Baskin Robbins Rebranding
I think this is not that new, but still worth a mention. What do you guys think of the new logo. The choice of type makes it looks very childish, but that’s probably who they are going after. But I also think that it might turn off existing Baskin Robbins fans, who are used to the older one.
Posted in Branding 
Add to del.ici.us 
Digg It
Blogs that link to this post 
Permanent Link
April 12th, 2006 at 9:54 am
I like how the “31″ is part of their initials. It looks childish but yeah, I think that’s exactly what they’re looking for, a new target market and all.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:01 am
that is gay. the old one is not too good either. but i realy hate the new one.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:02 am
I don’t think the new logo works for me. There is to much going on. Am i supposed to look at the letters “BR”, numbers “31″ or look at the whole logo all together. I don’t know.. To many ideas fighting each other. It looks sloppy to me.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:12 am
I think it works with the whole get kids fat while they are young campaign in the US. Ice cream ought to be fun and colorful so I am into it, although I personally do not eat the stuff.
April 12th, 2006 at 10:57 am
They had a perfectly good one with the point of attention clearly defined. The new one takes much longer to register and not only because of the BR/13 mix but a lot because of the overall type.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:15 am
I’m not lovin’ it !
The logo, not the ice-creams !
April 12th, 2006 at 11:17 am
the ‘31′ integration in BR is kinda clever, but other than that it’s nothing special. I like it better than the old one, though.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:18 am
Probably the move away from “31 Flavors” concept (though it is integrated in the new logo for now). I expect that they will just move to “Baskin Robbins” in a few years, jettisoning the 31 soon.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:25 am
BR is in need of a whole company and operations rethinking. Have you been in any of their stores recently. They all look disgusting, outdated, and like your grandma’s kitchen (and not in a good way).
I too like how they integrated the “31″ into their initials. I am unsure if I like it a lot, but really, it can’t be any worse than the former branding.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:31 am
Butt-ugly
April 12th, 2006 at 11:37 am
I think it would have worked much better had they not tried to force it into the same dimensions/layout as the old logo. I like the BR/13 element but it is caught it the middle. A suggestion might be to place it on top of the name, or in front of it.
April 12th, 2006 at 11:39 am
I agree with Jtrott. The logo is somewhat confusing as the “31″ clashes with the “BR”. It’s a good attempt but I feel like a casual reader would not stare at the logo long enough to see “31″ nested in the “BR”.
April 12th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
I don’t care if they set the logotype in Frankfurter, as long as they bring back the Mandarin Chocolate flavor.
April 12th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
It seems that taken apart, as both the “Baskin Robbins” and then the BR would be a bit better. Together, with the title and initials, its a bit too busy, but separate could be good.
April 12th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
it took me a minute to see the ‘31′ but once i did thought it clever. but i’m not liking the font at all. wish they would have stuck to the old one.
April 12th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Here’s what popped into my head when I saw this.
Hope the comments accept html…
April 12th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
Ok, the image code didn’t work so if you click my name you can see the idea I had when I saw this…
April 12th, 2006 at 11:14