5/2011 12:13 PM

    Why change a logo that is working and known throughout the world? The GAP tried and changed back...... Maybe you should have spoken to their marketing department first. Not a good move on your part, a better idea would have been reverting to the original label.

    • knighted-one
    • 1/5/2011 12:15 PM

    UGLY! YUCK! And it looks totally unfinished. It looks like a bad design from the '70's! It should at least have a "ring" around it, to finish the edges off. It's not pleasing to the eye to look at...I don't need a degree in design to tell you that much!! I guess I'll just have to use my reusable sleeve & cover the HIDEOUS thing up! Maybe that's their ploy....get us all to spend money on their reusable sleeves!!

    • kiefercs
    • 1/5/2011 12:15 PM

    I don't see the improvement in brand identity with the removal of the logo. I can't believe you'd waste shareholder's money on this and all of the sign changing costs this might produce. Better to stick with what is already iconic and invest profits in something more meaningful to your customers and shareholders. Big Disappointment:(

    • ctrout01
    • 1/5/2011 12:16 PM

    Just plain silly.

    • mfinzel
    • 1/5/2011 12:16 PM

    Mr. Schultz, thank you for communicating to your customers the vision of where you're going, the changes you're making and why you're making them. I applaud your vision and thoughtfulness. Any time a major change is made it is always met with resistance--it's human nature to like what's familiar over what's new and different. I like the vision of what the logo represents, and how it's connected to where you're going but tied to the past. I love Starbucks and what y

    • aalderma
    • 1/5/2011 12:17 PM

    It's called: TOO CHEAP TO USE 2 COLORS. I think it is fugly - at least the coffee collar will hide it - oh wait - they will probably mess with that too. Oh, and raise prices.

    • tnwjd222
    • 1/5/2011 12:17 PM

    Your new brand expression reflects "Starbucks coffee" words are no longer needed. Starbucks already reached widely known famous brand without brand word. I think that new logo has appropriate attitude torward the future of Starbucks. New logo is simple and symbolic. We can know think of Starbucks about the future.

    • Tamiruffolo
    • 1/5/2011 12:17 PM

    I hate to see the Words go off the logo but I'd recognize the company anywhere even by their umbrellas. It confirms to me that SBUX isn't just a coffee company but a multi faceted organization which has been a part if my life for at least the last 16 years and I really couldn't think of starting my day without their products or their people. SBUX confirms they are not a stagnet company but an organization willing to put their people and product first and looking for growth in the futu

    • dennissoapes
    • 1/5/2011 12:18 PM

    The new logo is evidence of what happens when marketing people are allowed to overthink. The rebranding expense will be astronomical. Worst idea since Pepsi changed its logo in '08.

    • zachsroberts
    • 1/5/2011 12:18 PM

    Sorry Starbucks but your new logo sucks. It's boring. Hollow. A bland green shape on a sterile white cup. It makes the brand look cheap. But it probably IS cheap. Less ink. One color printed instead of two. Just an added perk to the real reason that "Starbucks Coffee" was removed. Take the focus away from COFFEE. How much junk are you going to push in the name of more money? Maybe it IS the best logo. Hollow and cheap. I for one am terrified about the "evolution."

    • ldafonte
    • 1/5/2011 12:19 PM

    I really dislike the change in logo. It is way too "clean" and modern looking. And that's not anything that says warm and inviting.. which is usally what I think of when I think of Starbucks. A warm and inviting atmosphere.. delicious, classic, well-made coffee.. a company that wants to make better decisions about the environment.. all that comes across in the green and brown logo. Gap realized their mistake when they tried to change their logo, I hope Starbucks will as well.

    • zachsroberts
    • 1/5/2011 12:21 PM
    • jodiejoscoffee
    • 1/5/2011 12:23 PM

    Seriously people ! Get a life. Move on.

      • Ian_Glasson
      • 1/5/2011 12:34 PM

      In reply to: jodiejoscoffee

      Exactly...people should focus the negative energy into positive and enjoy their coffee. If you don't like your "color of your card" or the way a company is going, don't shop there and quit complaining. It really isn't that deep. At the end of the day...it's coffee.

        • lintns4980
        • 1/5/2011 12:37 PM

        In reply to: Ian_Glasson

        I disagree. Having been in retail (not Starbucks) for most of my life, I want my customers to complain. It's the only way we've been able to continue to succeed and grow. It's a copout to just walk away and not say anything.

        • Ian_Glasson
        • 1/5/2011 12:53 PM

        In reply to: lintns4980

        I do agree with you. I, as well, work for a large retailer and understand feedback for improvement. Feedback...not complaining. Some people like to complain and some like to give feedback for improvement. Some just need to be a little more professional when they are "complaining" to a corporation. Professionalism gains respect and an "ear" for improvement.

    • jodiejoscoffee
    • 1/5/2011 12:24 PM

    It's really not that serious.

    • GmaMeMe2
    • 1/5/2011 12:27 PM

    Also, if they are really going to sell beer and wine, will they use the "coffee" cups or the clear frappe cups? I know if they do use the coffee cups for the beer & wine, I'll go there less as people won't know WHAT I'm drinking and I don't want anyone to think I'm not drinking coffee. At least use the Starbucks name as an identifier.

    • sbulldurham
    • 1/5/2011 12:28 PM

    Man, jodiejocoffee, you are so right on with these people! They must lead a really boring, non-productive life if all they can do is complain about Starbuck's logo! I'm a serious Starbucks customer and will continue to be, logo change or not...

    • mountainman68
    • 1/5/2011 12:32 PM

    Starbucks....ever hear the saying "No Vision - No Mission"? If you folks really think a new logo is the vision or helps communicate the vision for the future, you clearly have lost site of your mission. In case high priced consultants have allowed you to forget what you are, allow me to remind you......you're a coffee house! Focus on your core! Great coffee, amazing service and comfortable surroundings should be your focus, not revising the logo. Which by the way....the new log

      • earlstudios
      • 1/5/2011 12:44 PM

      In reply to: mountainman68

      I agree. just think of all you could have done if you put the money spent on this new logo into figuring how to make your coffee not taste like asphalt tar after sitting in the pot for an hour.

    • gpmabrey
    • 1/5/2011 12:35 PM

    First of all, Congratulations on 40 years! It is an impressive milestone in this day and age. I cannot see a reason to change the logo, but I really don't see any reason not to change it if you are trying to reposition the brand. The new logo is remarkably similar and familiar looking, but it does drop the word coffee and the name of Starbucks. I would probably have left the comopany name somewhere in the logo, just not in a ring. The ring needed to go. The ring was just too limiting.

    • andymorehouse
    • 1/5/2011 12:38 PM

    DUMB!!! How do we loyal customers now refer to you ... the neighborhood establishment formerly known as Starbucks? Keep the existing logo style, remove Coffee, and give us back the "bare" Siren.

    • jeffpdx
    • 1/5/2011 12:41 PM

    I would have kept her in her circle. Not a big fan yet of the new logo, love the history of the current one.

    • lorrivallese
    • 1/5/2011 12:41 PM

    Sorry I like the existing logo. Change isn't going to make me stop being a customer but I don't like it.

    • earlstudios
    • 1/5/2011 12:42 PM

    I was, a starbucks customer for over 15 years. Why you have changed the logo to this new logo is beyond me. its very bad. Did you not see the outrage when the gap changed its logo? "New Coke" anyone? your logo was your identity, your brand, it had character and quality, changing it just shows you felt you needed to change your identity, and you only change something when its broken, so are you admitting that starbucks is broken? and yes, the actual "GOLD" gold card was a

    • Heathermunoz
    • 1/5/2011 12:42 PM

    HATE the new logo! It feels cheap and lonely on the cup. And I wish the rewards card would go back to 10% off purchases. I am so tired of constantly having to reload the card and ask for drinks to be rang up separately

    • jaloro
    • 1/5/2011 12:43 PM

    I don't care for the new (proposed?) logo. Too wiccan, devilish. I would be surprised if anyone @ SBUX with genuine marketing authourity will read these posts. The person or committee that approved the new design has no doubt already received an award and a bonus.

    • pdiscenp
    • 1/5/2011 12:44 PM

    First Impression Unusual...I really don't like it! Keep the name or change it to "5 Bucks" since thats really the bottom line! Also please give back the discount at the register to the Gold Card Holder's!

    • calida16
    • 1/5/2011 12:45 PM

    The logo is awful and boring! Instead of paying high prices to change the logo, you should spend it on retraining some of the baristas. Starbucks is known for good coffee, ANYWAY you like it, but more and more my friends and I have noticed that "certain" establishments are consistently giving you the wrong drink and the baristas are not as friendly to the customers as they used to be. Why not take a poll and spend the money on training so you can maintain and increase your customer b

    • calida16
    • 1/5/2011 12:46 PM

    The logo is awful and boring! Instead of paying high prices to change the logo, you should spend it on retraining some of the baristas. Starbucks is known for good coffee, ANYWAY you like it, but more and more my friends and I have noticed that "certain" establishments are consistently giving you the wrong drink and the baristas are not as friendly to the customers as they used to be. Why not take a poll and spend the money on training so you can maintain and increase your customer base

    • JenniferLuce
    • 1/5/2011 12:47 PM

    Removing the Starbucks name from the logo implies the company is moving away from its core values. The new logo is not appealing and is actually a huge turnoff to this long time customer. Hope the marketing department reconsiders this change.

    • Yeaaah_R
    • 1/5/2011 12:48 PM

    sorry, I hate the new logo.

    • jessida8810
    • 1/5/2011 12:48 PM

    I agree with many of the comments. Starbucks used to be an ironic symbol. You could see the logo anywhere and know what brand it was and expect great quality coffee. Now the new logo just doesn't seem to say quality. It's flat and boring, and is just plain awful. On top of that they continue to hike prices. Just lost a long time customer

    • jonderfin
    • 1/5/2011 12:53 PM

    Extra lame. Starbucks new logo = Gap 2.0 I give it 1-2 weeks and then they'll go back to the good one.

    • ll01106
    • 1/5/2011 12:54 PM

    I intensely dislike the new logo. It's a bad design. It looks incomplete.

    • mrmorrow@comcast.net
    • 1/5/2011 12:54 PM

    Hello. I am a retired Business Development Executive, so have some experience with this kind of thing. While you focus on the Siren, the brand is Starbucks. Would you put just the siren on billboards now without the name Starbucks? I don't think so. I first discovered Starbucks on a trip to Seattle in the late 1990's, and have been a gold card holder since 2005. I would respectfully suggest that you need the name Starbucks on your cups and all advertising, not a picture of a Siren.

    • pgsmalley
    • 1/5/2011 12:55 PM

    I like the new logo--both refined and updated. I think the symbol is recognizable as Starbucks as my 4 year-old son can attest to (who can't read). :)

    • gracie3536
    • 1/5/2011 12:56 PM

    Awful! Looks so elementary, looses it's class and quality!

    • mrmorrow@comcast.net
    • 1/5/2011 12:57 PM

    Someone there edited my comments above. I referenced an example of another company and they eliminated my comments. Not good business to ask for my comments and then put in only what you want to.

    • cjcks1
    • 1/5/2011 12:57 PM

    I do not like it. It should remain as it was.

    • kristencaron
    • 1/5/2011 12:58 PM

    Why would you take the name off of your logo? I don't quite understand. In any case, it seems the further your try to extend yourself, the less quality your products are. Stay with the basics that got you where you are today!

    • txchap
    • 1/5/2011 1:00 PM

    I have to agree with most others that when I saw the new logo, I was really surprised that the decision was made to remove the Starbucks name. The logo looks really odd now, but I have to say that I doubt it will stop me from stopping at Starbucks! But if someone is taking a tally, put me down for not digging the new logo!!

    • cblaylock
    • 1/5/2011 1:00 PM

    The logo is not going to change my spending habits at Starbucks. I wish that the think tank at Starbucks would realize that currently their entire Shared Planet campaign is a joke. Most stores don't recycle the thousands of milk containers used each year, the plastic cups, the paper cups or any other product the store uses. Since they should consider themselves to be among the anchor stores in most retail space they are in, they should leverage themselves to force more of the management co

      • cblaylock
      • 1/5/2011 1:15 PM

      In reply to: cblaylock

      ...companys to offer recycling.
      The logo won't cause me to stop buying my drinks there but their inability to really do something about our shared planet could be just the motivation I need to start using the $500+ espresso machine sitting on my counter.

    • ventilatte5
    • 1/5/2011 1:01 PM

    I honestly like the logo they have now. I think not having the band around the siren that says Starbucks Coffee takes away from the symbol. People are not going to recognize this new logo unless they are avid Starbucks customers. I think this new logo looks less iconic than the old ones, but no one asked me! I guess I'll just have to deal with it.

    • respree
    • 1/5/2011 1:01 PM

    A new logo, good or bad, will neither make or break the company. All of you who hate it will still drink the coffee, I guarantee it. In a year, we'll all be accustomed to the new logo and the removal of the word 'coffee' will allow the company to better diversify into other future business lines.

    • mphorneca
    • 1/5/2011 1:02 PM

    really? you used the power of your brand to send out this junk?

    • mhjones2
    • 1/5/2011 1:03 PM

    Bad idea to change the logo...especially for this one. Also not happy with the gold card....lets go back to the black@!!

    • deeservicepaul@aol.com
    • 1/5/2011 1:07 PM

    I cant believe someone thought that changing one of the most iconic logos of our time was a good idea. To take the name off and change the art is definately a bad idea may leave people wondering what the brand is. PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT JUST HAPPENED WHEN TROPICANA DECIDED TO CHANGE THEIR ICONIC PACKAGING. And oh yes the black card was certainly alot nicer, the gold card is a bit cheesy. LEAVE THE LOGO ALONE!!!!

    • thomasruns
    • 1/5/2011 1:10 PM

    Add me to the multitude of gold card members who hate the new logo. It looks incomplete and it damages the brand because the vast majority of people will have no clue who that logo represents. Don't fix things that aren't broken.

    • acrawford80
    • 1/5/2011 1:11 PM

    Your people/clients have spoken, what will you do now? Will you listen or just brush us aside, as if our comments do not matter?

    • galanomt
    • 1/5/2011 1:15 PM

    I think the choice to drop "Starbucks" from the logo is a poor one and will soon be recognized as such, similar to GAP's attempted and failed logo change.

    • pfwojnar
    • 1/5/2011 1:15 PM

    I can't say that I really like the new logo, I like the current one better. Perhaps keep the current logo and change the word coffee to the spelling in the local language.

    • michel@justplanes.com
    • 1/5/2011 1:16 PM

    The new logo in 1 word = AWFUL... Loved the previous logo, this one is TERRIBLE. There is no way on earth you can keep this. I really think I want Dunkin Donuts now! Please tell me your 5 year old kid came up with this and I'll say, nice job... because if you tell me that you spend as much as $1 on this, and I assume you spent a lot of money on it.. then you are fools... Remove at once and take away the explanation for this joke!

    • tyline11
    • 1/5/2011 1:17 PM

    I don't agree with the people leaving comments about "fluffing resumes" and calling people "boneheads", I do see the point in the comments. I do not like the new logo at all. If I'm paying $4 or $5 for a drink, I WANT the name to be on the cup. I love Starbucks coffee and rarely drink other types of coffee and I've always loved the company logo. I may grow accustomed to the new logo, but it seems like a cheaper, cheezier version of the former logos.

    • pakiser@sbcglobal.net
    • 1/5/2011 1:18 PM

    I like the logo change. It is simple and crisp. I agree that many corporate changes are a mask for saving money, but I don't feel that this 'save money change.' As one person suggested, the logo change may may save money because it uses only one color, but it also saves natural resources....because it uses one color, Personally, I would like to see more customers use refillable cups, but until then, this is a good change.

    • lkylaurenkay
    • 1/5/2011 1:18 PM

    I already miss the old logo..As a former partner for 10 years, I have seen this company constantly try to change themselves and most often not, in my opinion, for the better....It has been said, and I will repeat...New Coke?? Don't fix what ain't broke!! I can't wait for the day when the Executives "decide" to change it yet again..

    • fanning03
    • 1/5/2011 1:20 PM

    I never noticed the lady figure in the logo. The green ring with the Starbucks name is what sells it and is the iconic image. Bad move Starbucks, this logo is NO GOOD! I go to Starbucks everyday and believe in the company, but I cannot get behind this. Yikes...What are you thinking.

    • itistrue99
    • 1/5/2011 1:21 PM

    All I have to say Starbucks is look at GAP their logo flopped. If it is not broke do not fix it. This new logo is even worse marketing ***** up, why would you purposefully remove your companies name from your product.

    • cagonz
    • 1/5/2011 1:22 PM

    New logo blows.... pull a "New Coke" and go back to the current logo asap.

    • mystarbuckscards
    • 1/5/2011 1:23 PM

    POSTED WAY BACK IN 2008 at www.mystarbucksidea.com STARBUCKS' NEW LOGO- NEW direction Posted on 10/24/2008 11:21 PM by SirMark "As Starbucks wrote back in 2008 'STARBUCKS does not comment on future campaigns.' Apparently now, at just over thirteen months later, they have finally made their comment!" Long may the NEW logo reign, until something "NEW" comes up in about 10 years. (And- I would predict- a more streamlined Siren, like Britannia looking across the wa

    • abates-cw
    • 1/5/2011 1:24 PM

    Love the new logo!!! Pure genius

    • icolbowca
    • 1/5/2011 1:24 PM

    Changing the logo wasn't required and will turn out to be a waste of $$$ on their part. Their current logo is just fine and has become the recognized image of the company. If I hadn't of read this story and saw this logo... I would have thought it was a cheap immitation brand much like the gucci and coach bags you see sold by Chinese/Nigerians, whatever on the streets. So, not only will they have to change their logos in every store, on every product... they're going to have to put to

    • acrawford80
    • 1/5/2011 1:24 PM

    I agree, if I am paying all this money for your coffee, when I can buy a month supply of coffee at costco for $12.00, I want to see the words 'Starbucks Coffee" on the cup...You should have tried that earlier, now it's apart of the culture and company identity. People are more drawn to the words (which are relatively larger) than the picture.

    • mystarbuckscards
    • 1/5/2011 1:24 PM

    (And- I would predict- a more streamlined Siren, like Britannia looking across the water to the next FIFTY years!) The ORIGINAL THREAD may be found at:http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/ideaview?id=0875000000059SLAAY

    • kptice
    • 1/5/2011 1:24 PM

    I completed a survey about possible logo changes months ago and, if I remember correctly, the one they picked is the one I liked the least. I'm curious what type of feedback they received or if comments (like mine) to leave the logo alone were ignored. Ah well, people will eventually get used to it, but I prefer the current logo.

    • susiewhite
    • 1/5/2011 1:25 PM

    Do NOT like the new logo!! What is up with companies changing their logos??? Craziest thing I've ever seen -- take a lesson from The Gap logo disaster, and go back to the logo as it was. Bad move...are you reading these comments??? Very bad move indeed. I hope you didn't pay an advertising agency to advise this silly decision - what a waste of money that would be!

    • criacovelli00
    • 1/5/2011 1:25 PM

    I was surprised that the new logo is so appalling that it actually evoked an emotional response of disgust when I saw it. So much so that I logged in to leave a comment! I'm happy to see so many other Gold Card Members HATE it!! I'm not alone in thinking it's a complete waste. I'm not sure what a Siren is and I sure didn't realize that's what the little lady on the cup was supposed to be. I'll be sure to google it now that I find myself wondering how it's more

    • icolbowca
    • 1/5/2011 1:25 PM

    together a PR campaign to let everyone know of the change, lest we all get confused. Like I said, what a waste. They should put their resources towards figuring out how they can creatively remain relevant in the future. There are a lot of other coffee sellers making headway these days into their market.

    • markdavidhaus
    • 1/5/2011 1:25 PM

    The new logo is just terrible. I hate it.. You ruined one of the most magical parts of starbucks just because you needed to change something else in the company. The logo is plain and boring and just disgusting. What the heck was starbucks thinking. They people who made this should be fired. Don't mess with something that works and is in peoples heads. Starbucks thinks its to big to fall.. Well you just lost some customer guys! Enjoy 2011!!! Shame on you...

    • MarcoGenovese
    • 1/5/2011 1:26 PM

    Honestly this is a sad change,y our new logo looks and says K-Mart and Target. If that is what you wanted congratulations, I will be going to Peet's from now on... Who is the head of your marketing department? Are you saving money on black ink?

    • icolbowca
    • 1/5/2011 1:26 PM

    If the use of a single ink scheme and the potential savings as a result is the reason behind change, bad move. Specifically, if true then Starbucks is truly a dying company. If it's willing to throw out nearly two decades of brand recognition to save $$$ on ink then it's bottom line must be very bad. Or else they've hired onto a corporate culture that is no longer about quality and customer service, but about increasing profits, bonuses, shareholders' revenue, etc.

      • gmontgomery2021
      • 1/5/2011 1:30 PM

      In reply to: icolbowca

      I fail to realize a connection between customer service and the up-dated logo. If you think a new cup design is going to effect guest services you might just be better off not going ti Starbucks anymore.

      • gmontgomery2021
      • 1/5/2011 1:30 PM

      In reply to: icolbowca

      I fail to realize a connection between customer service and the up-dated logo. If you think a new cup design is going to effect guest services you might just be better off not going ti Starbucks anymore.

        • icolbowca
        • 1/5/2011 1:41 PM

        In reply to: gmontgomery2021

        Yes, you're right... it's an extremely loose connection. If the change is due to, as some have suggested, the potential savings of only having to use a single color scheme on their cups and thereby less ink then I feel as if the company's strategy is misguided. I think about the similar moves that the U.S Auto company took... they sacrificed quality and customer service so that they could reduce costs thinking that people would always buy their cars based on brand recognition alone.

        • icolbowca
        • 1/5/2011 1:44 PM

        In reply to: icolbowca

        So what I am trying to say is that Starbucks shouldn't change the logo simply to reduce costs given the two decades already invested in building a globally recognized brand and logo. It should focus on investing and developing a way forward that continues to differentiate the company from its competitors.

        • gmontgomery2021
        • 1/5/2011 1:52 PM

        In reply to: icolbowca

        I seriously doubt the idea here was to save money by using a little less ink. The savings, if their truly is any, will be so insignificant. The idea was to simply up-date the design. Let's be honest, if you were asked to identify which company the logo belonged to, you would have known even without seeing this.

        • icolbowca
        • 1/5/2011 2:07 PM

        In reply to: gmontgomery2021

        Honestly, not without pause. And I think it's because the letters have always figured so prominently in the logo... they stand out more than the mermaid in my opinion.

    • gmontgomery2021
    • 1/5/2011 1:27 PM

    If people look at the cup in its entirety the would realize the company name has not been removed, just repositioned sideways where they write your order on the cup.

    • lorgera
    • 1/5/2011 1:28 PM

    Add one more to the "don't get it" votes. Why would you remove the SB's name? The type and font add character to the logo. I really think you should re-think this - bring the name back - Thx

    • mlrideout
    • 1/5/2011 1:30 PM

    Another Gold Card member --- and stockholder --- who dislikes the new logo. NOt a good use of goodwill and corporate resources to "fix" something that was not broken. Was this why drink prices recently increased -- to accomodate all the retrofits needed by the logo change? Re: "coffee houses" selling beer/wine: this is fairly common in many parts of the world. Starbucks needs to focus on good quality coffee and tea drinks at affordable (e.g., not $4-$5 cup) coffee.

      • icolbowca
      • 1/5/2011 1:33 PM

      In reply to: mlrideout

      Just on New Year's Eve I was wondering why Starbucks doesn't sell liquor... I so wanted a coffee with bailey's, and I remembered fondly how the Juan Valdez coffee houses in Colombia sold liquor with their coffee as an option. Perhaps it's the tax hike and permit fees that pile on as a result of the required liquor license for each store.

    • nomiyama
    • 1/5/2011 1:30 PM

    I agree with many others here - I'm not a fan of the new logo. It doesn't visually stand out as well as the old logo. The black provided good contrast. It would be nice if the Starbucks part of the name could be kept, even if "coffee" is removed (while still maintaining visual balance). Or, if the name must be removed, maybe put some black back in. Still, I am intrigued to see what Starbucks has in the works for non coffee related ventures.

    • moreyel
    • 1/5/2011 1:30 PM

    I haven't bought a cup or bag of Seattle's Best Coffee since their logo was changed to that horrible drip and now Starbucks is doing it again with the Starbucks logo. When will they learn that a sleek/modern looking logo is not all it's cracked up to be. Marketing studies have shown that when an established brand changes their logo they have a significant dip in sales due to the loss of brand recognition. With this new logo Starbucks doesn't even identify their name. I don'

    • richczarnecki
    • 1/5/2011 1:34 PM

    Wow - the Starbucks logo is iconic. I can't believe you took your name off of it. Are you going to change all your signage? It may make it harder for fans to find a local Starbucks when they are traveling. Bad move . . .

    • Azzurra75390
    • 1/5/2011 1:36 PM

    The new logo looks sterile and impersonal. GAP tried to repackage its logo and faced a major revolt. I suspect that the majority of your customers will be responding in kind.

    • elliottdesigngroup
    • 1/5/2011 1:36 PM

    I agree completely with the majority. I think graphic designers and loyal Starbucks fans everywhere such as myself see this as a very wrong move on many levels. In today's economic climate, we don't need any more change. Why "fix" what's not broken? Please bring back the one we know and love.

    • dancingagain
    • 1/5/2011 1:36 PM

    I'm a huge Starbucks Fan - not a huge fan of the new logo. I miss the black on the logo - just think black adds a nice contrast to it - it looks sort of boring now. Like most people here, I think removing the company name wasn't a great idea either. Maybe the name could have been changed and done in black? I will still buy Starbucks, but I will be a little disappointed the first time I hold one of the new cups in my hand. :( Why change a good thing?

    • boosthuysen
    • 1/5/2011 1:36 PM

    Ok, change the name ... remove the word "Coffee", move into other products and markets. Just leave "* STARBUCKS *" on the logo. Removing the name is making a big assumption that people equate the siren with Starbucks. We don't. We equate the green stamped Starbucks name with the company. The siren alone means nothing.

    • Azzurra75390
    • 1/5/2011 1:38 PM

    The new logo looks sterile and impersonal. The ring and the Starbucks name along with the siren define your brand. GAP tried to repackage its logo and faced a major revolt. I suspect that the majority of your customers will be responding in kind.

    • mystarbuckscards
    • 1/5/2011 1:41 PM

    POSTED WAY BACK IN 2008 at mystarbucksidea.com STARBUCKS' NEW LOGO- NEW direction Posted on 10/24/2008 11:21 PM by SirMark I wrote to Starbucks about the idea of a 'new logo being introduced' back in late 2008, and as Starbucks wrote back in 2008 'STARBUCKS does not comment on future campaigns.' Apparently, at just over thirteen months later, they have finally made their comment! Long may the NEW logo reign, until something "NEW" comes up in about 10 years.

    • christimomma
    • 1/5/2011 1:42 PM

    Hmmmm, honestly never noticed the siren before this. The Starbucks Coffee is what I focused on. I"ll still love my Starbucks, but don't think this change is a great idea.

    • smdunn
    • 1/5/2011 1:43 PM

    I don't like the new logo. It looks like the 'Great Value' brand of Starbucks.

    • veselino
    • 1/5/2011 1:44 PM

    Some marketing "wiz" convinced you that this was a good idea? Your new logo looks terrible. It's so plain. I understand if you wanted to limit a reference to "coffee",to expand and provide customers with more than just coffee - but you have eliminated a good mixture of style and colours. Compared to competitors a good quality of a coffee cup, excellently designed lids and yes, the look of the cup itself are the full experience. Fortunately for you, your are still in busine

    • ekucolonel1
    • 1/5/2011 1:46 PM

    I do not care for the new logo at all and think removing the name from it is a mistake. I personally see no reason for the change at all!

    • samlevi13
    • 1/5/2011 1:47 PM

    Yikes!! Starbucks what were you thinking?? That is terrible! Yes people recognize the Siren as "Starbucks" but hello... Your not GM. Your not McDonalds. You are a coffee company which people recognize with the green and black logo, name and all. Kind of pretensious to drop your name from your brand isnt it? I think she gets lost on the cup without it standing out from the black. IMO it is washed out and terrible.

    • pete.grieve
    • 1/5/2011 1:47 PM

    If you wanted to expand beyond "coffee" then you should have just dropped the word coffee from your current logo but kept the Starbuck's above the image. This smacks of a PR play (probably done by Coke by replacing Coke classic with New Coke only to re-introduce Coke Classic when the public cried foul), I can't believe this tested well with focus groups?? People recogize Starbucks by the green Starbucks name not by the mermaid logo.

    • laurie1040
    • 1/5/2011 1:48 PM

    PS I am an original stockholder.

    • peparry
    • 1/5/2011 1:48 PM

    I'm a longtime customer and the old logo was just fine, thank you.
    Bring it back please!

    • oldsbuxguy
    • 1/5/2011 1:49 PM

    Any company willing to throw away the opportunity to reinforce it's brand identity through millions of consumer impressions daily, demonstrates an arrogance that makes me uneasy as a Starbucks fan and shareholder. Hate the new logo!

    • coffegal1981
    • 1/5/2011 1:49 PM

    Why fix something that is not broken? This new logo looks cheap. Nice job ruining an iconic logo, boo!!!

    • cranley
    • 1/5/2011 1:50 PM

    Personally, I love it. It's clean and as simple as you can get given your current design. I believe Starbucks brand is at the point where the name doesn't have to be part of the logo. I think the new logo looks modern, is instantly recognizable, and works for the new decade. Branding isn't just about logos, it's also about the colours you use. The green on white nails it. You could have changed the siren to a horse and it wouldn't have mattered because your brand is all about

    • tnoebel
    • 1/5/2011 1:51 PM

    I am a Starbucks COFFEE drinker. I am confused as to why you would step away from the very foundation of your business; "- A carefully crafted offering of the finest, high-quality coffees from around the world" in your new logo. What value does this change add to your business? As patrons of Starbucks, we already know that you sell more then coffee. Yet we come to Starbucks for coffee. Not too long ago you guys strayed from your core and it cost you. Please don’t take a similar

    • T.W.I.T.C.H
    • 1/5/2011 1:53 PM

    Ok. Im a Lot Disapointed. The marketing ploy to remove the logo Is absolutly absurd. I mean seariously. Are you going to remove the sing from the front of your stores. And just hope people find there way to starbucks. Of cousre im talking about people that dont know about starbucks. If you want to keep bringing in new costumers. And as well as keep some of your exzisting customers. A name might be usefull. Hey lets go to that place with the wierd logo and no name. come on get with it people.

    • javabeary
    • 1/5/2011 1:55 PM

    It is another sad, sad day when one more corporate lemming has let the logo clowns lead them down the path of meaningless change. It provides no new value to customers and only serves to increase costs. Shame on you Starbucks!

    • winterone51
    • 1/5/2011 1:56 PM

    The complaints about the new logo are strange. We have a tendency to become emotionally attached to branding without even realizing it- I am also wary about the new look. But the Siren never changed, though a repeated complaint - at it's very foundation, the logo is the same. Starbucks is such a strong brand that they don't need to splash around their name. They found a way to evolve their logo in such a way that symbolizes their idea - both that of great coffee, and of what the Siren mea

    • scarletdisco
    • 1/5/2011 1:56 PM

    To Howard S., Starbucks chairman, president and chief executive officer: You now have over 200 negative comments on this blog alone regarding the logo change. Can't you see this is obviously and overwhelmingly a BAD IDEA? People are obviously upset, passionate, and majorly against the change. These people are your customers. Your constituency if you will. LISTEN to them. This will kill your business. Put a big 40 on the logo if you're itching for change. Don't rebrand an icon that WOR

    • basildave
    • 1/5/2011 1:57 PM

    I would keep the logo the same. For one thing, it's nearly a universal icon and easily recognizable as Starbucks. Even when it's disguised and altered you still know whose it is. The other reason is the new logo is simply dull, less vibrant and does not clearly communicate the brand. However, it's your company, despite being a good customer, I'm not a shareholder; so feel free to change the logo but I will say that I believe it's a mistake.

    • benmarson
    • 1/5/2011 1:57 PM

    I like the old logo much better. I'd actually call it more of a badge or medallion. It meant more. The new one is just a simple logo, and actually seems much more generic than branded.

    • alainsaffel
    • 1/5/2011 1:58 PM

    Not sure why the need for a new logo. The old one was fine. It's the least of my worries though. I'm more concerned about initiatives like sourcing coffee from China (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704462704575609733431622088.html) You want to talk about diminishing your brand? I hope you warn us which coffees are from China. I won't drink them. Locating your kiosks in Safeway also diminishes your brand. I refuse to buy coffee at them. Cheapens the experience.

    • winterone51
    • 1/5/2011 1:58 PM

    *means to us

    • scarletdisco
    • 1/5/2011 1:59 PM

    that's supposed to read..."Don't rebrand an icon that WORKS." In short, just don't remove the name from around the siren. It doesn't need to be changed and will not bring you increased revenue. You are not Nike and you are not Apple. You are COFFEE and that's part of what makes you likeable.

    • montyqd
    • 1/5/2011 1:59 PM

    Definately don't think removal of the Starbucks name from the logo is a good thing. Makes you more Generic than the brand is already becoming. Starbucks needs to remain unique...you have been forgetting that lately I think.

    • KEYWEBONES
    • 1/5/2011 1:59 PM

    I just created an coount because I felt like I needed to comment on your logo change. I love Starbucks, I am a recent convert...your Dark Cherry mocha got me hooked last year..and now Sbux is my daily pleasure! I do not like you new logo. I think the Starbucks Coffee is an iconic part of the logo and now it just looks generic.

    • lbpozzi
    • 1/5/2011 2:00 PM

    Starbucks Coffee and Tea -> Starbucks Coffee -> random company with unfinished logo. Too bad my black card is now gold and my gold card doesn't work at Peet's.

    • thefoodca
    • 1/5/2011 2:01 PM

    I like it. It takes the "old" logo best assets to a higher place. It's clean, simple and beautiful design. Why change something that works, some asked. Well, if the company needs it to move forward, it's a good enough reason as the essence (90% of the old logo) is clearly kept. This is definitely not a redesign gone bad.

    • candacesmartt
    • 1/5/2011 2:01 PM

    I go in Starbucks every morning...I did not even know there was a siren in the logo! I ALWAYS, ALWAYS notice the green circle with the bold STARBUCKS. The siren has never stood out to me, at all! I do not like the new logo. Keep the old one.

    • ksocausky
    • 1/5/2011 2:03 PM

    YES! Finally, Starbucks is now known only by a label! It's like saying Madonna, Cher or Reba! There is no reason to know a last name, we know who they are! There is no reason to weigh down the Siren with STARBUCKS COFFEE, everyone will know by the logo! I lke it! Hooray for Starbucks! Let's celebrate! As for the gold card, it's okay. My balances are always correct, I get my rewards immediately, and only occasionally is the their a problem with a free customization. But, the BLAC

    • playlikeapro
    • 1/5/2011 2:04 PM

    I must add in a complaint about the new logo as well. I much preferred when the logo at least said "STARBUCKS" on it. Why would you want to remove such an iconic name from the logo? Starbucks, along with the siren that is the main focus of the logo, are well known, but is the siren itself truly enough to signify to everyone that a cup of coffee came from Starbucks? I think Starbucks should retain their name on the logo to remain unique and outstanding.

    • Eastsidesipper
    • 1/5/2011 2:06 PM

    I read studies that show humanity is heading towards a more 'icon oriented' way of interacting with the world, but I'm a 50-something and I find an icon presented alone - without wording - just plain annoying. Plus there's something irritatingly presumptuous in Starbucks assuming that everyone - the world over - will know the icon.

    • cfreie
    • 1/5/2011 2:07 PM

    Removing the name of the company (not just "coffee") leads me to wonder if your next announcement will be a name change or merger...

    • danielj7
    • 1/5/2011 2:07 PM

    hmm...new logo = who cares. As long as I can go into the store get a good cup of coffee I'm fine. I know I can walk in there and know what store I am in if the logo spells out "Starbucks" or not.

    • cpattee
    • 1/5/2011 2:08 PM

    Well, I guess just like when they foolishly tried to be retro and bring back the brown label, I'll have to patiently wait for them to realize their error and change back to the tried and true Starbucks logo. And while I wait, I won't buy anything with the lame new logo on it. This totally ended my day on a low note. Way to go Starbucks.

    • italiangrl26
    • 1/5/2011 2:09 PM

    I am disappointed in the new logo. It looks plain and random. Shoot I would rather see them go back to the original logo from 1971 instead of this new one. Sorry Starbucks but you messed up a perfectly fine logo. Bravo!

    • lisdelan
    • 1/5/2011 2:09 PM

    Was there ever a draft logo to put the Starbucks Coffee logo on the 'Sirens' crown? &/or to keep the green ring around the outer edge?? I do have to agree, the brand name NEEDS to stay integrated to the logo. I wish, at the time, I would have seen the selections of new logos for customer comment. The complaints are pouring in but beyond saying 'keep the old logo' I don't see any suggestions to refine the unfinished look to the new one.

    • marlatimmons
    • 1/5/2011 2:10 PM

    Hate the new logo! Don't try to fix what already works!!!!!!!!!!!!!I won't by anything with the new logo either!

    • laceyodonnell11
    • 1/5/2011 2:11 PM

    This Gold Card member loves the new logo. We are creatures of habit . . . of course we will miss the old logo, but what is wrong with change?

    • LStuartBos
    • 1/5/2011 2:14 PM

    Howard, My first reaction is, frankly, a big Y-A-W-N! Perhaps if you had explained how the new logo addresses and relates to future plans, you might have demonstrated some merit to the change. I surmise that you intend was to distance the logo from coffee to some degree to facilitate launching into new product categories where your coffee heritage might not be viewed as a plus (e.g. StarbucksTM brand adhesive strips?). Lacking any explanation, the change remains a big Y-A-W-N!

    • Eastsidesipper
    • 1/5/2011 2:14 PM

    Now I GET IT: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2010-10-18-starbucks18_CV_N.htmA very different kind of Starbucks is on tap. It will serve regional wine and beer. It offers an expansive plate of locally made cheeses — served on china. The barista bar is rebuilt to seat customers up close to the coffee. Most conspicuously, the place looks less like a Starbucks and more like a cafe that's been part of the neighborhood for years — yet that's "green" in design and decor.

      • lisdelan
      • 1/5/2011 2:32 PM

      In reply to: Eastsidesipper

      Even if Startbucks is expanding their retail option further 'STARBUCKS' should be part of the logo. No one really says they're going to Starbuck Coffee anyway. But a 'Brand' simply needs to stay with a logo. People might start saying they're going to the 'Siren' place!
      Good for you to keep evolving in this strained economy!

    • soonie1234
    • 1/5/2011 2:14 PM

    The new logo (coming from a person that has a design and marketing background) is just horrible. It is flat, boring, and actually took me a while to connect it to the word Starbucks. The old logo was fine as is, and had much more depth and personality than the newly proposed logo. This makes me wonder if they're trying to replay what Gap did--make customers go "Hooray" and spend lotsa money on them once they go back to their old logo in about a week or two after the change.

    • JumboJigga78
    • 1/5/2011 2:16 PM

    Wow lots of branding experts in this comment section. Fitting since Starbucks doesn't know anything about branding and design...oh wait.

    • mjpurple8
    • 1/5/2011 2:17 PM

    It sounds to me like they plan to expand into areas beyond coffee, so to take it off the logo might make sense. I would imagine they will include the name "Starbucks" on signs, packaging, etc. -- just not within the logo itself. If you're holding a cup of coffee you bought at Starbucks, you don't really need to be reminded that it's from Starbucks by having the words printed on the cup...

    • Amandainparis
    • 1/5/2011 2:19 PM

    I am very disappointed in this new logo! I am not impressed at all. Very poor choice for Starbucks.What will they think of next?? maybe just a star for a logo lol What were you thinking??? In my opinion they should fire the advertising team that came up with it. I know how much it probably cost for this new logo/new cups & merchandise with it. That just adds to the price of our coffee in the future. You should have just stuck with the old that everyone loved and saved us a few cents on our dr

    • kendraks@yahoo.com
    • 1/5/2011 2:20 PM

    The old logo was fine - I think the new one looks dumbed down and like a bad cup of coffee from a gas station. Time to snap up the old logo merchandise. Yes, the old logo spells comfort and familiarity - guess we are creatures of habit, just don't change the coffee.

    • localClient
    • 1/5/2011 2:23 PM

    It's not the siren that people recognize as the logo. I didn't even know what was in the middle of the logo until a couple years ago. Take some advice from Gap and keep your logo. People like it, and more importantly, they actually recognize it. One more reason to go to Caribou: Avoid the huge freaky siren staring me down every time I take a sip.

    • angryape
    • 1/5/2011 2:23 PM

    At first, I wasn't sure about the logo. I thought to lose the type was a bad idea. When you listen to Howard Shultz explain the reasoning and how they are moving beyond just coffee, I think it makes sense. It holds true to the tradition of the siren imagery, but breaks out of the "circle" of just being a coffee shop. It is also a nice mark.

    • Eldorado45
    • 1/5/2011 2:24 PM

    Well, reading through 3 hours of comments, I see about 5 max number of people who like the change. Will Mr. Schultz take the reins and do the 'popular' thing and reverse this decision?

    • mebraha47
    • 1/5/2011 2:28 PM

    While I can appreciate your attempt to update your logo, I think that your replacement is a horror. Whoever designed it has no knowledge of effective marketing-retailing. It is a gross error to remove the word STARBUCKS from the logo, in my opinion. Removing the word COFFEE, accomplishes your attempt to broaden your appeal to more that just coffee in the future. Unless it is your plan to change the company name from STARBUCKS to something else, there is no need to remove STARBUCKS from your logo.

    • talshuv
    • 1/5/2011 2:28 PM

    This would be suitable if done as part of larger revolution: switching to a completely new kind of cups that don't harm the environment or completely reinventing the way coffee is grown and transported from different parts of the world. But changing, just for changing - that's bad. I like the cleaner design, hey - it's more up to date. So what? Give me a reason for this type of change...

    • hans@gerwitz.com
    • 1/5/2011 2:29 PM

    On purely aesthetic grounds, I think the logo works on-cup (though I would encircle it with a black band or otherwise add black to avoid the cheap look of single-color). But as signage it seems it will clash with recent store designs, including the 1st & Pike "environmental" approach and the Olive Way "street level" language. This logo says "ubiquity" and will work fine alongside highways but I'm worried about the adaptation to urban contexts.

    • adesoucy
    • 1/5/2011 2:30 PM

    What nonsense, and the Prez believes we are going to buy the line he has been given by some marketing guru, oh please! I have been in retail for 30 years and I think Starbucks changing their logo is such a mistake. At 40 years, that is the biggest thing they could think of. Sad! It is what you give the customer, your product and store experience that matters.

    • saramitt
    • 1/5/2011 2:30 PM

    Removing the word COFFEE might be looking forward to expansion of product offerings but removing the STARBUCKS from the Siren Logo is just ridiculous. Also the border around the Siren design had a classier look. Hope it comes back quickly.

    • scullyiza
    • 1/5/2011 2:30 PM

    Okay...all they are doing is removing the words "Starbucks Coffee" from the logo.....why is that supposed to be so impactful? I think not. It's stupid. The logo is staying the same, just without words. A five year old could come up with that brilliant idea. LOL.

    • mkopke
    • 1/5/2011 2:33 PM

    I'm disappointed with the new logo. It has lost impact. I also find it strange to remove the company name, especially since I don't think the Siren alone is established as the identity of the brand. What was the impetus to change? Just the anniversary? Imagine the cost to update all the stores around the world with the new logo.....I sense a price increase coming....

    • 3marilou
    • 1/5/2011 2:35 PM

    This new logo is wrong, wrong, wrong. You can rationalize and 'reason' all you want, but this logo says - 'CHEAP and corporate.' What hits your eye with this design cannot be justified. Is it really about saving money by not printing two colors? This logo cheapens the brand. It pains me to think that I have funded some ad agency to dream up this scam. Do they have any consequences for bad decisions, or do they laugh all the way to the bank? Bring back the old cup with they t

    • artaxias
    • 1/5/2011 2:41 PM

    Bring back the logo where the siren had *****.

    • skeremy
    • 1/5/2011 2:43 PM

    Someone is going to be fired over this one . . . the old logo was classic and this is a mistake

    • clwasilko42
    • 1/5/2011 2:46 PM

    I'm an avid Starbucks customer (does 125+ visits in 12 months count?) and I can say that I HATE the new cup design. VERY disappointing. Awful-terrible-who in the world thought of this idea? There is nothing wrong with the current cup. Haven't you ever heard of "Don't fix it unless it's broken!"? Seriously, what a waste of time thinking of a new cup design. Starbucks should be focusing on customers and how to make them happy and make coffee even better! Now, yo

    • tlaube
    • 1/5/2011 2:49 PM

    I'm a long time customer, and can't help but wonder why Mr. Schultz feels this should be his focus. I have some advice. Starbucks is your name, own it. Don't let your artistic, flunky, too much free time, marketing staff remove it. It will cost a ton of money. The world will hate it, you will change it back. How about you focus on operations. Try making an Iced Chai Tea taste the same everywhere (don't forget your locations in airports and Targets). Fresh/Consistent/Clean!

    • Clitzler
    • 1/5/2011 2:50 PM

    Bad move. Keep the curent design.

    • clwasilko42
    • 1/5/2011 2:50 PM

    Starbucks should be focusing on customers and how to make them happy and make coffee even better! Now, your gold card rewards program - that was a great idea!! Focus on ideas like that instead of redesigning a stupid cup. Here's another idea - why don't you ASK your best customers what they want and what they would like to see?

    • erinkkg
    • 1/5/2011 2:51 PM

    The old logo is much better! Please change it back!

    • catahoula23
    • 1/5/2011 2:51 PM

    Wow. My first two thoughts are... 1) Gap logo disaster redux, 2) Why in the world take away the Starbucks name? While many companies have logos without their name incorporated within the design, the name is often nearby. It strikes of arrogance to this over caffeinated loyal customer. I like the current (name included) logo. Maybe in time I will like the new one, but I would not bet on it.

    • vaness13181
    • 1/5/2011 2:51 PM

    In the words of Vivian from Pretty Woman, "BIG MISTAKE. Big. Huge. I have to go shopping now." Why would you change the logo? I agree with the majority here, do not make changes. Does this mean you plan to change the light signage in the window too? Because I look for that logo when I want coffee, and I guarantee I am not searching for a green mermaid!

    • robs2558
    • 1/5/2011 2:52 PM

    The new logo looks incomplete without Starbucks Coffee. If I had seen the cup prior to reading this article, I'd have thought it was printed incorrectly.

    • abedgar
    • 1/5/2011 2:55 PM

    I'm glad to see I'm in similar company - I don't like the new logo at all. It's missing the Starbucks name, it feels unfinished, washed out...This is definitely a step backward. Change the interior of some of the stores if you wish, but the logo should stay!

    • fred9999
    • 1/5/2011 3:00 PM

    Ugh, ugly, mistake.

    • billdog50
    • 1/5/2011 3:05 PM

    Logo change? You just removed the STARBUCKS NAME! That seems counter intuitive and counterproductive. Are you just changing the logo on the cup or signage. You really want to make a change how about cleaning up the store at 2191 Buckingham rd. in Richardson Texas. I went in there the other day and the only seat available was next to a table of people eating food from MacDonalds and the chair looked like it had vomit on it. And when I try to redeem a reward on my Green card I get an argument.

    • tmcilvain2
    • 1/5/2011 3:06 PM

    This is so bland! Why would you weaken your marketing by removing your name? Maybe Starbucks is getting ready to sell themselves to Cellular One so we can drink "Cellular One" coffee at Komiskey, I mean Cellular One Field. Unlikely, I know, but why would you take your name off your cup? Also, it looks like they're trying to save money on printing by going down to one color. Go back!

    • msivaramprasad
    • 1/5/2011 3:07 PM

    This is one of the WORST logo redesign i have ever seen. Going from GREAT to WORST Logo. I will not able to distinguish between Starbucks Cup and some morning joe's Cup until i see it from 1 feet away with this change. You could leave remove Coffee and put some thing like ex: Est: 1971 if you really want to change the logo to diversify into another areas.

    • overachiever532
    • 1/5/2011 3:09 PM

    Why do people insist on changing classic logos? Gap's idea of a new logo was awful but at least theirs was halfway logical and still said "Gap" on it. This new logo is a total wreck. The obvious problem being that nowhere on the logo does it say "Starbuck's." Keep the old logo, they shouldn't make a change that is simply going to cost the company more money and it doesn't even have the company's name on it. On a sidenote, I haven't had any problems at a

    • hondastud
    • 1/5/2011 3:10 PM

    looks f'n generic like your coffee's becoming

    • cmbainc
    • 1/5/2011 3:11 PM

    As a 20 year marketing/advertising professional, I never cease to be amazed at the stupidity of these type of corporate moves. I've heard rumors of Starbucks considering wine, etc. and could possibly agree that if these are true the "coffee" name could be dropped from the logo, but the "Starbucks" name, definitely not. Monumental mistake. Right up there with the ridiculous decision to always serve Pike and not the variety of mild/bold that built the built the brand in the

    • overachiever532
    • 1/5/2011 3:12 PM

    ll with my gold card or receiving rewards in a timely fashion. Although I liked the original design for the card I thought it was illogical for a card called the "gold card" to be black. So at least the transformation to a gold card made sense. This new logo makes no sense at all.

    • overachiever532
    • 1/5/2011 3:12 PM

    ll with my gold card or receiving rewards in a timely fashion. Although I liked the original design for the card I thought it was illogical for a card called the "gold card" to be black. So at least the transformation to a gold card made sense. This new logo makes no sense at all.

    • tchang69
    • 1/5/2011 3:12 PM

    The new logo is the worst of all four. It doesn't say "Starbucks".

    • olgerm
    • 1/5/2011 3:16 PM

    I am fine with the Logo update. To the people that complain that it doesn't explicitly call out the Starbucks name need to consider other wildly successful companies who's logos don't spell out the company name. Apple is a big one, just as iconic in America and around the world as Starbucks. Nike as well. Virtually every car company out there. When you have a symbol/emblem that is recognizable around the world it is perfectly fine to drop the actual name of the company from the logo.

    • tgd49er
    • 1/5/2011 3:20 PM

    Changing the logo is like taking lat out of latte it would just be te so what now when someone ask were we get our coffee we will just say some coffee place i feel that you are in a down hill tumble and if you don't stop you will crash and burn i love starbucks just the way it is its great to change some things like coffee flavors and furniture but leave the name alone it just dont make sence

    • RobinTenold
    • 1/5/2011 4:23 PM

    Yuck! What is Starbucks thinking? The new logo is weak. It would be one thing if the new logo was better, but this one just isn't. I want an intricate, yet familiar, logo for my intricate and familiar coffee. Give it back!

    • skelly3055
    • 1/5/2011 4:25 PM

    I suppose the new logo (without words) is to identify a cup of coffee for those who cannot read english?Perhaps we are moving into the age of symbols instead of words as a global gesture.

    • Duckydu143
    • 1/5/2011 4:28 PM

    Yeah and once again troglodytes prove that they don't like change - wow. LOL Your new logo is modern and different, and not something to be sacrificed OR worshiped, just like any of the others. Give it up folks, as long as Starbucks is dedicated to improving then they will.

    • pej7445
    • 1/5/2011 4:28 PM

    Where is my previous comment and how come the quantity of comments dropped from 394 to 45???? Is SBUX deleting non-favorable comments??

    • janet804@comcast.net
    • 1/5/2011 4:29 PM

    We love you for who you are. And we identify you by the green and the logo and the name. Would it make sense to change the green to yellow or pink or orange? or change the mermaid to a fish or camel or monkey? I strongly identify with the logo as is...mermaid, color, name and all. Please don't mess with my one guilty pleasure, leave it as is.

    • joesales
    • 1/5/2011 4:30 PM

    If I hadn't seen on this website that the Starbucks logo was to be changed, I would have thought that someone was ripping off the Starbucks brand. It would look like bogus coffee to me.

    • zxdjkrm
    • 1/5/2011 4:30 PM

    This logo is AWFUL! What a terrible business decision! This is one of the most recognizable logos on the planet for one of the largest corporations on the planet. Why in the world would you mess with that? Reverting to the "original" logo a few years back was an awful idea too. How do you not learn from a previous mistake and intentionally repeat it??

    • pej7445
    • 1/5/2011 4:31 PM

    At least keep the "starbucks" label on there, ditch "coffee" if you want. I don't like the new logo and lack of branding. I speak as a strong SBUX fan and (happy) SHAREHOLDER

    • stratsi
    • 1/5/2011 4:44 PM

    After GAP, yet another ill-motivated self-serving attempt to "refresh" a corporate logo. So many Brand/Marketing teams at corporations who need to justify their worth by tinkering with an established and well-liked brand...sad. As to the CEO arguments Starbucks would be branching into products other than coffee, I leave you with these two thoughts: 1) I buy almost daily but I don't drink coffee (Iced Chai Tea baby). 2) People buy Coca Cola, even w/o the coca in it!

      • Whaddyadoing
      • 1/5/2011 5:01 PM

      In reply to: stratsi

      How are the adults of tomorrow supposed to refer to your company? My kid is a Starbucks fan, not a 'Siren' fan. Hmmm, perhaps Kraft should simply play up the macaroni & cheese, or the noodle. Whaddyadoing?

    • shuoqiwang
    • 1/5/2011 4:51 PM

    I really don't like the new logo. Please don't do it...

    • milehighmonkey
    • 1/5/2011 4:51 PM

    the new logo is TERRIBLE!!!

    • lvela03
    • 1/5/2011 4:52 PM

    I like the new logo, but I'm gonna miss da starbucks letter logo!!! :(

    • PrayingEagle
    • 1/5/2011 4:54 PM

    This logo is really ugly. Why would you take your company name off your product? If it's not broke, don't fix it.

    • JimBray
    • 1/5/2011 4:55 PM

    This is a mistake. As a daily drinker and stockholder, it sickens me to think about the amount of time and money Starbucks devoted to meeting after meeting, consultant fees, graphic artists, focus groups, more meetings and to signage. In 2021, I expect a future Starbucks CEO will announce the company is going "retro," and the logo cast aside in 2011 will return. I just hope they have the good sense not to waste more on consultants, focus groups and the like.

    • milehighmonkey
    • 1/5/2011 4:58 PM

    i hate the new logo. i am not even a loyal starbuck customer. i got a $25 gift card for xmas but when i got to starbucks it was only for $5. starbucks made a $20 profit off my boyfriend. i actually only created this account to share my opinion about the horrid new logo. PLEASE CHANGE IT BACK!!!

    • starbucksgirl692
    • 1/5/2011 4:59 PM

    Really don't like the new logo. Leave well enough alone.

    • CatAndTx
    • 1/5/2011 5:01 PM

    I just created an account so that I could log in and express how much I DO NOT like this change in logo. Didn't anyone learn anything from GAP? If you are concerned with it being too "Coffee"-ish the just take that off...don't remove Starbucks from it. It's ugly and looks like any other off-brand coffee shop cup. I drink Starbucks any time I am not at home...maybe I should I just carry around one of my Flavia cups to pour my coffee in so I don't have to drink out of

    • patlamey
    • 1/5/2011 5:05 PM

    I have been in Starbucks stores all over Asia and dropping the English will remove Starbucks from the universe of 'Sharing the American Dream' experiences desired by many outside of our shores. On a second note, I realized lately that I am paying $6.00 for the same latte and breakfast pastry that I originally paid $4.60 for several years ago. During that time, my base pay has gone up 7.5% while Starbucks raised the price by 30%. Save the money spent on logos and reduce prices instead.

    • joelelsd
    • 1/5/2011 5:05 PM

    i created this account to just say you are all a bunch of babies. its a new logo! not new coffee, not a new store, and actually it isnt new they just took out the name so you could appreciate the image that has been there forever. The only reason there is so many comments that are negative on this is because only you guys care. and youre losers. and so am i for responding but theres more of you than me.

    • lnorian
    • 1/5/2011 5:06 PM

    Ugly! I don't think removing the name of the company is that bad, but the logo is just blah. Simple is good, like Apple's logo, but when the company name is "Apple" and your logo is an *****, it obviously works. Besides, Apple's logo is white/silver and sophisticated. The mint green siren by itself is hideous. What a waste of time and money!!!

    • YogaManDan
    • 1/5/2011 5:06 PM

    This is a great example of how companies lose their focus on core values like quality and start obsessing on self-indulgent pursuits. I could care less what the logo looks like - draw it in crayon if it makes you happy. I return 1/3 of drinks I purchase to SBux counters due to quality concerns, and the 2/3 I keep feature espresso that tastes flat and stale. What difference does a pretty cup make if the espresso inside is sub-standard?

    • karenloubr
    • 1/5/2011 5:06 PM

    Each time Starbucks closed one of my faviorte shops I would e-mail, please reconsider. When you stopped making the light mocha's I again sent a e-mail please bring it back. When you changed the card from black to gold and reduced the saving to the customer I thought wow they must be hurting financially. Is this a cost cutting move again?

    • egrutta
    • 1/5/2011 5:08 PM

    The logo is too plain. I think you should still have the starbucks name in the cups.

    • luree777
    • 1/5/2011 5:08 PM

    I don't know if the Starbucks folks care one way or the other, but in looking over the comments it seems the majority doesn't care for the new look. Count me in on that one. It just seems empty without the Starbucks name. I know it doesn't change a thing as far as a good cup of coffee but I just don't like the new logo.

    • guchniat
    • 1/5/2011 5:24 PM

    Removing the name of your company from the brand is dumb. I drank coffee DAILY and nationwide at Starbucks since its earliest days. Until today I never knew about the green lady. I don't look for a green lady when I look for coffee on my travels. I don't Google a green lady when I look for your nearest location. It's smarter to remove 'coffee' from the logo and branch out. Removing 'Starbucks' is stupid. Hey, care to meet me at the green lady and talk this over?

      • eightiesmania
      • 1/5/2011 6:52 PM

      In reply to: guchniat

      I don't mean to be rude, but haven't you ever noticed the green mermaid lady inside the Starbucks logo? I mean it's been right there in the center for a long, long time. Weird.

        • JitterbugLOL
        • 1/5/2011 9:24 PM

        In reply to: eightiesmania

        eightiesmania, you and I seem to be in the minority here. Many folks are going ballistic (too much caffeine) and saying how AWFUL and BAD it is, when it is really the same as before without their name. And when I say same, it is exactly to the pixel with just a color change. So, what they are telling you Starbucks, is that not only is your new logo completely terrible, but your old one was 50% garbage too!

    • sirtimtim1
    • 1/5/2011 5:24 PM

    Rather than spending all this money on a new logo and advertising campaigne, you could imress me by lowering your prices.

    • phoenixrising88
    • 1/5/2011 5:27 PM

    WHY change something that's not broken. Hate the new logo!!!! Seems more stark and not as warm as the 2 color version. And I am a successful corporate marketing consultant. You are going down the wrong path...

    • spohkh
    • 1/5/2011 5:28 PM

    Superficial lip service. Changing the logo doesn't do anything to bring Starbucks into a "new age," an age of over-consumption and waste. Using biodegradable plastic cups would have been a better more SIGNIFICANT way to come into Starbucks' fourth decade.

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 5:28 PM

    I'm a proud Starbucks partner . And I happen to just love the new logo . Starbucks is not about just coffee anymore . We are much bigger then coffee! we sell a experience that's what keeps you guys coming back. I think braking away from just coffee is a awesome idea and the new logo shows that .. it well help grow are brand even further on all levels .. I'm exited about it way to go guys !

      • lnorian
      • 1/5/2011 5:42 PM

      In reply to: simplycatlin

      Why not just write "Starbucks" on it, instead of "Starbucks Coffee?" I'm still against the idea of a company spending so much money on a logo, but that's the corporate world I guess. The green siren by itself is just ugly, in my opinion, but hey, I'm just a customer... Of course that doesn't mean I won't buy the coffee anymore - I'm not that petty - but there's something to be said about aesthetics, otherwise corporations wouldn't spend milli

      • Javanity
      • 1/5/2011 5:42 PM

      In reply to: simplycatlin

      No, Starbucks is about coffee. Sorry.

    • dafdaf_1
    • 1/5/2011 5:31 PM

    Is there any way I can buy the old, unused cups when the change is implemented? I want some vintage Starbucks cups around the house.

    • salnancy
    • 1/5/2011 5:31 PM

    Nice update

    • twofizzys
    • 1/5/2011 5:33 PM

    Wow! Didn't even know what the "siren" was. Truthfully, couldn't have told you there was one on the cup. Now your cups will look just like the cups Gibbs uses on NCIS!

    • rondajf66
    • 1/5/2011 5:34 PM

    I just don't like the removing of the name from the logo. As a marketing major myself, I am just not following the thinking behind removing the name...It's the name that most people love, not the "green lady".

      • simplycatlin
      • 1/5/2011 5:40 PM

      In reply to: rondajf66

      You guys love the experience not the name and not the green lady .. and starbucks well still be on the cup just on the back of it by the boxes .. Starbucks is more then coffee now we serve food and pastries and lunch .. Starbucks is branching out and are logo needs to represent that !

        • pmprez99
        • 1/5/2011 9:14 PM

        In reply to: simplycatlin

        I agree it is more than just the coffee which would make sense removing the "coffee" from logo but branching out or not, the experience, the food, etc it is still Starbucks and completely scrapping a logo that works for such an unattractive logo does not represent branching out but an unwise move on corporates part!

    • starbucksisawsome
    • 1/5/2011 5:35 PM

    I am Speechless. The New Logo Is Bland, Very Bland, Watered Down, Not Crisp And Clear. What Is The True Purpose Of Changing The Logo This Way ? ? ? Easier To Display On LCD Road Signs ? ? ? Saves Black Ink ? ? ?

    • bwmayes
    • 1/5/2011 5:36 PM

    Looks awful. There is nothing worse than change for the sake of change. 

    It feels cheap, rushed, and low class. On second thought, I guess it does fit in with your customer service attitude over the last year or so.

    This is one gold card holder and daily customer who is becoming more disillusioned by the day.

      • JitterbugLOL
      • 1/5/2011 9:21 PM

      In reply to: bwmayes

      "Looks awful." - so the old one was just half awful then, because the new one is identical to the old one with the words removed. Start drinking decaf.

    • EdwardCannata
    • 1/5/2011 5:38 PM

    Although I am not a fan of this new logo, I do find it more palatable by adding an addition green circle around the design, which makes it less painfull to look at. If you look at my design - www dot 86it dot biz slash starbucks , I think you might agree.

    • bf62279
    • 1/5/2011 5:38 PM

    I do not like the new logo.

    • mcellim@earthlink.net
    • 1/5/2011 5:38 PM

    Really...the old logo was just fine, as was the "Black Card", which was unceremoniously replaced by the "Gold Card". I enjoyed using my black card and feeling a little special. Now, the boring Gold Card, which is already all scuffed up from constant use, has lost it's shine. It would be so nice if Mr. Schultz would first ask his loyal customers about these changes and see what "they" think. He might just be surprised!

      • jdubrox
      • 1/5/2011 7:28 PM

      In reply to: mcellim@earthlink.net

      Great idea. SBUX leadership would be wise to poll customers on its website what logos they like best. Management should remember that it's most loyal customers are the ones who provide sustainable earnings in the long-run. Throwing customer loyalty to the wind is an unlikely bet for long-term success and customer satisfaction.

    • NHootman
    • 1/5/2011 5:39 PM

    I love how most of the "pro-logo" posts are so well phrased and punctuated. Never in a million years would I suspect that the marketing team had prepared them in advance.

    • plasticrobb
    • 1/5/2011 5:39 PM

    I was looking forward to a monumental change. Changing a logo does not necessarily mean a brand change. I believe this is much ado about nothing or just an attempt to bring attention to the company. I, as does most, enjoy the coffee and the astounding branding but this is truly not news worthy!

    • Javanity
    • 1/5/2011 5:41 PM

    Stupid idea. And someone got paid for this? Really stupid.

    • kastend
    • 1/5/2011 5:41 PM

    I’m really disappointed with the new logo for Starbucks. The current logo that was introduced in 1992 is not only a classic, but it’s a very solid company image that would do well regardless of how long Starbucks has been in business.

      • jdubrox
      • 1/5/2011 7:31 PM

      In reply to: kastend

      Agreed. This is why external consulting firms create and vet logos before they are released to the public for backlash. Take a look at Deloitte, for example. Their green-dot logo worked out great because they got it from an outside consulting firm. And the funniest part? SBUX likely spent the same amount of money as if they'd just outsourced the job appropriately.

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 5:45 PM

    You guys love the experience not the name and not the green lady .. and starbucks well still be on the cup just on the back of it by the boxes .. Starbucks is more then coffee now we serve food and pastries and lunch .. Starbucks is branching out and are logo needs to represent that !

    • mshardrock
    • 1/5/2011 5:46 PM

    I really like the old logo... If it does have to change, I agree with the folks who suggest that the Starbucks name stay, and just drop the word 'Coffee'. I LOVE STARBUCKS LATTEs!

    • Willow_Creek_Cafe
    • 1/5/2011 5:48 PM

    Howard . . . You're the man!

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 5:49 PM

    You guys love the experience not the name and not the green lady .. and starbucks well still be on the cup just on the back of it by the boxes .. Starbucks is more then coffee now we serve food and pastries and lunch .. Starbucks is branching out and our logo needs to represent that !

    • ykuskin
    • 1/5/2011 5:52 PM

    The new logo is blah. Why remove the name? Or is it just a stunt to attract attention and then revert back and NOT change the logo?

    • grannymim
    • 1/5/2011 5:53 PM

    I agree 500% with all of the above who think the change is ludicrous!!!!!!!!!! Probably just like so many other changes, the guys at the top have nothing else to do, so they justify their existence by coming up with ideas like this. So, does this mean that because the Mona Lisa is old, we should change her name for the sake of progress?

    • johnhuetteman
    • 1/5/2011 5:53 PM

    I agree and understand the logo change due to the corporation's desire to diversify and create a brand that isn't only synonymous with coffee. Regardless of how cleverly symbolic the Siren breaking free from her encasement is from the Starbuck's name and the word "coffee" as Starbucks continues its quest to incorporate other products into its portfolio, I can only hope this change allows the Siren to stay afloat and not eventually drown due to lack of support, since I LOVE

    • sandyhu26
    • 1/5/2011 5:56 PM

    Hey no worries, I like the new design. I will just go to "Mermaid Coffee" now.

    • execujetv12
    • 1/5/2011 6:00 PM

    I DO NOT like it, period.

    • plasticrobb
    • 1/5/2011 6:00 PM

    I see more and more post about the logo change is due to brand diversification. Let's be real Starbucks is a COFFEE company and will be synonymous with coffee. Using the name/logo on mugs and accessories is one thing but what are they expecting to do? Build cars, sell clothing, cell phones....

    • meluttke
    • 1/5/2011 6:01 PM

    Going to sound like a broken record at this point in the comments, but not impressed with the new logo! Very bland, & the name should stay on there.

    • execujetv12
    • 1/5/2011 6:01 PM

    Leave the old logo behind. To me it has become an American icon, why foll around with something that is not broken, and so perfect?

    • execujetv12
    • 1/5/2011 6:04 PM

    Hopefully they listen to customer feedback and actually turn this big mistake around. The best companies always succeed by listening to their customer feedback, so far customers say, this new logo stinks!

    • jmmeetz
    • 1/5/2011 6:04 PM

    I do NOT like the new look. I also think is is DUMB to remove "Starbucks" from the logo. Who dreamed this up anyway?

    • skaperzinski
    • 1/5/2011 6:06 PM

    I agree with all the Starbucks lovers who are asking why mess with a good thing? The logo was fine as it was. Everyone knows and recognizes it. Sounds to me like Starbucks is planning on getting out of the coffee business.

    • QUENCE111
    • 1/5/2011 6:07 PM

    I LOVE the new logo, way to go starbucks! There is no need to say HEY I'm Starbucks, I think Siren has become an international symbol that i think everyone knows and loves. I applaud starbucks and I cant wait to see whats next.

      • eightiesmania
      • 1/5/2011 6:49 PM

      In reply to: QUENCE111

      I agree, it's like a milestone for them to know that people will recognize them by the green mermaid alone. Kind of like, dare I say, the golden arches of McDonald's. I like it!

    • kissteele
    • 1/5/2011 6:13 PM

    I agree..... The new logo is LAME!

    • chuckcrichley
    • 1/5/2011 6:13 PM

    I have read the history of Starbucks, own the stock, and drink the coffee every day. The current logo is excellent and should remain the company symbol. I don't want to drink wine, beer, or sodas at Starbucks. Thank you.

      • smoothcoffee
      • 1/6/2011 12:35 AM

      In reply to: chuckcrichley

      Well said chuckcrichley. I too think the current logo should remain the company symbol and I don't want to drink wine or beer at my local Starbucks. The familiar atmosphere will disappear and I will no longer feel comfortable when alcohol beverages begin to be served. The coffee house was a safe place where I could meet friends at.

    • halfriebe
    • 1/5/2011 6:13 PM

    Schultzy: Bad decision on this logo thing!!! As you can see, it would have been a good idea to consult with your loyal fan club of coffee drinkers beforehand.

    • Carol1240
    • 1/5/2011 6:19 PM

    I don't mean to be negative about the new logo but the single color makes it look faded, flat and generic. Makes me think of 7-11 or Walmart even though they have more than one color.

    • BikeToStarbucks
    • 1/5/2011 6:21 PM

    Big Mistake, I really don't like the new logo at all and think it should have been left alone. Why throw away something so recognized and respected? Yes, we all know you can get more than coffee at a coffee shop, but people still go there primarily for their coffee beverages and "Coffee Company" should be included in the logo.

      • JitterbugLOL
      • 1/5/2011 9:19 PM

      In reply to: BikeToStarbucks

      Have you even looked at the new logo? "I really don't like the new logo at all" - well, considering it is 50% of their old logo, did you not like the old one a 'little'?

        • cmkalm
        • 1/5/2011 11:45 PM

        In reply to: JitterbugLOL

        @JitterbugLOL - there is no need to be defensive...it is a noticeable difference with dropping the name in white lettering with black trim and the green band around the siren. The siren alone in one color is what everyone on here (beside the employees trying to promote this) takes issue with - it's boring, bland, strange, unimpressive, vague, monochrome, generic and cheap. Are you employed or affiliated with SBUX in some way?

        • soonie1234
        • 1/7/2011 2:08 PM

        In reply to: cmkalm

        cmkalm: well said! My opinion is that if they really want to update their current logo, they should make the new one at least equally as beautiful as the current logo. Their attempt at making it look more modern and simplistic has gone too far and now the siren is all alone and washed out. I think they should at least add a green border if they really want to make it single color process and it'll already look so much better.

    • vol_skier
    • 1/5/2011 6:22 PM

    Wow. What is the compelling need to change the logo? I really can't see the benefit of *removing* the company name. How many times has IBM changed their logo in the past 20 years? How about Apple? GE? Imagine Google removing their company name from their logo... I would hope that SBUX will see the folly of this idea and reverse course. Save the money needed to update all the signs. Keep your customers happy, and don't mess with a good thing.

    • hillarykg
    • 1/5/2011 6:22 PM

    NOT IMPRESSED. I mean, if it's not broke ..

    • 4coliver
    • 1/5/2011 6:23 PM

    I am not impressed with the new logo at all! Brand marketing is critical and Starbucks has spent millions to achieve their world class logo recognition, I cannot believe that you would want to change the logo now! This goldcard member says, NO! PLEASE DON'T DO IT!!!!!

    • nbucceri
    • 1/5/2011 6:23 PM

    I normally do not complain about much but I do NOT like this new logo. Who ever heard of a company removing their NAME from the product. You'll be happy to know I will be purchasing some more reusable mugs with the current logo before they are unavailable but don't count on me purchasing any after the change.

    • kelliscoffee
    • 1/5/2011 6:24 PM

    While this isn't as bad as the Gap logo redo (that was pulled 72 hours later) or the horrible cheap looking Belk logo redo, this new logo was unnecessary and it is blah. What next, the holiday cups will go away? Did a new Marketing Director come in and feel the need to make her/his mark?

    • rjrolston
    • 1/5/2011 6:31 PM

    Funny, I posted a negative comment (not profane) a little while ago. Now it is gone. Starbucks must be trying to edit the comments! LOL I'll say it again: I don't like the new logo. Public outcry will win!

    • jenben59
    • 1/5/2011 6:32 PM

    I do enjoy my Starbuck's coffee. It's a treat, but changing the label doesn't impress me. I say, "Leave well enough alone". It looks generic. I won't pay a high price for generic anything. Time for me to stop buying Starbuck's and make my own...I love my old homemade Irish coffee.

      • ambernicole628
      • 1/5/2011 11:45 PM

      In reply to: jenben59

      it's sad that you think a simple cup change will change the way the drink will taste. maybe if you close your eyes your sense of smell and taste will remind you what your treating yourself too

    • AusKosh40
    • 1/5/2011 6:34 PM

    Having been a fan and purveyor of Starbucks since the late 80's, I've seen amazing growth and smart image moves by a company that still manages to stay ahead of the curve. I think this is a similar move. Simple is better. This does that. Starbucks isn't just about coffee and the removal of the name is a subtle, yet strong way of saying so. I applaud the redesign, which isn't much redesign after all. An evolution and a smart one at that.

      • eightiesmania
      • 1/5/2011 6:46 PM

      In reply to: AusKosh40

      I agree completely! The anger and dismay in others' responses is completely shocking to me. I can't imagine why it matters so much to so many people if Starbucks wants to change their logo a bit. I am resistant to change in some areas of life, I won't lie...but the redesigned logo of a massive corporation that sells coffee? It doesn't really upset me! I hadn't considered this new logo standing for more than just coffee, but that makes a ton of sense with all of Starbucks&

    • cmbainc
    • 1/5/2011 6:41 PM

    ...somebody has been editing the comments. I sent a copy of the Starbucks email to an fellow advertising associate to discuss at 5:47 pm (Central Time) and there were 331 comments and counting. Now, only 103? Maybe the server was overwhelmed, but I find this interesting to say the least. The majority of comments seem to be negative towards the new look. The Marketing Department better pay attention. Bad Idea.

      • s2sweetsakura
      • 1/5/2011 7:13 PM

      In reply to: cmbainc

      I just tried to search up my name for the comment I left and now it's gone!! Someone is definitely editing them. Once more, as a loyal customer I vote No!! The new logo adds no value, actually it adds negative value. It's doing more damage than good at this rate. The new logo should be dropped.

    • politiphil@aol.com
    • 1/5/2011 6:43 PM

    Yeah, it's a sneak peak at a likely change of emphasis. Let's just hope they don't "jump the shark" and find that they cannot in the future do what got them to where they are today---produce and sell decent coffee.

    • hays1120
    • 1/5/2011 6:45 PM

    The current logo WITH the Starbucks Coffee band is much better. ...Why remove the company name? I guess a better question is why change an easily recognizable logo with world-wide brand recognition in the first place?

    • hutsell
    • 1/5/2011 6:45 PM

    Since Starbucks is a successfully expanding International Business, did the Marketing Department, thinking of the long term, decide future global operations & expansion may be problematic when considering part of the Trademark's Brand is based on the phonetic alphabet--perhaps being too provincially "Western" when competing internationally in places such as Asia, the Middle East, parts of Africa or the Russian Federation? For myself, the traditional symbolism felt in the name wi

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 6:46 PM

    You guys love the experience not the name and not the green lady .. and starbucks well still be on the cup just on the back of it by the boxes .. Starbucks is more then coffee now we serve food and pastries and lunch. we serve the human spirit its far beyond coffee ! Starbucks is branching out and our logo needs to represent that ! as a customer and a partner I hope all partake in this next chapter of Starbucks ..it really is a amazing time for Starbucks its time for us to raise the bar once more

    • molly61298
    • 1/5/2011 6:47 PM

    Did they have a contest at a local preschool to come up with something and that logo won? It is the lamest cup design I have ever seen I think.

    • nfrias
    • 1/5/2011 6:48 PM

    I have to say at first that this is not "originality." To me, if a company wants to be known as a primer coffee institution, they should come up with a better way to promote and characterize the logo. The idea of dropping the name is old news (heard of Apple). Please, I kindly ask that you drop the idea of ditching this new logo look and bring more sense and enlightenment that the company as a whole "love" to abide to. Don't be imitators. Be original. Ideas in clouds

    • PsychoMeezer
    • 1/5/2011 6:50 PM

    I'm not crazy about the new logo. It just looks too generic and has a cheapness to it. Like it or not, for me, Starbucks IS about the **** coffee! Coffee is the entire reason I go to a store! The other stuff, like breakfast sandwiches and pastries are nice, but they're just a sideshow to the main attraction. Please, just don't start screwing with the coffee next!

    • raymond.macalino@yahoo.com
    • 1/5/2011 6:52 PM

    I agree with the commenters here that I too do not like the removal of STARBUCKS COFFEE. It's what set you apart from the rest. You should not just be a "picture" logo. I hope some followup focus groups are held before the finality of the logo. Or like with most change, you will move forward with the vision and over time everyone will forget this conversation even happened.

    • nfrias
    • 1/5/2011 6:54 PM

    are infinite. Another thing, evolving the company's logo is whole different thing than going with the changing of generations. Do you see McDonald's ditching the red or gold in the color of the logo? Nor do you see the Coca-Cola come up with a script unrelating to the old one? As the world's leading coffee company, you should know that leaving the logo as it is will should that you ARE the leading coffee company in the world. Bring up more ideas/creativity inside the stores/barist

    • scherzhaus
    • 1/5/2011 6:55 PM

    It always seems like the progressive thing to do at the time, but usually the company figures out how much brand equity they are simply throwing away. Why has Coca-Cola recently brought back the nostalgic shaped bottles? Why did Ford bring back the Taurus name after they stupidly cast is aside? The list goes on and on. Until today, I could not have told you what was inside the green Starbucks Coffee ring either. It just defies logic to us customers.

      • eightiesmania
      • 1/5/2011 7:02 PM

      In reply to: scherzhaus

      I am so confused by the sheer number of people saying they never saw the green Siren inside the Starbucks logo until now. What? It is right in the center (of the old logo). How could someone possibly miss it, if you even looked at it for 2 seconds?

    • donbullockjr
    • 1/5/2011 6:55 PM

    I go back to purchasing market spice tea and coffee in Pike Place Market in the early '70s. I like the name "Starbucks" and miss the name in the new Logo. Think about Apple. Apple shortened it's name from Apple Computer to Apple to reflect it's expanding business, but kept it's name, sometimes displaying in sequence in ads. How about keep the name and the double rings? Maybe put stars evenly spaced at the bottom of the ring to replace the coffee and balance the compa

    • nfrias
    • 1/5/2011 6:56 PM

    as to show that the company is up-to-date with the generation. Be ahead of the fellow competitors. Besides the points, I completely admire the risk-taking to increase the value of the branding.

    • politiphil@aol.com
    • 1/5/2011 6:57 PM

    The new image reminds me of what the new portraits look like on some of the current US currency--out-of-proportion distortions of previously-dignified portraits. Surely Starbucks isn't worried about anyone counterfeiting their logo and peddling non-Starbucks coffee in fake cups!

    • caffn8me
    • 1/5/2011 6:58 PM

    The reason Peets is now my favorite coffee is because Starbucks' ego got too big. The logo? Seriously? How about you start including three shots by default in your grande espresso drinks like everyone else does? I couldn't care less about your logo--I want value for my money.

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 7:02 PM

    You guys love the experience not the name and not the green lady .. and starbucks well still be on the cup just on the back of it by the boxes .. Starbucks is more then coffee now we serve food and pastries and lunch. we serve the human spirit its far beyond coffee ! Starbucks is branching out and our logo needs to represent that ! as a customer and a partner I hope all partake in this next chapter of Starbucks ..it really is a amazing time for Starbucks its time for us to raise the bar once more

    • denisgoodwin
    • 1/5/2011 7:04 PM

    ever since Howard and Co. closed down the store in the old Newton Center train station in favor of a horrific McStarbucks around the block, I've been a Peet's man. Yeah, I'm still bitter......the new logo? It's OK, I guess.

    • themottolagroup2
    • 1/5/2011 7:05 PM

    Wow, seems like there is consensus here about the new logo. I will admit that at first glance I like to current logo to the new logo. I am also a person who tends to resist change. On second glance, what I like about the new logo is the removal of the words "starbucks coffee" since it seems more inclusive to me for a global brand to not have to use a specific national language in their branding. My bottom line is this: I like Starbucks products better than any of their competetors a

    • brown.jean
    • 1/5/2011 7:07 PM

    Why waste 5 bucks on a coffee with a cup designed for a fast food restaurant? It just cheapened the experience.

    • onyons33
    • 1/5/2011 7:07 PM

    Maybe your next step in this future movement should be the actual quality of your coffee. Starbucks coffee is about the experience and not necessarily the coffee. I don't go to get a great cup of coffee (because its not even as good as 8 o' clock coffee, check out information taken from consumer reports). If your coffee is as good as you think it is then coffee aficionados as well as 15 year old girls who want a vanilla frappucino (ice *****- tastes good) will bring even more business.

    • Fpecchio
    • 1/5/2011 7:07 PM

    The siren looks soooooo lonely in the cup!!!! It's just a green spot on a cup!! Don't do it!! It's like taking off the hat of uncle Sam! I VOTE A NO GO!!

    • klizm@aol.com
    • 1/5/2011 7:08 PM

    Long-time customer. Logo is not an improvement. Last time the attempt was to go back in time with the older logo, etc....now it's going "modern"? I like the metaphor about Apple. It's not an improvement unless it builds on the branding....I think this just seems a little clueless.

    • Ptimoteo
    • 1/5/2011 7:18 PM

    I have to agree with the vast majority that removing the name is a HUGE mistake. If what they want to do is expand into more than coffee, that's fine, then just drop the word "coffee" but don't drop Starbucks. Or change it to "Starbucks Cafe". You clearly still sell coffee, but everyone knows that cafe's offer a lot more than just coffee. Plus what's the deal with the 'siren'? I don't see any relationship between what looks like a mermaid and coffee

    • sdalal00
    • 1/5/2011 7:19 PM

    First of all, I love Starbucks and what it brings every morning to me.

    I agree to all those who said a big NO NO to the change. CocaCola, Pepsi and most recently GAP Inc have reverted back to their already established identity theme/logo.

    Suggestion is to keep thriving on betterment of product and experience that "siren" has provided. It takes years to establish a generalized identity so please change the things around that market needs (new products, lower prices

    • egibson0270
    • 1/5/2011 7:21 PM

    Is this what I have to look forward to looking at in the mornings? I'm not a fan of the new logo. Yuck! Yuck!

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 7:22 PM

    You guys love the experience not the name and not the green lady .. and starbucks well still be on the cup just on the back of it by the boxes .. Starbucks is more then coffee now we serve food and pastries and lunch. we serve the human spirit its far beyond coffee ! Starbucks is branching out and our logo needs to represent that ! as a customer and a partner I hope all partake in this next chapter of Starbucks ..it really is a amazing time for Starbucks its time for us to raise the bar once more

      • Ptimoteo
      • 1/5/2011 7:27 PM

      In reply to: simplycatlin

      Smart companies listen to their customers....read through all of the comments and feel the passion. Nobody is wasting their time commenting because they don't care. It's because they do....this type of brand loyalty is what every company strives for....do the smart thing and cancel this new logo.....you may actually get a ton of great free PR out of it....then again, that was probably the plan along....this is just a big joke....ya that's what is....a big joke LOL

        • Ptimoteo
        • 1/5/2011 7:30 PM

        In reply to: Ptimoteo

        If you have to change something to justify the millions spent on this redesign, get rid of the siren. It means nothing, has nothing to do with coffee and I'm sure 90% of people wouldn't even know what a siren is.

    • coffeefromsing
    • 1/5/2011 7:24 PM

    For most of us the siren did not represent Starbucks. And I guess it will not in the future either. This is new narrative coming from Starbucks Marketing Department. Not sure the consumers like me identify with that. I feel like I'm losing some kind of connection with Starbucks with the new logo. Bring back the old one. Learn from Gap!

    • wetatu
    • 1/5/2011 7:27 PM

    Maybe it is time Starbucks should start focusing on who is in control of the company and make a change there. I cannot say that any of your changes in the past year or so have benefitted the customer. You completely watered down the gold card with the new real benefits going to the company not the customer. Maybe it is time you started thinking more about the customer instead of all your wild ideas that you hype to us but yet they end up with overwhelming negative comments and responses.

    • m4mromance
    • 1/5/2011 7:27 PM

    Marketing people have to earn their keep by coming up with new logos that don't increase the sales or connection with the customer. Hands off the old logo and I agree GAP tried this and didn't work, well if you are just trying to get attention to the brand then it did work.

    • Kellymkent
    • 1/5/2011 7:28 PM

    This isn't just a logo change folks. This is one of many moves to diversify away from coffee, and in order to do this, the word "COFFEE" needs to be removed from the logo. Starbucks has long been repositoning itself to represent more than a coffee company, which is evident in the moves to sell food, music, and many non-coffee beverages. Marketing 101, I'd say.

    • lrboyd29
    • 1/5/2011 7:29 PM

    I'm so fired up about this logo change I created an account just to leave a comment. Did you do any focus groups? Did you ask your loyal customers to enter a contest to help with the design? It is almost funny, I'm imagining the millions of dollars that were spent on designing this new logo and it is awful. Terrible. Please protect your brand better than this...

    • neilnotkin
    • 1/5/2011 7:32 PM

    Clever, clean, crisp and speaks to opportunity of an evolving brand that remains true to its' core. Well done!

    • stranodr1
    • 1/5/2011 7:34 PM

    I dare say for many of us, the logo doesn't represent Starbucks at all, the experience that gets us to pay $2.25 a day for a cup of coffee is. I get the move - makes sense when branching out of the historical core business - change won't be accepted easy, but I don't think the new logo is inconsistent with the history of the brand (see: Gap, Xerox), just a progression of the old logo.

      • stranodr1
      • 1/5/2011 7:36 PM

      In reply to: stranodr1

      Also, for what it's worth, if Starbucks can figure out a way to bring the Pacific northwest to the rest of the world (wine and beer specifically), that makes me tremendously excited and happy so I'm cautiously hoping this leads to more readily available quality products.

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 7:35 PM

    You guys love the experience not the name and not the green lady .. and starbucks well still be on the cup just on the back of it by the boxes .. Starbucks is more then coffee now we serve food and pastries and lunch. we serve the human spirit its far beyond coffee ! Starbucks is branching out and our logo needs to represent that ! as a customer and a partner I hope all partake in this next chapter of Starbucks ..it really is a amazing time for Starbucks its time for us to raise the bar once more

    • jazlin
    • 1/5/2011 7:37 PM

    I rather Starbucks stick to the old logo. This one does not speak starbucks to me at all. In my opinion it's not appealing. Please stick to the current one, it's just right

    • cris.etch
    • 1/5/2011 7:38 PM

    Eight years ago on my honeymoon in Madrid, Spain, I was ecstatic to see this "green beacon of happiness". I still refer to it as such and will continue you to do so with the new logo. Starbucks has been around long enough that people will recognize the logo and know who/what it is. I understand the need to change the logo, and it definitely won't stop me from patronizing Starbucks. Kudos!

    • jdubrox
    • 1/5/2011 7:41 PM

    I like how SBUX is putting up new blog posts every few hours so as to push the negative comments about the logo change further down. You can only see 3 posts at a time, which means that there's no telling how many really negative comments have been posted about the logo change. That's PR 101...and a way for SBUX to hide the truth about consumer sentiment in this situation.

      • simplycatlin
      • 1/5/2011 7:53 PM

      In reply to: jdubrox

      That is just not true at Starbucks we encourage are customers to give us insight . We believe this change is needed to diversify ourself across every aspect of our business. To help our brand grow we must branch out .. we love are customers everything we do is for you. This new logo well help us come closer to our customers . And set a new Starbucks face for a new generation across the world !

        • bwmayes
        • 1/5/2011 9:50 PM

        In reply to: simplycatlin

        Please, oh please, explain to me how a new logo will bring a company closer to its customers. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for this idiotic explanation.

    • coastbum
    • 1/5/2011 7:51 PM

    What numb-skull decided to take a WONDERFUL logo and ruin it? LEAVE the Starbuck's logo JUST LIKE IT IS. You all need to carefully examine your upper management and LEAVE THE LOGO ALONE. When people pay $4 for a cup of coffee they at least want the Starbucks name on the cup. I know.....just use that ugly new logo and put "Great Value" under it....afterall it looks like it came from WalMart.

    • SeattleMelody
    • 1/5/2011 7:56 PM

    I like the Starbucks Siren, and think it is a beautiful logo with or without a ring outside of her. This will take some adjusting. I'm sure I will get used to the logo. I remember the change from the 1987 logo to the 1992 logo. My only real concern is that the passion for coffee not be forgotten. That doesn't depend on a logo. It depends on leadership. The new logo is beautiful. The leadership must be passionate about the brand AND coffee.

    • oldschoolamericano
    • 1/5/2011 7:56 PM

    the new logo looks like the 'misprint' that i got the other day on my cold cup. my cup only had this same one layer of color printed and was missing the rest including the name. in my opinion, this new logo looks like they forgot the rest of it. i think names in print along with graphics help to reinforce a company logo better than just a picture. it is almost as bad as the new seattle's best coffee logo, but at least they have their name printed to explain the 'dumb droplet

    • lmflora
    • 1/5/2011 7:56 PM

    Sorry to hear that you are changing the logo. Sounds like a waste of money. The logo can be spotted blocks away. A better move would be to get rid of the Pikes Place coffee.

    • simplycatlin
    • 1/5/2011 7:56 PM

    That is just not true at Starbucks we encourage are customers to give us insight . We believe this change is needed to diversify ourself across every aspect of our business. To help our brand grow we must branch out .. we love are customers everything we do is for you. This new logo well help us come closer to our customers . And set a new Starbucks face for a new generation across the world !

    • biggestteddy
    • 1/5/2011 8:01 PM

    Wow...The first thing I would like to know is the total cost of this piece of marketing genius and how much of this weeks price increase is needed to pay for this "major improvement". I can't believe that anyone cares what the cup looks like. Stick to the basics...a good cup of coffee for a reasonable price.

    • dezynebabe
    • 1/5/2011 8:10 PM

    I'm quite sad to see the *$ name drop from the logo... a drink brand like Coca-Cola keeps its name on its product in some way, no matter how many milestones they've celebrated. If the iconic siren alone has become the *$ brand, I can only assume caffeine has either made us illiterate or too lazy to read a name!

    • ocelot01
    • 1/5/2011 8:16 PM

    Truth be told, I never took note of the "siren" on the cups; I noticed the iconic bold all caps font. Seeing the company's names on cups while in an unfamiliar neighborhood or city enabled me to determine how close I was to this store which I knew would be comforting, familiar and satisfying. I am very disappointed in this design choice because it was unnecessary and looks like a lower quality version of the logo we have come to recognize instantly and to which we have fond memories

      • mexicubaz
      • 1/5/2011 8:22 PM

      In reply to: ocelot01

      I agree. They should have at the very least kept their name and dropped Coffee from the logo. When our of town I look for the RING with the Starbucks Coffee logo not the Siren. Do not like this change. Add STARBUCKS to the logo and I am good with dropping of Coffee.

      • jesserobbins
      • 1/5/2011 8:26 PM

      In reply to: ocelot01

      I completely agree. The Starbucks name is iconic...it feels like home and it's familiar. My head also turns when I'm craving coffee, don't know where to find one, and see someone walk by with a Starbucks cup. I also agree that the new design looks cheap--it looks generic.

    • jesserobbins
    • 1/5/2011 8:23 PM

    I totally agree with all those who hate the new logo. I don't like it at all, and I think it's a very bad move to remove the Starbucks name from the logo. The cup and the logo is part of the coffee-drinking experience, and Starbucks is going to detract from that experience. A milestone isn't a reason to change something--just for the sake of change.

    • corinne.m
    • 1/5/2011 8:49 PM

    @starbucks #fail

    • miamigroove
    • 1/5/2011 8:52 PM

    Party like its 1999....wait, no, its 2011....introducing THE ARTIST FORMERLY KNOWN AS STARBUCKS !!!!

    • Baltimorebabe
    • 1/5/2011 8:53 PM

    Nooooo! If it ain't broke, don't fix it! This logo change is a definite downgrade of your image. I'm sorry.

    • iluvchile
    • 1/5/2011 8:54 PM

    Scrap the white cup with the green logo altogether! How about serving coffee in the RED CHRISTMAS CUP all year long! I love the red cup!

    • Roy8888
    • 1/5/2011 8:57 PM

    I don't like the new logo design. Maybe they try to save some money for ink. That why they take the Starbucks name off the logo.

    • iluvchile
    • 1/5/2011 8:58 PM

    I bought a grande coffee today at my favorite Scottsdale AZ Starbucks and noticed a 10 cent increase in price. UGH! How about figuring out how to keep prices stable (or god forbid, lowering the price) rather than spending gazillions of dollars dreaming up a revised brand? Starbucks, you already have loyal customers... you do not need to spend any more money manipulating the siren.

    • UAGrad98
    • 1/5/2011 9:03 PM

    Do not like this logo at all. From a marketing perspective, totally agree that logo/branding needs to evolve...but companies usually get the best results when they go back to their roots/DNA. This has gone so far in the wrong direction that it makes Starbucks completey unrecognizable. When you see a Starbucks sign, its not that goddess you think of, its the words "STARBUCKS". There is a heritage with having the name in the logo. I have an MBA in marketing, I work in marketing and I

    • UAGrad98
    • 1/5/2011 9:04 PM

    Do not like this logo at all. From a marketing perspective, totally agree that logo/branding needs to evolve...but companies usually get the best results when they go back to their roots/DNA. This has gone so far in the wrong direction that it makes Starbucks completey unrecognizable. When you see a Starbucks sign, its not that goddess you think of, its the words "STARBUCKS". There is a heritage with having the name in the logo. I have an MBA in marketing, I work in marketing and I

    • UAGrad98
    • 1/5/2011 9:06 PM

    ...and I'm an avid Starbucks drinker...I'm truly surprised that you received positive responses in focus-group testing. Hope you will reconsider this logo before moving forward...

    • Roy8888
    • 1/5/2011 9:09 PM

    Starbucks already lose tradition.

    • JitterbugLOL
    • 1/5/2011 9:16 PM

    Why do you guys even care.....about this or rewards card BS. Piping in about how you hate the logo (when it is the EXACT SAME THING WITHOUT THEIR NAME, AND THE COLORS SWITCHED) means you have too much caffeine in your system, and you are a little ON EDGE! It's not the best coffee anyways, not to mention crazy overpriced. Here's an idea: if you are truly a coffee fanatic, learn to roast it yourselves and experiment, not just plunk down $$$ for mass marketed ****.

    • Roy8888
    • 1/5/2011 9:18 PM

    Starbucks new logo look like a cottage edition.

    • Pitboss141
    • 1/5/2011 9:20 PM

    Sorry but you guys really dropped the ball on this one. If you need proof just read the message boards. They are easily 7 to 1 against the new design. Why? People appreciate and even need clear definition in the brands they use. Strong definition conveys clear goals and confidence, and thus people feel more secure in using the product. By removing the black background and the outline you are basically now saying "we hv no idea where we r headed or why, but come go with us anyway.

    • morrow10
    • 1/5/2011 9:21 PM

    I enjoy your coffee. I can deal with the freshening of the logo. However you should be proud of the Starbucks name and the coffee tradition and keep those both predominately displayed. I don't know who decided this was worth the marketing dollars, but I am not impressed. I think your rewards coffee coupons should appear automatically on the card rather than requiring me to get a card in the mail, which is often lost. Also shout out to the Oregon Convention Center Starbucks. They are great

    • rrlecropane
    • 1/5/2011 9:38 PM

    The new logo is bloody brilliant. I've always thought that the text surrounding the siren sapped the strength from an otherwise powerful image--removing it was the right thing to do. Good job.

    • WaltFrench
    • 1/5/2011 9:41 PM

    I'm really perplexed by your site's design. Here you are touting your 21st century updatedness, and telling me I should have flash for optimal viewing experience. (Thanks for caring!). And yet, the ****plays perfectly on my laptop from which I've expunged Flash for bugginess. And when I try to size up the text to read about your dear siren, the layout changes awkwardly, but the text is unchanged… it even seems smaller. What am I missing about Starbucks trying to reach its users?

    • onecoolwoman
    • 1/5/2011 9:47 PM

    I am fine with the new logo. I like to see change and progress, if done respecting the history of the brand, which I think has been done in this case. I get the global issues ("Starbucks Coffee Tea") and look forward to other, new products/innovations that will continue to keep me a Starbucks fan.

    • armyep
    • 1/5/2011 9:51 PM

    "Sales Prevention Department"

    Starbucks newly renamed business development / marketing department ...

    • peonygal
    • 1/5/2011 9:51 PM

    Not a fan of the new logo. Stylistically unappealing, and I think if you want to go "wordless" then go for some symbols...Perhaps *$ (star bucks) (not really, I think that is equally bad.)

    • jharre
    • 1/5/2011 10:00 PM

    I always wondered where the team that created "New Coke" would end up working....now I know, they've been working hard at Starbucks to "improve" things.....congratulations on a terrible move...........

    • denverdick
    • 1/5/2011 10:03 PM

    I worked for Fortune 500 company for many years supporting the Marketing Department. This has the smell of a marketing executive trying to make his mark on the department. The new logo is just plain dull and dumb. I'm continually amazed at how marketing guys (and gals) can really ***** up a successful product and/or idea.

    • mskarenj
    • 1/5/2011 10:06 PM

    Re-branding is the new corporate facelift. They think they have to reinvent themselves and clearly the clients on this site are interested in tradition. Removing the word coffee tells me the company intends to water down their product line - too much of that already and in my opinion it results in unnecessary overhead costs and store clutter. Just go back to doing what you do best and reduce your prices if you want to attract more customers.

    • BethesdaGirl
    • 1/5/2011 10:07 PM

    Change may be okay, but this was the wrong way to go. It is worrisome that the executives at Starbucks can't get this right. Makes one wonder what other bad decisions are being made . . .

    • krystynec
    • 1/5/2011 10:11 PM

    i really DO NOT like the new logo - i would much prefer that you returned to the original brown wood cut - this is not an image that I associate with high quality and ethical responsibility - this seems much more like a discount brand - I truly hope that you reconsider this decission - I associate starbucks with who I am

    • lifevoyager
    • 1/5/2011 10:18 PM

    Logo...Somgo.....They just took away...the buy 3 pounds of Coffee, get one pound Free and made it buy 4 get one Free...... I have not had a raise in 3 years..benefits have been cut...Times are hard! Starbucks makes good profit.....who cares about a Cup ??????? I go to Starbucks every day....on weekends we have breakfast there with our Dog....but Starbucks is a Luxury, which may have to go...So, I ask again....Who Cares about a Cup ??

    • denverdick
    • 1/5/2011 10:23 PM

    Oh, yeah, Howard, I forgot to mention that because I really hate the new logo, I will NOT stop buying your coffee . . . I'm addicted, darn it. But, I will stop buying gift cards as gifts for my friends and relatives. They'll just have to live with gift cards from Amazon.com or Outback Steakhouse.

    • Jerusalemnvrbug
    • 1/5/2011 10:44 PM

    Please don't change the logo. For me, the old logo represents my Starbucks experience for over a decade. I'm all for continued evolution of the brand, products, and stores, but the name "Starbucks" means more than "Siren," something ( or one) that I have never heard of. Starbucks should leave the name of the brand on the logo.

    • KaffeineKid
    • 1/5/2011 10:45 PM

    Sorry, but I think it's a serious mistake to change your logo. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". Change for the sake of change is pointless and can be destructive. The present logo is iconic. Everyone is familiar with it and looks for it. Why in the world would you want to change it ? If it isn't going to improve your product, leave it alone. In my experience, people prefer and are more comfortable with the familiar.

    • mystarbuckscards
    • 1/5/2011 10:48 PM

    This LOGO, continuing the the vision by Terry Heckler, is a far superior revision & update, especially when compared to the mess made of the SBC makeover. I just wish that Starbucks, & others would stop repeating the revisionist version of history where the Pike Place location is referred to as where it all began. Fact is, the FIRST STARBUCKS was down the block, not in the market, and on Western Avenue till 1976! Pike Place came after that. Why is the truth so difficult to accept?

    • mdkarr
    • 1/5/2011 10:49 PM

    As a long time Gold card holder I am very disappointed at the decision of Startbucks to change their logo in such a drastic way that makes it unrecognizable from a distance. A logo makes a product more popular when it can be recognized easily in a store.

    • mukanova
    • 1/5/2011 11:37 PM

    The new logo is AWFUL!!!! NO ONE I ASK LIKES IT!!! I agree with most people here, I am not going to buy any Starbucks merchandise with this new logo. You guys better change it back or you will lose a lot of customers!

    • tacshose
    • 1/5/2011 11:49 PM

    Starbucks MARKETING SHOULD ALL BE FIRED! You hired an outside firm to fix siren LINES, my god what a waste of money. How about stop raising the coffee prices due to milk when you waste time on this junk. Also, I agree with everyone else the Black Card was GREAT. This gold card thing is junk. Just bring back the instant rebates if you want to be eco-concerned. You send out paper mailing and worry about recycling cups. GOOD LUCK BEING AROUND IN ANOTHER 40 YEARS!

    • cmkalm
    • 1/5/2011 11:51 PM

    Starbucks loyalists (Gold Card Member Here) all agree - the new logo is awful. Please do not use this - you can scroll through all the comments and see for yourself. Your customers have spoken -- stay with the current logo with the name and green band on it!

    • execujetv12
    • 1/6/2011 12:22 AM

    I am not buying any merchandise with that aweful logo in them! Not gift cards, not tumblers, not plates or coffee machines! Just makes the company look...cheap!

    • chrisjtt1
    • 1/6/2011 12:55 AM

    Never mind about other products, just put a Starbucks into Stevenage UK, or give me the franchise to do so....it is needed here.

    • zou_zou
    • 1/6/2011 12:57 AM

    I have tolerated your terrible store renovations turning warm orange and wood themes into clinical black, fluorescent white or in one case neon blue-green. I cross my fingers every time a store goes haywire hoping it's just a pilot test that someone will nix eventually. But this... this is ridiculous. The name on your stores is Starbucks. Our warm memories of talking with friends, working at your cafes, holding a cup like a security blanket during tough times are associated with the logo - St

    • zou_zou
    • 1/6/2011 1:01 AM

    This is ridiculous. The name on your stores is Starbucks. Our warm memories of talking with friends, working at your cafes, holding a cup like a security blanket during tough times are associated with that name. Get rid of the siren. Who needs her or even knew her. But bring back my "Starbucks"!!

    • smoothcoffee
    • 1/6/2011 1:12 AM

    Before this decision was made, the marketing department should have surveyed their loyal customers. Is it not your loyal customer base that helps your business stay in business? The opinion of these loyal customers should make in impact on your decisions. To have announced on the late news that the powers to be are moving forward despite the comments made by their customers, tells me you really don't care what your customers want.

    • johnkneeland
    • 1/6/2011 1:20 AM

    I went through the trouble of looking up my username and password just so I could tell you how much I hate the new logo. It's just awful. The Starbucks logo is (was?) iconic. This is terrible. Nice going, geniuses.

    • hstrain
    • 1/6/2011 1:26 AM

    Wow, is there a trend in revamping classic iconic logos in to monstrosities that are following current trends in marketing logos? Gap did the same thing a couple of months ago, guess what happened? People hated it and they went back to the original. This logo looks like something a first year graphic design would do, it is void of emotion, a strong visual identity, and most of all it is a boring unoriginal idea that people will forget. Also I just created this account to tell you it's awful.

    • MigoMigo
    • 1/6/2011 2:00 AM

    I'm sure this has been said in previous posts, but I'm in the advertising industry and the Starbucks brand has always been a huge source of admiration and respect. I'm a believer in Howard and his commitment to the brand, but this move seems to show that the he and the company's marketing team are out-of-touch with their customer base. Don't change something so iconic and don't be too agressive with brand extensions...first rules of advertising. The EXPERIENCE is why we

    • MigoMigo
    • 1/6/2011 2:03 AM

    Changing the logo shows that Starbucks is focusing on what is important to THEM...marketing the beauty of the daily Starbucks experience shows focus on what's important to the customer, and a logo change ain't what it's about.

    • MigoMigo
    • 1/6/2011 2:04 AM

    New Coke...enuff said.

    • kmpusa
    • 1/6/2011 4:04 AM

    Wow - I am so disappointed. Please do NOT ever again ask me to watch a video titled "A Look at the Future of Starbucks" - and then let it be about your logo. Do not waste my time.

    • fred9999
    • 1/6/2011 4:26 AM

    Seems like they're deleting all the negative comments - my previous one is gone and so are others. There was more comments yesterday afternoon already than now - 99% of them negative.

    • nmanf333
    • 1/6/2011 4:27 AM

    I loved the old logo. I am not sure what Starbucks is trying to do by replacing it. Why would you remove your name? It would have made more sense to remove the center. You should not change something that works. The new logo is just plain ugly.

    • OrigoStudios
    • 1/6/2011 4:51 AM

    Perfect Example of Brand EVOLUTION. 40yrs in the making Starbucks could put a solid green circle and the consumer would still recognize the iconic green. It's terrible to see others that don't like it. I guess they want McDonald's and AT&T to be put back as well. Great Job Starbucks and I look forward to enjoying more coffee for another 40yrs.

    • StarWhat
    • 1/6/2011 4:58 AM

    Brand recognition? The only truly recognizable thing left is the "Starbucks Green." Even now that the new logo has been released, try picking 10 people from a Starbucks line and asking them to cover their eyes and describe the Starbucks logo. They will probably all say a green circle and the word "Starbucks." How many do you think will even have a clue what is in the middle of the logo?

    • patsheryl
    • 1/6/2011 5:21 AM

    Are you going to remove the name Starbucks from the stores also? Sorry, your marketing folks should have asked customers first before deciding on this unnecessary new logo. Did you want existing and potential customers to be drawn to her and the logo, or to the name Starbucks? Humbly admit that this was a bad choice and please try again (and keep the NAME in the logo this time.....jeez). Where's the nearest Dunkin' Donuts.....I wonder if they'll accept my Starbucks card?

    • nheath@cox.net
    • 1/6/2011 5:34 AM

    Are you kidding me???? How much time, money and effort has been wasted on this terrible decision? Starbucks you need better advisors. I will not be buying any more cups with this logo. Job not well done.

    • eric@sarjeant.com
    • 1/6/2011 5:48 AM

    I'm guessing Starbucks did this so they could sell something other than coffee. It just doesn't make any sense since that is the whole point of a coffee shop. Focus on coffee and if you want to branch out fix the selection of pastries -- partner with someone else if you really need a lunch/dinner menu.

    • nextlevelcoffee
    • 1/6/2011 5:59 AM

    I am involved in the speciality coffee industry, which often makes starbucks target #1. Constantly i am checking out the latests things this coffee giant is attempting and often giving my own spin to some of their decision making. That info can be found at www.nextlevelcoffee.com . As much as I criticize, I think the new logo is very cool. They are moving towards a similar branding to other industry leaders. If they are accepted as a symbol it will allow them to expand their offerings.

    • hartzbech
    • 1/6/2011 6:06 AM

    Dear Howard, Great posting and interesting design. You have always been a role model to me as an entrepreneur and I enjoyed your book a lot! Have you made an eye tracking test on the new designs on the consumers in US? We have 12 mall based sites ready to do a study for you on the new design. Many of our large FMCG clients use eye tracking for this kind of major changes to designs. Check more here: http://www.imotionsglobal.com We hope that you would be interested in this! Keep up the GREAT work!

    • tkrafters
    • 1/6/2011 6:09 AM

    Please restrict the marketing department to DeCaf only. They have obviously become over caffinated. Think this one over again, please.

    • adslag
    • 1/6/2011 6:10 AM

    Pardon my scathing view, but you are all IDIOTS.... The new logo design has nothing to do with evolution of the logo design rather more to do with the fact that Starbucks will develop new products and services that will bare the starbucks name. Such as books, music, food in-shopping stores non-coffee related etc...

    • JimboUSMC17
    • 1/6/2011 6:20 AM

    The old logo is what makes Starbucks. This new one looks very plain and I am not happy with it at all. If you are trying to sell other products and do no want to be known just for coffee, why not just remove "Coffee" from your logo and leave the company name. Also, let's not try to be like those other companies who just use a logo without the company name. It may have worked for them but that does not mean it will work for all. I truly hope the logo is changed back to it's previ

    • clah95
    • 1/6/2011 6:38 AM

    I understand the concept of pulling the "coffee" part of the name off the cups; the compnay is diversifying. But putting Starbucks on the back of the cup is just a waste of ink as my hand will cover it anyway. And as to the "new siren" ? Not an improvement in my view. I agree with the other folks when they say the logo now looks "cheap". Maybe a "name change" is next and this will make it easier to do; a seque of sorts. Bottom line; I dont like the new logo

    • cbadger001
    • 1/6/2011 6:40 AM

    I have to say, I don't love the change... In a world where branding is so important, I definitely wonder why you would tinker around with such a successful brand image.

    • dak.peoples
    • 1/6/2011 6:53 AM

    Starbucks, WHY??!!! Leave the logo alone. The new one is horrid. Must have pretty pathetic group think going on in your management ranks or listening to idiotic outside paid consultants. Best FREE consulting is right here. When people say the word "Starbucks" they already assume coffee. Starbucks is Coffee. Starbucks is for 'drinks'. Venture in to coffee, beer and wine. Drop music business. FOCUS on what you do best. That is coffee.

    • tmcrowd
    • 1/6/2011 7:00 AM

    "The Generic Meaningless Swoosh Thing is what happens when any corporation gathers senior management, their internal creative department, and a design agency in order to develop a new logo. The managers will talk about wanting something that shows their company is 'forward thinking' and 'in motion,' and no fewer than three of them will reference Nike, inventors of the original swoosh. The creative types smile, nod, secretly stab themselves with their X-Acto knives, and [put]

    • timg19
    • 1/6/2011 7:03 AM

    Apple is the only other company I can think of with such a strong brand following, and I can't fathom them changing their logo. Starbucks, have your customers ever told you to change? Don't fix something that isn't broke. Starbucks, I hope your listening to all of these customers.

    • Steph315
    • 1/6/2011 7:05 AM

    I've noticed the siren before, and it looks great in the circle, but this new logo is plain ugly. I associate the brand with the old logo, this one looks fishy. Bad move starbucks.

    • jjboston
    • 1/6/2011 7:08 AM

    Boring-doesn't leave much of an impression. Agree, should re-instate the cirle around the logo.

    • gary1030
    • 1/6/2011 7:11 AM

    As a stockholder I see value in the publicity surrounding the change, but I do not agree with need for change. I know the logo & what it stands for and look for it amoung the flurry of signs as I travel so I can know where to go. Changing a logo where it has less visual impact and message means it will get lost in that flurry. And, people still tie words to memories, so while I know what it means, there are millions in the future who will not get that "tie" and this will mean a c

    • beckissimo
    • 1/6/2011 7:12 AM

    Looks like a ripped off logo on a cheap import- flat and plastic. *Sigh*, doesn't anyone remember what good design is all about?

    • NLADOPOULOS
    • 1/6/2011 7:13 AM

    GOD I hope Saatchi didn't convince you to do this - They have ruined more brands than you know. If it was Saatchi...stop drinking their Kool-Aid, take off your matching track suits and get out of their cult now! Restore your logo, don't "fix" what wasn't broken, no matter what your company is sold on brand imaging.

    • alyaris
    • 1/6/2011 7:21 AM

    I Love Starbucks but I DON'T LiKE THE NEW LOGO please please do not change it
    Thank you.

    • hokiegirl13
    • 1/6/2011 7:24 AM

    I'm a gold-card user as well and long-time Starbucks enthusiast and I truly believe that this logo change is a huge mistake for the company. The light green color of the new logo will not stand out enough on the cups, bags, thermoses, and certainly not on the roadway signs/storefronts. How will we spot the rest stops hosting Starbucks stores from the highway? The brand name should not be removed, nor should the circle. I have always favored more simplistic designs, but this one is a faux pas.

    • kathygallaher
    • 1/6/2011 7:28 AM

    It's unfortunate that Starbucks feels they are honoring their customer base by changing their logo. I echo many others in stating I recognize their logo from blocks away. If you need to change the logo to recognize the 40th Anniversary; enhance it for the year!

    • txdino2003@yahoo.com
    • 1/6/2011 7:29 AM

    This is "the kings new clothes" all over again! Starbucks does not need to "brand" with a blank, cheap, rip-off of a logo. No name and just a simplified silhouette of the classy original logo =NO CLASS! I'm a 35 drinks per month customer and I HATE this change!

    • scarthur1
    • 1/6/2011 7:30 AM

    I don't like the new logo at all. Why not, to celebrate an anniversary, change the logo to be something more like the original brown one; but with the trademark green color? The siren was always my least favorite part of the Starbucks logo and now she will be the only part. Adding the circle back would make the logo seem more polished, but I still like the older ones MUCH better. It's a shame.

    • maura_ong
    • 1/6/2011 7:37 AM

    Normally I don't comment on brand logo changes but this one really got to me. It doesn't look enticing at all. I love your coffee but to see this plastered everywhere would make me want to walk across the street to the gas station for coffee. It has about the same feeling when I look at this logo and when I think about gas station coffee. Ugly.

    • schielm
    • 1/6/2011 7:41 AM

    As a shareholder, marketing consultant, and daily Starbucks customer, I strongly urge management to incorporate the name "Starbucks" into the logo, not just slap it on the back of the cup. The masses will not connect this new, nameless logo with Starbucks the company unless "Starbucks" is clearly emblazoned across the logo. I dread thinking that profits may erode even further because of this new logo. We don't need the word "coffee" in the logo, but "Star

    • plouinc
    • 1/6/2011 7:58 AM

    Beloved Starbucks team: if it ain't broke, why in the world fix it?!?! Are you doing a Tropicana egotistic try to leave your Management mark?!? You are dumping you corporate tandem colors and iconic font, which many have tried to emulate... Come on! The new logo looks cheap. Moreover, you assume that you can afford dropping your name? How pretentious. That's a no-no if you aspire to international growth! Don't want to limit to Coffee products? Put "Starbucks since 1971" and

    • tlaube
    • 1/6/2011 8:09 AM

    Mr. Chairman,
    Why don't you focus on operations and not your marketing department?
    Why not figure out how to give us a chai tea that tastes the same no matter which location you go to? A pastry that is fresh every day of the week?
    Please focus on quality drinks, fresh food, and a clean store.
    I'm glad I sold my stock, as this is a sign of a company that is lost.
    It makes me sad.

    • kumar136
    • 1/6/2011 8:16 AM

    The new logo is disappointing. It looks unfinished and quite honestly, never knew that icon in the middle was a "siren", and don't get the connection to the brand. The logo seems generic vs. clean, which is what I'm assuming the design is after. It's taken the feel of Starbucks from the best coffee in the world to just coffee. Good luck with that!

    • ndmartinxyz
    • 1/6/2011 8:23 AM

    Why kill the STARBUCKS name completely? I understand getting rid of the name, but how about a nod - like navigational stars, for instance. And it definitely feels unfinished as is. http://www.flickr.com/photos/54943802@N08/5330595074/

    • postmansmp
    • 1/6/2011 8:43 AM

    For whatever it's worth, I never paid attention to the picture inside the Starbucks Coffee ring. When I read the article & it mentioned the Siren, I had no idea to what it referred. I had to look at the picture & only then did I realize what was inside the ring... I have a feeling many if not most people are like me & have never paid attention to picture. I don't care anything about the siren. It does not personify or say "Starbucks" to me. I would not recognize th

    • nickmccollum
    • 1/6/2011 8:58 AM

    I agree with the vast majority of the comments here in strongly dis-liking the new logo design. Why would take away the STARBUCKS name that you've spent the last 40yrs building? This new logo is not distinctive in a market with an increasing amount of coffee choices and cookie cutter logos. The previous 3 logos stood out and were easily recognizable. This one, sadly, just blends in with the crowd. Very disappointing.

    • Carol_RN
    • 1/6/2011 9:06 AM

    The old logo was great and recognizable. Why try and mess with something that isn't broken. The logo change isn't of utmost importance but we, as customers, will ultimately pay for this unnecessary change...so I'm going to say this is a BIG MISTAKE! If the logo was dated, it should be changed, but it's not.

    • robg66
    • 1/6/2011 9:10 AM

    Stupid, truly stupid logo change. If you are staying true to your roots, why does the logo need to change? And what company would take their name off their logo? A bit egotistical. Regardless of how well known your brand and logo are, removing the name? Its a terrible change that I hope you reverse. What does the logo change have to do with moving your company forward? You can refresh your locations and product offerings without tinkering with what already works.

    • vickiebolton
    • 1/6/2011 9:12 AM

    I NEVER comment online, but sorry, I am a one to two time daily gold card customer and I say BAD IDEA. I do not like the change, doesn't say Starbucks to me either, almost looks like it is trying to be some cryptic symbol indicating something totally different than great coffee.

    • Ozgenn
    • 1/6/2011 9:15 AM

    we lov starbucks, my dad drinks and my child will drink, we want to drink the same beverage , we want to feel the same feeling! Do you think you make us to think Siren, are you workin for Siren or us? Where is Starbucks? It is extremely disappointing! Maybeee by this way only one good result of this unnecessary logo changing idea occours, If Starbucks decide to use the same logo for PROFESSIONAL STARBUCKS FANS AND DRINKERS =) It will be a good communication and a strong partnership with Starbuc

    • ptorresmx
    • 1/6/2011 9:21 AM

    New Adventures, great. You have an icon, and now it's without Characters and more international. Congratulations.I would like to be at Anniversary party, What do I have to do? I would travel from My country to Seattle...

    • fireman_scott
    • 1/6/2011 10:05 AM

    This has got to be one of the most ill-conceived change-for-change-sakes marketing move in a long time. Nothing says "we care more about expanding our name into other realms than we care about coffee" than this move. Boo! Boo, I say!

    • stanleymlyniec
    • 1/6/2011 10:08 AM

    The new logo alienates itself from the old. The foreground of the current logo is the green circle with the words STARBUCKS COFFEE. The Siren was secondary and in the in the background. Now the foreground, the element that people keyed off of to identify the brand as been removed. I never cared about what was in the middle of the circle. I looked for the word STARBUCKS.

    • clayholcomb
    • 1/6/2011 10:15 AM

    do not like the new logo, not because I am nostalgic or don't like change. I just think it looks cheap and I have no identification with the "siren" just the name and the coffee. This is a case of people making decisions within the confines of the board room not the coffee shop.

    • ventebold
    • 1/6/2011 10:25 AM

    WOW;
    this has put a GAP between me and the local Starbucks store. I love the coffee, but trashing a great Trademark Logo seems to be the dumbest thing you could have done.
    I'm sending my shredded Registered Card into the GAP that you have made...!!!

    • walorado
    • 1/6/2011 10:26 AM

    Did you hire the same marketing company that came up with New Coke? I may not be the smartest guy in the room, but if you take your mega-name and extremely recognizable logo from your #1 marketing tool (your cups), you are going to hurt your marketing efforts overall. This appears to be a case of fixing what isn't broken. Perhaps you should run for congress. They seem pretty good at that, too.

    • nutravine
    • 1/6/2011 10:31 AM

    This is the most ridiculous change I have ever seen! You spend millions of dollars trying to create recognition of your company and its logo, and now you are going to change it -- stupid decision. Didn't you learn from the Coca Cola disaster? As an owner of my own company, I say DON'T CHANGE IT! Why don't you spend your money on worthwhile and much appreciated efforts such as continuing the nutritional improvements in your foods! You will be sorry, because we customers don't

    • slewi30
    • 1/6/2011 10:34 AM

    Yeah, so I’m not liking this new design all that much. At all, actually. You guys should maybe enroll at the local community college and take a business class that teaches about branding. Bad move.

    • dido78
    • 1/6/2011 10:40 AM

    DON'T CHANGE IT ! the siren is ***** on the new logo !!!

    • lamcdaniel
    • 1/6/2011 10:59 AM

    I actually created an account so I could comment on the atrocious new logo. Coca-Cola still uses their name and they are much better known and more successful. I would not recognize this logo as being Starbucks. The name needs to be on there. Also, it looks rather ****** and very cheaply done. Not a huge Starbucks fan anyway but this is really awful. I just received a $50 gift card for Christmas, will probably take me over 2 years to buy that much.

    • milehighron
    • 1/6/2011 11:01 AM

    One can put humps on a horse, but it is still a horse, not a camel. Removing your brand name will not eliminate the contentious nature of those who oppose your presence in their neighborhood. Those who are pushing for the "brand name" elimination will never see the Starbucks enterprise as anything but a mega-store regardless of the local kids/adults Starbuck's employs, the local taxes they pay, the tuition aid they provide workers, the "green" programs they encourage, the

    • pkirkey1
    • 1/6/2011 11:04 AM

    The new logo is horrible. I totally agree that companies need to make subtle changes to keep up with the times and to show customers that they have their finger on the pulse of the customer, but with this logo I think we all just flat-lined. My children (in elementary school) could have created a more brand-specific logo. To remove the Starbuck's name from the logo was nothing short of MORONIC! Let me get this straight: You want to appeal to NEW customers (not just the same Gold card cus

    • lbrockme
    • 1/6/2011 11:06 AM

    Okay ... don't usually comment on things but could not keep quiet.
    I do not like this logo. At all .. It feels somewhat cheap ...as well as idolic ... a little evil ... starbucks name is what should be on the cup ...
    would I carry around this cup into my workplace, church, shopping ... not likely. especailly when there are so many coffeshops up and coming - if they were a drive thru it would take little now to shift.

    • lbrockme
    • 1/6/2011 11:07 AM

    by the way ... are you listening to your customers ... or just doing what you think we want ... or does what we say matter

    • drvnsmiln@att.net
    • 1/6/2011 11:10 AM

    As over 300 previous posters have stated, changing the logo is a BAD IDEA. the current logo is familiar and recognizable; this new logo is generic. The current logo is classy; the new logo is generic. Your products are way better than GENERIC - don't "dumb down" the logo! And be proud enough of your product to put your name on it!!!

    • heather.gamble
    • 1/6/2011 11:36 AM

    As loyal Starbucks customers, who have spent hundreds of dollars (seriously) on your coffee, don't we get a vote on how the new logo should look? Not a fan of the new Siren to come. Bring back the 1987 version!

    • housebrook
    • 1/6/2011 11:37 AM

    The logo needs a circle of some kind. The current one can be seen from a distance & we all use it to find the nearest starbucks. The lack of black is cleaner, but has less impact, especially at a distance. I like some of the changes to the siren, but she has lost her *******. She looks very strange without a hint of her *******. It doesnt exactly honor her female qualities. I like her history and losing her female qualities is wrong.They are gradually fading out her mermaid qualities, wrong a

    • julebeem
    • 1/6/2011 11:39 AM

    Im really sad, and confused over this new logo... That people were paid to sit down and come up with this. Stripping the logo of it's famous circle, WHY??? If it's not broken-don't fix it--leave it alone!!!!!....I collect all things with this logo on it, I even have a huge sign in my spare bedroom with the logo on it...People love it...Your not changing the logo for the better-you are stripping it and making it plain and boring....Compare it to (Nike taking it's nike symbol off

    • housebrook
    • 1/6/2011 11:41 AM

    wow I didnt realize I could NOT say the word ****** . There is nothing wrong with that part of female attributes...no wonder they are changing the logo if I cant even say the word . She is suppose to be a mermaid, and if mermaids are cool for disney they should be okay for starbucks

    • pixel8design
    • 1/6/2011 11:43 AM

    People, people.... please. Change is good. Starbucks is like the Apple Computer of coffee companies. They know what they're doing, and I doubt a logo will make them lose business. And if y'all know so much about branding, where's your CEO badge? Please, they've made it this far because they take risks. If you don't take risks and ruffle a few feathers, you're not gonna be noticed in our high-speed world. Good move Starbucks. Good move.

    • lessismore74
    • 1/6/2011 11:50 AM

    You know what this means, they are going to more fully embrace selling music in the stores. And probably iPads and mobiles. Hence, the removal of the word COFFEE.

    • moriarty65
    • 1/6/2011 11:54 AM

    The new logo looks *****, it needs some sort of border around the outside. Removing the Starbucks name is just plain lame. Whomever approved this has a very odd sense of marketing tools. Understood why you would remove the word coffee but to remove the name of the company is not intelligent.

    • ccmyers1414
    • 1/6/2011 12:16 PM

    Completely UNIMPRESSED. I hope this is just a publicity stunt to get their name in the media. Did anyone not learn from the GAP logo fiasco?

    • sushaaann
    • 1/6/2011 12:44 PM

    I am extremely disappointed in this change. I am unimpressed and unhappy about this! I have actually lost some respect for Starbucks for removing their name. The new logo just looks too modernized and doesn't have that classy feeling to it anymore. Change is good, but now as regular Starbucks customers, we'll have to get used to this again. This was a bad choice.

      • sushaaann
      • 1/6/2011 12:48 PM

      In reply to: sushaaann

      Ugh. I can't express my disappointment in this change.. I had to comment twice. How will they attract customers without the company's name on it!!?! I can't believe Starbucks wasted money and effort trying to change something like this..and the fact that loyal customers don't even get a say in this! We are the ones drinking your coffee!!!

    • timst454
    • 1/6/2011 12:48 PM

    I agree that this logo is terrible. It is very generic. It would be the equivalent of a white cup that says "coffee" on the front. This is absolutely terrible. A very sad day in history. How about we just try to please everyone, save on ink, and serve it in a plain white cup? Better yet, everyone just bring a cup from home. I think not! How very dissappointing. It sounds like the goal is to be generic. What can you say? Congratulations then. For some reason I all of the sudden don't

    • timst454
    • 1/6/2011 12:49 PM

    (cont)....feel the same about Starbucks. If you have to dilute yourself down to a green spot on a cup to please the world that is pretty sad.

    • cccchad
    • 1/6/2011 12:54 PM

    I really DO NOT like this logo. Although I do favor 'moving forward', I think this is the complete wrong way to do it. Unfortunately, when I see the new logo, I find it hard to associate it with the classy starbucks brand, and I am quite disappointed. Please, reconsider going back to the last one. -Long-time Customer

    • cccchad
    • 1/6/2011 1:05 PM

    Please, look at Edward Canta's design with a circle around it. That design would be much more appropriate and not look so cheap. Please, take a few moments and visit www dot 86it dot biz slash starbucks. I absolutely love the design! Thanks Edward!

    • tiffanymalia
    • 1/6/2011 1:15 PM

    I am not completely opposed to the new logo, however I do feel that the logo is missing a clearly defined border which in turn leaves it lacking the familiar continuity of the old logo. Perhaps simply adding a line around the new icon will help make it more appealing to those loyal to the former Starbucks seal... I personally would like to see the incorporation of the Starbucks name back into the new logo as well. I am a Starbucks fan and a loyal customer!

    • danobanano@earthlink.net
    • 1/6/2011 1:33 PM

    Added to this week's obscene price increase, the discontinued 10% discount for Gold members and the removal of paper towels in the restrooms, this logo change is just another reason to get your coffee elsewhere. New logo is horribly unpleasant to the eye. Sad day.

    • ohiobarista
    • 1/6/2011 1:43 PM

    Logos are meant to be simple, with key characteristics of the brand being portrayed. tipi4starbucks said it right - Nike, McDonald's, Target, Underarmor, Playboy, etc. are all logos that do not contain the brand name. If it is so important to have the name on the coffee cup, are you really drinking it because it tastes good or for what it says? And do you (everyone being negative) not comprehend the whole idea behind the logo change? Starbucks is ever evolving; the logo is open to allow chang

    • AnaOrdonez
    • 1/6/2011 1:57 PM

    I think the new logo is more sophisticated and modern than the previous logo; a true symbol of the evolution of starbucks

    • WADenny
    • 1/6/2011 2:06 PM

    I must admit I am not a fan of the new logo at all...The siren is beautiful and I'm glad she is still representing Starbucks, but the name itself is SO important! It's the name that everyone knows. It's the name that is synonomous with the quality you only get from Starbucks! Other "generic brands" can come closer to a ********* logo if the name is gone...I know there are times that things must change and move forward, but as Gap learned consumers want some things left untou

    • WADenny
    • 1/6/2011 2:07 PM

    Not sure why, but in my comment above the word generic is starred (*) out? and the last word is untouched!

    • tessalouise
    • 1/6/2011 2:24 PM

    'ohiobarista' mentions many companies that portray themselves without displaying their names, only their logo. Historically, it is a rare commodity to be able to do this. A few of these companies - McDonald's, Nike UnderArmor (although, I still struggle with this one - were it not for a really cute boy =]...,) etc. had no signifigant imagery in the mind of the consumer when their companies were formed. In fact, may have had multiple images to be considered, but through branding,

    • tessalouise
    • 1/6/2011 2:25 PM

    ...they were able to cement in the mind of the consumer that a Big Yellow Bubble-Lettered 'M' meant hamburgers & fries. That a Red Swish meant athletic shoes. Whether they meant to be genius' at marketing, they achieved just that.
    Another company that comes to mind is Chili's - they no longer (in some cases) display the name of their restaurant as the sign over the door - ONLY a Big Red Chili Pepper. Genius! Especially, when the chili pepper is prolific in our so

    • tessalouise
    • 1/6/2011 2:26 PM

    ...society (at least in this Texans society).
    Starbucks has achieved this status, and they recognize it. In my opinion, the 'siren' was the touchstone for the founders of Starbucks, but they had to assign a name to her/the company until we became familiar with her. The particular round shape of the sign, albeit small, and the color, its vibrant kelly green immediately catch my eye when looking for a store. Starbucks has simply removed the extraneous information on the signage

    • tessalouise
    • 1/6/2011 2:27 PM

    ...and boiled it down to the basics - The Pretty Lady MEANS Exceptionally Great Coffee!

    • frankk2
    • 1/6/2011 2:39 PM

    I agree that the new logo is a step backwards. But I can't help but wonder if they've left the word "Coffee" off the logo specifically because they're planning to branch out into much more than just the current coffee, pastries and snacks. If so, that's probably a bad move as well... they do what they do now very well, but straying from one's core competencies is historically a very bad business decision.

    • Dickies
    • 1/6/2011 2:58 PM

    I don't seem to be the only one who thinks that this new logo is not up to par. Removing the Starbucks Coffee ring around it totally loses its class. I am all for change and evolution but this is not what I expected. This new logo loses what this brand is supposed to represent and the history it holds behind it. I have been a loyal Starbucks customer for a long time now. It may not stop me from drinking their coffee but it will feel like I'm not drinking from the right cup.

    • columbus86
    • 1/6/2011 3:24 PM

    Include me as one of the doubters on the new logo. I liked the old logo and liked the instant association with it. I'm surprised that the new one is so different. I'm surprised that it didn't keep the black color with the green color.

    I understand that you want to look to the future and expand the possibilities with new products and new joint ventures. I applaud the risk taking and the expansion, but be careful not to forget what got you there and alienate existing cust

    • DDMocha
    • 1/6/2011 3:37 PM

    Bad idea changing the logo. The new one, in and of itself, is fine. But when compared to the previous it appears washed out and pale. There is something to be said for a classic, unchanged logo that makes people feel comfortable. The Coca Cola script comes to mind. State Farm insurance too. Stay true to what got you here. Why the need to change?

    • THEWELSHES100
    • 1/6/2011 4:05 PM

    I don't get it. It's missing the ring which draws the eye. The lack of two colors makes it bland and faded. Kinda lame you have to carry a girl on your cup to get some coffee. It really isn't a logo, but a mascot now. Odd.

    • marbo2000@yahoo.com
    • 1/6/2011 4:17 PM

    Howard - stop the madness! "STARBUCKS" IS the logo. Any focus on the Siren is an internal one - customers could care less (I honestly have to say, I never noticed it). I travel all over the world - and seeing that Starbucks logo is like a sign of 'home' - why would you want to change that? What's the saying - "Don't fix what ain't broken." I'm in Starbucks every day (somewhere) - and also a stockholder. I vote NO. Don't remove the Starbuck

      • Mindajoy
      • 1/13/2011 7:41 PM

      In reply to: marbo2000@yahoo.com

      HA! I had to comment b/c this is exactly how I feel: STOP THE MADNESS! I realized how passionate I am about this logo as I have scrolled thru 500 comments on 2 different days b/c I'm so happy to have kindred spirits to rage & mourn this INSANE decision. I travel as well, and seeing the "green/black Starbucks Circle" is like a welcome mat to "the mother ship" as I fondly call Starbucks. Seriously? If I see that ring blocks away..I will walk past many coffee joints to

    • broonsie
    • 1/6/2011 4:20 PM

    The new logo just doesn't seem right and it doesn't make sense at all. Is Starbucks going to take down all the giant Starbucks Signs in front of their stores and replace it with a nameless logo? Who is the genius that came up with this idea?!? Did Mr. Schultz or Starbucks management even consider this? This is brand suicide. Please come up with some alternative. The new logo is just sad and makes me feel empty. The day this logo becomes official will be a sad day for a company that so ma

    • espiekermann
    • 1/6/2011 4:44 PM

    Has nobody noticed that the brand will still be called Starbucks? They didn't drop the name, just made the symbol (it's not a logo, that would require letters) simpler. Look at your iPhones or Macintosh computers: no mention of Apple there, just the *****. Does Nike need to spell its name every time the swoosh appears? Starbucks is one of the world’s biggest and best-known brands. It owns the colour green in that market and it dominates it. They are more than coffee now.

      • broonsie
      • 1/6/2011 5:01 PM

      In reply to: espiekermann

      Yes, but the difference is that the Apple logo has always been the same (other than color changes), and Nike has always used the swoosh. They were the symbols that the companies were founded by, and people have come to know those companies by those symbols over the years.. Do you think that Apple would suddenly decide to change the shape or style of the Apple in their logo, or Nike the shape of the Swoosh? I doubt that would ever happen..

    • crosshatch
    • 1/6/2011 5:19 PM

    brilliant branding! the comments are proof that focus groups don't work... this logo won't be used in a vacuum. Consumers are going to know it's Starbucks without the name being part of the icon. Great evolution (unlike Gap)... simple! clean! and beautiful! That said, were talking about the logo. The coffee isn't as good as my local coffee shop but this is a better brand.

      • broonsie
      • 1/6/2011 6:34 PM

      In reply to: crosshatch

      i don't think anyone commenting here is worried about consumers not knowing that its Starbucks... I'm sure people will know its Starbucks regardless of the "Starbucks Coffee" in the logo... I just think that everyone has grown accustomed to the old logo and relate to it more than the new one..

    • LouiseJenn
    • 1/6/2011 5:38 PM

    Personally, I think it's a mistake to remove the name from the logo. Dropping the "Coffee" part would be alright because you serve more than just coffee, but it's the "Starbucks" word that MAKES the logo. Truthfully, I didn't even notice what was inside the circle until I read the update about the changes (that's probably true for a lot of people). And I don't find the siren attractive at all by itself. You should leave the word "Starbucks" an

    • LouiseJenn
    • 1/6/2011 5:41 PM

    Oops, I wrote too much in the last comment and the end was cut off. It said: You should leave the word "Starbucks" and just remove "Coffee" if you are going to remove anything. The logo just won't be the same without the company name and I don't think that the logo will represent the company the same without it.

    • s3xym4n
    • 1/6/2011 6:30 PM

    While I personally like the having the text associated with the logo, it does make good sense for the company on a global level. Rather than having to develop different logos for different locales, and constantly updating various marketing materials, this logo will be recognizable and static across the globe.

    • FatherEdS
    • 1/6/2011 6:37 PM

    This new logo is HORRIBLE! Doesn't anybody at Starbucks headquarters understand the power of the green circle? The circle around the siren has always been a part of the logo! When I am walking or driving down the street in search of a Starbucks what do I look for? THE GREEN CIRCLE with Starbucks Coffee! Didn't any of the Starbucks executives learn from the folly of the people who tried to change the Gap logo? Apparently someone wasn't drinking their coffee again when they approved thi

    • frappmeister
    • 1/6/2011 7:23 PM

    I have to agree with MimiKatz. Glad she got in the first post, before the new logo fans. Change for the sake of change is stupid. If it ain't broke, don't fix it! While I don't absolutely hate the new logo, I like the old one much better. Also, like a few other people, I had barely noticed the center part, and only more recently became aware that it was a siren or mermaid. The ring with Starbucks in it has always represented the company to me. Now you're the company "formerly

    • frappmeister
    • 1/6/2011 7:26 PM

    (hey, got cut off) Now, you're the company "formerly" known as Starbucks.

    • MacManJT
    • 1/6/2011 7:27 PM

    I love my Starbucks, but not so much the new logo.

    • Greatcupofcoffee
    • 1/6/2011 7:33 PM

    WHY??? Don't like it at all! EdwardCannata's version makes it better.... but why change it? Don't like it at all.

    • BethesdaGirl
    • 1/6/2011 8:07 PM

    I agree with above. You need to work on your product and operations. Your remodels are cheap and uncomfortable. Your brand and logo are great. That's really all you have left. This logo issue has really made me think about my Starbucks experience over the last few years. I definitely do not love your coffee anymore. The quality is inconsistent. You often run out of the pastry that I want. Your workers lack enthusiasm. I often walk an extra couple blocks to pick up single cup brew now.

    • Binscarth
    • 1/6/2011 8:30 PM

    I don't like your new logo. Why a redesign when I'm sure it tops the charts on brand recognition scores? I have visited your stores all over the world - even China. Your signage is so recognizable! Is this move a value-add to your brand? Do your marketing people have too much time on their hands? Are they old enough to remember 'New Coke'?? Please listen to your heavy users.

    • mystarbuckscards
    • 1/6/2011 9:10 PM

    Sorry if I have overlooked something, but I have seen no mention of what changes will be made to the Starbucks logo in those countries- like Saudi Arabia, where the current logo is substantially modified to eliminate the Siren's face! STARBUCKS LOGO is NOT universally used. How many others have been redesigned/revisited. I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere. As the present logo is so entrenched, even when a NEW one is introduced, the older one will be ever present long into the future.

    • glendafrench
    • 1/6/2011 9:18 PM

    There are two things that happen when any major company releases a logo: 1) Everyone says they hate it. 2) We all get used to it and forget anyone ever hated it. I have a feeling the same thing will happen here.

      • riazpaynter
      • 1/7/2011 9:07 AM

      In reply to: glendafrench

      I agree! They will still be giving us great coffee and thats all that matters to me...once the coffee starts sucking then ill stop buying it...not because they changed the logo

    • Cranach
    • 1/6/2011 9:33 PM

    From Yucatán, México: I simply don't like the new logo!!! Why did you cut the Starbucks' name? It doesn't make sense. I don't see the "future" in the new logo. If you want to modernize the logo, just take out the COFFEE word, but don't take away the ring.

    • rkozmo
    • 1/6/2011 10:00 PM

    Don't remove the Starbucks' name! I don't like the new logo and would prefer that the old onw is kept.

    • syrusk
    • 1/6/2011 10:37 PM

    Mr. Schultz, I hope you will read all the posts and reconsider this change. The Starbucks ring with the 2 stars and the black/green color contrast is what made the logo.

    From close up, the mermaid has too much "stuff" to be a logo. The mermaid does not have as much brand recognition as you may like to believe.

    From far away (where your customers are before they buy anything) your logo will just be a big green dot.

    • amcdavid
    • 1/6/2011 10:47 PM

    All of these negative comments are ridiculous! I cannot believe people are begging for the logo to change back. When it comes to all brands, I believe that it's the PRODUCTS that matter. So what if the words are removed? You think they aren't going to use their NAME anymore? It's just a logo that is changing - not the name of the place. You'll still see your beloved "Starbucks" on the buildings, products, cups, etc. People just don't like change, and the majority of

    • geon
    • 1/7/2011 12:44 AM

    Not a fan of the ***** up lady. Put her back in her place, in a ring with your name on it. I spent well over a $1000 at your stores last year, and could easily do without it.

      • riazpaynter
      • 1/7/2011 9:06 AM

      In reply to: geon

      then stop complaining about how much you spent, if you dont like it they sell coffee a mcdonalds too...oh wait it does not say starbucks on the cup though...and will decrease your value to society because your cup does not say starbucks on it...

    • 3marilou
    • 1/7/2011 7:03 AM

    While I am not a 'subscriber' to being a 'card-holder,' I was happy with my SB gold card, as I thought that SB was a unique, personal, anti-corporate haven. The new logo changes all that, and yes, like 'geon,' I can easily unsubscribe. I will never buy a latte with the ******up lady on the cup, looking back up at me as if to say - gotcha sucker! Then the coffee won't taste as good anyway. If and when the 'generic' cups come in, I go away.

    • riazpaynter
    • 1/7/2011 9:01 AM

    I dont know what all the fuss is about...green siren, or just plain starbucks printed on the cup or **** nothing...are you people buying starbucks because they make great premium coffee or because you like the logo. Relax, its just a logo, as long as they dont mess with the product itself...i'm getting the impression the ones complaining are worried that no one will know they are drinking a starbucks coffee and their status in society will dissapear...its just a logo, relax and enjoy your cof

    • hilaryburrows
    • 1/7/2011 9:04 AM

    I hate the new logo. It looks awful without the circle enclosing the siren. It looks unfinished -- not the classy logo Starbucks had before. Change it back! Don't leave out the actual name 'Starbucks' from the logo, it makes it ambiguous.

    • ayosh01
    • 1/7/2011 9:40 AM

    Long time customer and gold card holder ... I like the older one far better .. the new one doesn't impact me positively .....

    • spl925
    • 1/7/2011 9:59 AM

    Your established logo over recent years is part of the Attraction and the EXPERIENCE of Choosing Starbucks and Drinking Starbucks Coffee! You new logo ditches both the attraction and experience and I fear ultimately the taste?! I do hope you will reconsider for this gold card user and no doubt may more Starbucks Coffee devotees.

    • Joyceteng
    • 1/7/2011 11:51 AM

    Not too impressed with the new logo~ I hope you guys would reconsider on changing the logo.

    • hnjana
    • 1/7/2011 1:17 PM

    Whos the brain trust that decided to change the logo? Wow good move lets not associate the company name with the product, I think Pepsi should just leave the color on their can and take the words Pepsi off. What was all the mumbo jumbo about the Siren, I think you need to get out of the office. Ive been drinking Starbucks coffee for 15 years now and excuse the way I put this but I've never given a rats Petuti about the Siren. Good coffee in a nice warm relaxing environment. Dont jump the sha

    • GillesKlein
    • 1/7/2011 1:38 PM

    I like Starbucks in US and France (have been first day at first location in Paris, suppo), have seen it in China and elsewhere. I can't imagine the name of the company will vanish, strange way to enforce a brand, by wiping it off.People makes years to have a brand and a logo in the consumer and fans's mind, you kill this image in few seconds like that ? Your consumers, friendly fans are a part of it, you should care about them instead to ignore them and the image you gave us and they like

    • annnmarie93
    • 1/7/2011 1:47 PM

    I agree with the majority here, most of us gold card members I assume. The "new" logo seems a corporate "nightmare". Who would not want to preserve the imagine and history is a mystery to me. I will continue to drink my daily latte unless the quality deteriorates, but I am certainly thinking of dumping my STOCK...seems the company is being taken over by a wave of less than insightfuls. Much of SB power was in that logo. Big mistake in marketing I am afraid, and recognition is

    • texasgirl68
    • 1/7/2011 2:35 PM

    I was really disappointed to see the new logo. The most recognizable portion of your logo is the green ring and the name. The siren is almost incidental - I don't even look at her. She is like a messy abstraction in the middle of the main logo, and I basically ignore it. When I'm driving down the road looking for a Starbucks, all I'm looking for is the green ring, and I would say that many others would agree. I think this is a huge mistake and hope this feedback will change your

    • MaryDiamondGoddess
    • 1/7/2011 3:39 PM

    LOVE IT! Entering 2011 with an iconic, no-name logo on par with the Golden Arches is brilliant. And I love that the Siren is not the fugly, dumpy, original but the "Playboy-hot" one. What a way to honor and invoke the Divine Feminine as She looks over the company and its patrons. This logo really moves Starbucks into the mega-international realm. You should be able to recognize Starbucks anywhere, in any language, and this logo does it. Great job, Howard, you've done it again!

    • gorgolit
    • 1/7/2011 6:41 PM

    ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND??? A NEW LOGO TO REFLECT THAT STARBUCKS IS MORE THAN A COFFEE SHOP??!!! HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN WHAT HAPPENED THE LAST TIME YOU STRAYED FROM THE "FORMULA"????? YOU ALMOST WENT OUT OF BUSINESS AND THE STOCK PRICE TANKED!!!! AS A STOCKHOLDER AND LOYAL CUSTOMER, I JUST WANT TO SAY, FIRE THE IDIOT WHO SUGGESTED "RE-BRANDING" OF WHAT HAS BECOME AN INSTITUTION. YOU ARE A COFFEE SHOP, AND YOU DO AN EXCELLENT JOB OF BEING A COFFEE SHOP. BE SATISFIED WITH THAT!

    • fitchick911
    • 1/7/2011 6:45 PM

    The new logo looks a Seafood chain logo. Count me out on this logo. Terribly NOT recognizable. In any language, the Starbucks logo (the former) is much more recognizable. Taking the class and brand out of your logo isn't that smart, Execs.

    • reacah
    • 1/7/2011 7:49 PM

    I love Starbucks, but I HATE the new logo. I like the current one, its recognizable. The new one has no appeal to me, keep the old one! Everybody likes its and I think the new logo would be a waste of money that could be spent on something else for the company!!

    • reacah
    • 1/7/2011 7:49 PM

    I love Starbucks, but I HATE the new logo. I like the current one, its recognizable. The new one has no appeal to me, keep the old one! Everybody likes its and I think the new logo would be a waste of money that could be spent on something else for the company!!

    • thekinseysix
    • 1/7/2011 9:26 PM

    Eeek. You know a company has an ego when they feel they no longer need their name in the logo! I hope there's an empty marketing chair soon. Forgot the logo! For your 40th I think starbucks should put an enterprise wide focus back on quality and lose the mclatte feel that's been brewing.

    • Stargazer59
    • 1/7/2011 10:49 PM

    It's obvious that your marketing dept. has been listening to talking mermaids! Earth to Starbucks: Leave the logo alone!

    • graceful_joy
    • 1/8/2011 12:36 AM

    Sorry Starbucks...thumbs down on the new logo. :( I honestly do not understand why you would remove the company name. It's a part of your brand that is so recognizable all around the world. Okay, I can understand removing the black ink (cost-savings measure), and maybe even understand making the siren image more prominent, but why remove your name? The design has an appearance of being incomplete. Sorry. If you're going to keep the new design, can you please bring back "The Way I See

    • graceful_joy
    • 1/8/2011 12:38 AM

    Please bring back the "The Way I See It" Stories on the back of the cups.

    • adayinthewife
    • 1/8/2011 7:17 AM

    It's always a mistake to take your company name off of your logo. Your focus has always been coffee, and your new logo tells your customers you are losing your focus. It also looks like you're trying to save a bundle of money by going to a one-color print instead of two color, which is fine, just call it "We're saving money" instead of "We're embracing the siren!"

    • cjsvendsen
    • 1/8/2011 7:21 AM

    I respectfully disagree with the changes made by EdwardCannata. Although they do make the logo more similar to the old one (and thereby give it a nostalgic appeal), they take away from the freedom that the siren represents. By enclosing her, you send the subliminal message that she is held captive. Also, i think the new logo is so much more expansive than the old one. By eliminating the border, the designers incorporated the entire cup in the image--as if the cup IS the logo.

    • cjsvendsen
    • 1/8/2011 7:21 AM

    I respectfully disagree with the changes made by EdwardCannata. Although they do make the logo more similar to the old one (and thereby give it a nostalgic appeal), they take away from the freedom that the siren represents. By enclosing her, you send the subliminal message that she is held captive. Also, i think the new logo is so much more expansive than the old one. By eliminating the border, the designers incorporated the entire cup in the image--as if the cup IS the logo.

    • valerievdz
    • 1/8/2011 8:06 AM

    I agree! Why take the name off the logo? Keep the Starbucks name, even if you broaden your product. Take a lesson from Gap and others. Starbucks is the brand, not the siren. Starbucks CEO and Marketing Department, read these comments. Count me out on the new logo.

    • SeattleMelody
    • 1/8/2011 9:30 AM

    So many people don't like the new logo. :( I like it. If you want to read more about it, I have two blog articles on it at starbucksmelody.com though I should warn that is a fan site.

    • vickie4
    • 1/8/2011 9:43 AM

    From a business prespective, I would have to say why change the logo if you have the same customers still bring money into your company right along with new customers. Mc Donald's don't change their logo. I understand this is a ne generation, but times are not changing that fast and people don't like the changes of logos. We still make purchases no matter what the logos are. What you sell is popular, no one really cares what is on their cup, because they either throw it away or recycl

    • eclipselost
    • 1/8/2011 12:03 PM

    well, let's look at this from both sides: if you listen to the video it clearly states that Starbucks wants to be more than a coffee shop. the old label made it a niche leader in the coffee market but by removing the "coffee" word from the label and putting the Starbucks on the side will allow the company to enter into new markets selling different beverages with the Starbucks name. On the other side, by removing themselves from the coffee niche, they lose their uniqueness

    • eclipselost
    • 1/8/2011 12:23 PM

    that was so characteristic of them. what they should have done, if they intended to increase their territory was create new beverages or speciality goods of different label names but under the Starbucks company Then the company can retain it's niche coffe market and still introduce new products to the market using the credibility and loyalty associated with Starbucks Coffee. Overall, the label looks exactly as what it is intended to do: be generic. The former label restricted the company

    • eclipselost
    • 1/8/2011 12:27 PM

    to a speciality market. It's about more than just the logo, it's about the vision the corporate has for the company. Unfortunately, they've decided to leave their roots as a coffee shop to be more. this may work out if they use the same level of quality, ethical principles and culture Starbucks coffee is known for. i just think it's sad. whether we are in a recession or not, people will go get coffee, hot chocolate and iced lattes. there is so much being sold to the consumer, some

    • kjcmartin
    • 1/8/2011 12:31 PM

    Instead of spending all of the funds rebranding, why not lower your prices, Starbucks?? And it's deceptive to appear to be a local coffee shop, but to be owned by Starbucks: http://www.newser.com/story/64566/starbucks-new-flavor-local-shop-names.html

    • eclipselost
    • 1/8/2011 12:31 PM

    times people just want to go some place simple, classy for coffee. Starbucks did that and added new music artists that were refreshing to hear. Now they've changed their logo bring emphasis on a greek mythology figure that isn't really known for nobility. Last time i checked the siren made ships run aground. i just feel like this logo put too much emphasis on the picture rather than the associations connected to the Starbucks name.

    • lukemartinez
    • 1/8/2011 1:30 PM

    The logo definitely needs the green ring around it! I don't know why but the siren with open white space makes me feel like it's not a quality brand.

    • kcanopener
    • 1/8/2011 1:42 PM

    I like the new logo, it's open and clean. I always felt the old one was cluttered. Also the new siren doesn't have obvious ******* so maybe now people will stop trying to sue them over the so-called "inappropriateness." I don't know why some of you feel so attached to the green ring, or where you're getting your statistics either. And as someone who travels to non-English speaking countries, I agree with MaryDiamondGoddess and others that this makes Starbucks internation

    • lildreamer_289
    • 1/8/2011 3:33 PM

    I know people like to change things up once in a while, but I'm really sad to see this logo go!

    • MaryDiamondGoddess
    • 1/8/2011 3:46 PM

    Thanks, kcanopener! The fact that anyone would sue about the beauty of the Starbucks mermaid just shows how envious people are about beauty! (I say, "Go to the gym then!" Please!) Starbucks' devotion to the mermaid logo is worship of the Divine Mother and the REAL secret to their gigantic success!

    • 5022398
    • 1/8/2011 4:37 PM

    Im so glad Starbucks is back to stepping up the gear again and despite the usual people who fear change this is a change that starbucks need to wake up and realise that starbucks is a business and needs to constantly evolve to to continue to be the number one otherwise every other starbucks copy-cat company whould take over the amazing green giant and thn where would our favourite third place be? and remember Starbucks used to only be a shop selling whole bean coffee and tea, think of the future!

    • barry@soon.com
    • 1/8/2011 7:46 PM

    I don't really care about the logo, but rather about what my choices are when I go to a Starbucks. I am a gold card holder that is Jewish and would like to be able to enjoy kosher cakes there, which I can't.

    • KatHM1990
    • 1/8/2011 8:16 PM

    I don't like the new logo at all. They should just leave the old one alone!

    • kprescod
    • 1/8/2011 9:17 PM

    Starbucks is proving how well of a brand they've become, by removing the words to make one say oh! thats Starbucks by simply identifying their logo.....

    • siandcr
    • 1/8/2011 9:49 PM

    Dear Starbucks Co.,Ltd: Saying goes: "Classic long never fade. ", as has become the classic symbol of the past, has become a symbol represented segments of society, why change it? The new logo looks nothing noble, people find it very tacky and cheap. And there is no color change, and I can not accept that. I have many friends that if it started this flag, the future will not reduce or even a Starbucks store. Hope you will accept my advice. Thank you!

    • slemerdy
    • 1/9/2011 3:01 AM

    The 'old' (do we yet have to say old???) logo had such a vintage look around it: it was a reflection of the products that it represented. A cup of quality, traditionally brewed coffee, to be sipped in a comfy chair listening to some good jazz in one of your shops. And even though it was 'vintage', it had a touch of youth in the offering it meant for the customers. You remove the name: what does the siren mean without its name? Who are you without a name? Sorry, I'm dissapointe

    • skmoyle
    • 1/9/2011 4:26 AM

    Did you seriously think the publicity over the new logo ( which I think looks both cheap and banal) would distract us from the fact that the cost of the drinks inside the cups went up last Tuesday? Really! We aren't stupid.

    • rellim123
    • 1/9/2011 5:28 PM

    Not sure if my first message was posted. I don't like the new logo. It appears weak, indecisive, lacking and plain...really plain. Where is the STARBUCK's name...the name that we coffee drinking, tea sipping folks like to branish with brewed boldness on top of our desks at work, in our shopping carts at the store, and find comfort looking back at us nestled snuggly in our cup holders in our cars? I CAN'T CARRY THIS CUP WITH PRIDE!!!

    • brittzies
    • 1/9/2011 7:15 PM

    I am writing this as a graphic designer who knows a great deal about branding. This is a mistake. Starbucks in the last 20 years has become a cultural icon and their branding is what people recognize. Would Coca-Cola change their brand identity? What about Nike? This new logo is corporate suicide. If this is just a cry for attention like the previous Gap Logo change fiasco, then well done. I'll be waiting for the "we listen to our customers" news letter followed by the return of the

    • easel821
    • 1/9/2011 7:53 PM

    More power to Starbucks! I see nothing wrong with the log. You have to change as everything else changes. If we were all so brilliant, we would have all thought up our own Starbucks. It's a logo and there's nothing wrong with it. Funny how people think they are all experts on the subject when a change it made. Keep up the great work and keep up the great service, Starbucks! I'm a fan and will continue to be a fan.

    • easel821
    • 1/9/2011 7:54 PM

    More power to Starbucks! I see nothing wrong with the log. You have to change as everything else changes. If we were all so brilliant, we would have all thought up our own Starbucks. It's a logo and there's nothing wrong with it. Funny how people think they are all experts on the subject when a change it made. Keep up the great work and keep up the great service, Starbucks! I'm a fan and will continue to be a fan.

    • jasoncasto
    • 1/9/2011 9:11 PM

    The new logo is terrible, why would you remove your brand name from your logo? The current Starbucks logo is perfect as is, why would you change it? I can only hope the CEO of Starbucks reads this feedback and tells the Marketing department to pull the plug on this logo change.

    • kcrockett66
    • 1/10/2011 5:05 AM

    I simply, flat out, do not like the new logo. But just like everything else Starbucks has been doing lately with all their changes (ie new formula for frappacinos).....I am just a gold card customer...what do they care what I think???

    • Tuffsport
    • 1/10/2011 8:55 AM

    To everyone who does NOT like the new "logo" due to the removal of the name. FYI it's on there, it's just been relocated! Change is good and I think this "logo" is great. And for those of you comparing Starbucks to Gap? Gap did it and failed yes. But Nike did it and now you wouldn't dream of the old Nike logo coming back!

    • 1LovelyDay
    • 1/10/2011 4:29 PM

    Really, Really, Hate the Siren. It's not attractive, lose it all together and MANY people will be happy. Many of my friends put STICKERS OVER HER just so we won't have to look at it!

    • danieldessinger
    • 1/11/2011 9:17 AM

    I am VERY disappointed with the logo change. I've been considering it since last week, and I simply cannot attach myself to the equivalent of an airline logo. The previous iteration symbolized a rich connection for me and my "Third Place." If the logo was changed so the company could sell non-coffee related items, then I've lost my connection. Starbucks is like Google. The name means something. To add other verticals and change the branding is nonsensical. I am very displeased.

    • ScottCrothers
    • 1/11/2011 2:30 PM

    Much respect for delighting me on the road and from my Espresso Machine in my home for so many happy years. Please affirm your respect for us, the loyal customers, by not continuing through with the blah, textless, one-color logo change. We can accept a mistake, once corrected, and laugh it off into the future. I love my Starbucks® mug with the classic, current, two-color logo and the awesome, historic, old brown one on the opposite side. 8-)

    • JacquelynD
    • 1/11/2011 5:31 PM

    I don't care for the new logo at all. I want my cup to say 'Starbucks'. Take out the 'coffee' text if you're trying to broaden the image, but don't take away the brand!

    • aronmeyer
    • 1/11/2011 11:10 PM

    No, no, no. You hire the same dolts who pitched New Coke? You can fix this. Starbucks is one of the most recognizable brands in the world. More for the round badge than the mermaid. Must be the first step to branch out from just coffee/tea. Which is fine, but not at the expense of your core business and widespread recognition. Imagine how dumb McDonalds would be to swap the arches for yellow letters on a red square. I'm for evolution, but this is dumb. Money better spent adding drive-thrus.

    • angelapea
    • 1/12/2011 7:44 AM

    It Stinks. Serioulsy, like carrion.

    • vickie4
    • 1/12/2011 10:54 AM

    Change may be good, but now days alot of people would like the changes to stay the same way. Our heritage does not like change, because it makes them think of them being in the ice age. Our children may be the new generation and they will have new ideas for other things, but keep the logo like Mc Donalds or Faded Glory. We appreciate the same logos. we have other styles to work on like jeans, shirts, music, and video games.

    • tim ruddy
    • 1/12/2011 1:28 PM

    As a loyal customer that hasn't lived more than a 10 min drive from Starbucks in over 15 years I must say that I HATE the new logo. As much as I enjoy the coffee, I enjoy and look forward to the Starbucks experience and atmosphere as well with each visit. The ringed STARBUCKS COFFEE surounding the siren is all part of the Starbucks experience. Much like some may identify with the Golden arches as comfort food, I see the Starbucks logo as a beacon I look for from L.A to Montreal To Seoul. Some

      • freelancing
      • 1/12/2011 1:40 PM

      In reply to: tim ruddy

      Agreed. It's easier to spot from a distance, than the feathered siren sans circle. I foresee mass declines in product sales with the new logo. Some people will dig it, but it will mortify the larger fan base.

      • freelancing
      • 1/12/2011 1:41 PM

      In reply to: tim ruddy

      Agreed. It's easier to spot from a distance, than the feathered siren sans circle. I foresee mass declines in product sales with the new logo. Some people will dig it, but it will mortify the larger fan base.

    • kelleradi
    • 1/12/2011 1:31 PM

    If I were CEO of Starbucks i would reject this new logo! Keep the "good and old one" or I will never come back.

    • tim ruddy
    • 1/12/2011 1:33 PM

    Some change is just bad. Brand identification is more important than just re-vamping a logo to make it more modern. Dump this new sci-fi look.
    Keep the logo we all know, love and identify with. Maybe spend more time and energy opening new stores after all the closures that have been made. Hey ROCKLAND ONTARIO is still waiting!!

    • frompariswithlove
    • 1/12/2011 1:38 PM

    Hi,I really don't like it at all !!! It is superb AS it is. Why did you delete the word "Starbucks" ? If you change it, I will go to another coffee place, really. If you change it, "je change de crèmerie" !!!

    • freelancing
    • 1/12/2011 1:39 PM

    This is one of the worst brand identity decisions I can remember in recent memory. Your classic 1992 logo is just that - classic. It has a timeless quality that makes it look both long established, and yet hip - and it is one of the more widely recognized logos worldwide. By itself, the siren looks too busy. While not as tacky, it reminds me of the busy logo for Wendy's. When it's not broken, you shouldn't fix it. The new logo is a DISASTER. It makes you lose credibility as an establi

    • themacdady
    • 1/12/2011 2:47 PM

    This proposed new logo sucks.

    It looks like a knockoff from a bad Chinese coffee store in Beijing. I hope you guys have not started running this off because........it's just plain ugly. Your marketing department should have spent a little more time working on brand recognition and a little less time at lunch patting themselves on the back for a "great new idea" In other words...........bleeech.
    Remember what happented when Pepsi started fudging around with their

    • alyaris
    • 1/12/2011 7:56 PM

    Please Do not change the LOGO is fine the way it is.

    • alyaris
    • 1/12/2011 7:56 PM

    Please Do not change the LOGO is fine the way it is.

    • felixmesa
    • 1/12/2011 8:16 PM

    Boo, Starbucks! Boo! The new logo is a low-rent, Dunkin' Donut-fication of an iconic logo. If it were up to me, I would reintroduce the original 1970s logo. I am hoarding all current logo drinkware so that I don't have drink out of the new one. p.s. Please bring back the sugar free Italian Roast coffee in the can. It was 35 calories of electric heaven.

    • tommysmac
    • 1/13/2011 2:49 AM

    I am an italian coffee estimator. But with the real and original italian espresso I really also love Starbucks. When I used to live in Toronto and then in Dubai I was a loyal customer (twice a day for my coffe, cappuccino, mocha, frappuccino...)! I can't drink tea or coffee at home without my numerous Starbucks mug (with the REAL logo). Please give me back my beloved logo... not that new horrible image you guys decided to use!! Please don't change!!

    • andycivil
    • 1/13/2011 7:20 AM

    It's a pointless change brought on by managers/marketers trying to justify their existence. It doesn't matter how wonderfully crafted the arty-***** words are, it's a bad idea with no meaning and I'm off to facebook to cancel my 'friendship' in protest.

    • daffodils96
    • 1/14/2011 5:36 AM

    i am an avid fan and drinker of Starbucks Coffee... this new logo is ridiculous. i hope the marketers/ceo responds to the outcry from its supports just as GAP did. How on earth can you take away the words STARBUCKS COFFEE???? when i see those words i know its going to be a good day! that siren lady can go in my opionion... if anything change her... NOT remove the words.

    Starbucks - you guys are ridiculous in thinking this new LOGO is a good idea! please rethink what you are doing!

    • tim ruddy
    • 1/15/2011 12:13 PM

    I agree, part of the home experience is drinking my coffee out of my Starbucks mugs with the Classic logo, and once a year during the Chritmas season i bring out the RED coffee mugs with the classic Green logo. All part of the experience.

    • mbmmbm1
    • 1/15/2011 3:24 PM

    Your New logo Sucks!

    • Addis11
    • 1/16/2011 4:55 PM

    It is amazing how some companies cannot handle success by leaving well alone, in this case the household name "Starbucks" itched in people's memories due to its presence for 40 years. Unless the quality and value of the company's products and services are stagnating and thus the company wants to lessen the impact to the company by removing the name from the logo, I cannot imagine why else it would want to be anonymous by hiding behind a logo only. Most people in the world have b

    • Addis11
    • 1/16/2011 5:14 PM

    Most people around the world do not value the "sophistication" of recognizing companies' identities only by their logos. If Starbucks thinks people will automatically identify the company only by its new logo, it has become another arrogant "ugly American." If "Starbucks" is out of sight, the company will be out of mind, resulting in big loss in market share. Instead, worry about how you can continue to improve the quality and value to customers of your products

    • rab2947
    • 1/16/2011 11:52 PM

    I couldn't agree more strongly than with the comments from Addis11. I live in Mainland China the market poised for the largest growth in Starbucks future. My staff of 100% Chinese thinks me crazy because if I am within sniffing distance of my beloved "Xing Ba Ke", Starbucks in Chinese I am a crazy woman until the driver makes the stop for me. My point is not a single one of them can tell me what is in the center of the Starbucks Coffee outer ring but they all can read the script. To

    • sowen028
    • 1/17/2011 4:40 PM

    I'm not impressed. I love Starbucks coffee and drink it more than three times a week. The new logo at the very least needs your name!

    • rschulter
    • 1/28/2011 1:42 AM

    Like Gap, you have made a huge mistake on changing your logo! I only hope you come to your senses as they did and stop this dead in it's tracks! I drink your coffee at least 3 times a week and I HATE THIS LOGO!! Why change something that is NOT broken!?! Geesh, stop the madness!

    • captbrian
    • 1/28/2011 11:14 AM

    new logo absolutely sucks, horrible, terrible. Old logo was quite literally perfect, genious, recognizable, good looking, and created a whole culture of logo'd products that were quite collectible. Just a stupid decision, I personally will halt purchasing of logo'd products. Thanks tho, cuz now my mug collection value will go up substantially.

    • desertdummy
    • 1/28/2011 2:13 PM

    New logo is absolutely AWFUL. Please don't change the logo - I beg you !!!

    • desertdummy
    • 1/28/2011 2:13 PM

    New logo is absolutely AWFUL. Please don't change the logo - I beg you !!!

    • desertdummy
    • 1/28/2011 2:14 PM

    New logo is absolutely AWFUL. Please don't change the logo - I beg you !!!

    • sanssanitary
    • 1/29/2011 10:56 PM

    I don't like looking at the new logo. It is so bland, yet shouts 'look! i'm a futuristic icon'. I agree with other posters as it is generic and I could picture someone walking out of a convenience store with a cup like that. I would even be convinced that it were Shell gasoline's new logo. For me, Starbucks is an experience from the moment I see the sign to the last sip. I enjoy the process of it all including the aesthetics, and this logo is devoid of comfort giving me an em

    • sanssanitary
    • 1/29/2011 11:01 PM

    ..an empty feeling. But hey lets try to look on the bright side, with the new logo and its lack of attraction, maybe I can reduce a custom and save some money.

    • mbkelimo
    • 1/30/2011 6:23 AM

    whoever thought removing Starbucks Coffee from your logo should be fired - it's one thing to rebrand - but who are you? right now, it's back to basics - you are a coffee company - bad marketing strategy - it will back fire

    • melarcher
    • 1/31/2011 1:44 PM

    The new logo looks like it's missing something...like type. I love the old logo and hate that you've messed it up. Starbucks will never be the same.

    • HornetM
    • 2/1/2011 7:52 AM

    A circle contains. In a situation of danger, it protects if you're on the inside. Remove the circle, and you unleash. And a woman with a five-pointed star atop her doesn't recall a "twin tailed siren" as much as it does Venus. Or perhaps the tails are wings, and she is actually Eris (Discordia), Greek goddess of strife and dischord. So the removal of the circle can unleash chaos. And a new partnership could be with Apple, since Eris threw the Apple of Dischord. Is this the way o

    • Gianleo
    • 2/1/2011 10:54 AM

    THE NAME IS THE SYMBOL.

    Mr Howard Schultz sometimes as foreigners we try around the world some points that talk to us about our daily lives. These points express safety and familiarity to us and give us a smart and easy sense of wellbeing.
    Starbucks has represented day by day this comfortable meaning for millions of people in the world. it is so plenty of joy our cup of coffee when we are getting it: in that moment we are living it as a special moment of freedom. For all this, thank

    • Gianleo
    • 2/1/2011 11:00 AM

    For all this, thank you Starbucks.

    But sometimes freedom, as loving, need a confirmation. Specially in these time of unsafety.
    And in the Starbucks logo isn't the Siren the symbol of confirmation but the name. Yes THE NAME IS THE SYMBOL. That's because the name Starbucks is involved us, day by day, in a great story. A story of freedom and wellbeing. And now it is a metaphor of these meaning. As for Nike is the opposite. For Nike the story tell us of agility and says us &qu

    • Gianleo
    • 2/1/2011 11:02 AM

    For Nike the story tell us of agility and says us "just do it". So the symbol of Nike represents very well this meaning and they can eliminate the name of the brand without problem. The story remains the same and stronger than before. That's the truth. Simply because every brand tell a unique story. And Starbucks tells the story of Starbucks that isn't the story of a Siren.

    • littleyacht
    • 2/1/2011 1:37 PM

    I can't believe that a corporation as big as Starbucks would make a change like this without running it past a few focus groups because that would be arrogant and downright STUPID. If you want to branch out from coffee, just remove the word COFFEE from the logo! The new logo doesn't make me think of brand identity, it makes me think that maybe the irritating Mickey D's commercials are right, do I really need to spend $4 on a cup of coffee? Why? Because I agree with whoever said it

      • littleyacht
      • 2/1/2011 1:41 PM

      In reply to: littleyacht

      Because I agree with whoever said it first, the new logo looks cheap and tacky! Put back the company name and green circle or at the very least, add the circle as suggested by one of the first posters in this article. The new logo just looks cheap and unfinished.


    • cnguyen07
    • 2/3/2011 12:45 PM

    Exciting times to be on board.

    • llancelot
    • 2/4/2011 7:58 PM

    Don't change the LOGO...it is a huge mistake. I've owned your stock for 10 years now and you continuously make me nervous as an investor. This may be all I can take....SELL! I see things going downhill with the logo, sorry, my 2 cents. I do however LOVE the dividends to the stock so I'm torn but I've ridden this roller coaster about all I can take. Please listen to 871 people and consider NOT changing the LOGO>

    • tulsa2nuts
    • 2/7/2011 6:37 PM

    As a gold card user, I am appalled at the new Starbucks logo. You have spent 40 years developing your identity. Why would any thoughtful individual want to change that which has been so successful!!!! Leave off the word "coffee", as you are branching out, but keep the word Starbucks. That is what everyone recognizes!

    • markandroxannaholt
    • 2/8/2011 4:11 PM

    We're not thrilled and have been with the company since 1999.

    • satkins01
    • 2/10/2011 3:40 PM

    I grew up in Seattle and have been a loyal customer of Starbucks since the espresso craze kicked off in the early 90s. I've also been a barista for the company. However, I've been very disappointed in Starbucks in recent years. The quality control really declined and the experience started to feel more like McDonalds and less like your corner coffee shop. And now this horrible new logo and an apparent move away from their coffee roots. Looks like I need a new place to get my coffee.

    • accountingsyd23
    • 2/11/2011 9:11 AM

    I'm a believer that less is more, and the new logo is perfect! Very simple, but communicates a bold statement. LOVE IT!

    • marilu1701
    • 2/12/2011 2:15 PM

    My first thought when I saw the new logo was that it looks CHEAP. I am not the only one who feels the same way. Just search for the word "cheap" in this thread. It'll keep you busy if you have time to kill.

    • svhsraider24
    • 2/16/2011 6:59 PM

    I am a current college student and as you can imagine, I drink a LOT of coffee. SBUX is a staple in my diet and has been since my high school years. I will eventually invest in SBUX so I want the company to be successful. That said, I fully agree that the LOGO should KEEP THE TEXT. I believe it's a horrible mistake to lose the text and original look, but if the company feels it absolutely must, then I agree that Edward's altered logo is much better. The encompassing green circle is essent

    • svhsraider24
    • 2/16/2011 7:11 PM

    On an additional note, I just watched the CEO's video, why do you need to "progress further, beyond or outside" of coffee??? SBUX....you are the global premier COFFEE company!!! Why do you feel the need to tap into the fast food market or wherever you are trying to go??? COFFEE is what you do...

    • annrina
    • 2/18/2011 5:05 PM

    the logo w the text ring makes me feel 'home'. the new one is just awful. seeing the new logo would not animate me to go into a starbucks or to buy a new tumblr sporting this logo. the 'old' logo is starbucks. it's the city, it's my city, it's making 7 decisions to get a cup o' coffee - the new one looks good for a fish food restaurant or a scuba shop.

    • geoffrey.gibson
    • 2/20/2011 7:55 AM

    Wow! What a bunch of fanatics. I mean that in the worst possible way. While I do agree that the logo looks better in the slightly modified version above, it's just globalization of a logo. Apple did it. Nike did it. You show me one person on the planet who has ever been into a Starbucks and won't recognize the new logo without "STARBUCKS COFFEE," and I'll show you somebody who needs to get off of their cell phone, open their eyes, and pay a little bit of attention to the wor

    • geoffrey.gibson
    • 2/20/2011 7:56 AM

    ...attention to the world. Grow up and get over it. Geez!!

    • gloriiaaa
    • 2/22/2011 8:31 PM

    Being a loyal Starbucks Coffee drinker all my life, I associated myself with the current logo. I am upset about this new change, as well as I am disappointed in Starbucks. I grew up with the currect logo and it brought comfort to me knowing what I was drinking the same thing for all the years of my life... I feel as though it is unjust to make customers be forced to accept what they do not what. While change may be good, this change is definitely not a good thing, just as the previous temporary c

    • s_chuk
    • 2/24/2011 12:45 AM

    I like the clean look of the new logo, but it looks too boring on the cup. the cup is too bare without anything else added.

    • lovekyoko3632
    • 2/24/2011 1:59 AM

    i like old logo better.

    • mjzke4
    • 2/24/2011 8:07 AM

    IMHO (1) The combination of coffee/ambiance/branding is what makes Starbucks successful. The coffee is what hooked me into drinking coffee in the first place - it was good. The similarity of experience and feeling at the various Starbuck stores is what keeps me coming back for my personal luxury (2) Current 2-color logo from 1992 is based on 1987's logo, so essentially, Starbucks has built its entire brand success on the distinctive 2-color logo for over 20 years. 2-color is expensive, sur

    • CollegeDays426@aol.com
    • 3/3/2011 6:19 AM

    when are the new logo comming out

    • captbrian2
    • 3/3/2011 10:00 AM

    new logo really sucks hard... seriously hope you are joking with going through with changing one of the most prolific, recognizable, and well liked logos in history. brain dead decision. the siren is NOBODY, many people don't even know what the squiggly lines are inside the center circle. you are tricking yourself into thinking that people know all about 'her'

    • captbrian2
    • 3/3/2011 10:04 AM

    and wtf does a mermaid have to do with coffee anyway? the story is stupid, and she is an afterthought at best. you do know how 'collectible' your logo'd items are don't you? well, kiss that revenue stream goodbye! your coffee sucks too by the way, overroasted beans may go further but they do nothing to make a good cup o joe. haven't you ever been somewhere that serves real coffee? taste is very different than swill u serve. we just love your stores and since they r friggin eve

    • fishman11
    • 3/3/2011 11:06 AM

    This is a classic case of corporate cranial rectal inversion. Let's build our brand by removing our Brand Name. This is unatractive. This is wrong headed. The amount of money you will spend converting all of the fixtures in your stores would be better spent providing better quality food and beverages to your customers. I have taught marketing for 20 years. I know ignorant when I see it!

    • DianaO87
    • 12/3/2011 6:23 PM

    It is obvious that you who are against the new logo don't know anything about branding and brand recognition. Once a company is so established and recognized that they don't need a name on the logo, its the ultimate success. Just by seeing the pictures and color of the logo we recognize the brand Starbucks and that is enough. Its a great strategic decision taken by the marketing team and I salut them for that. Good job!

Find Us Online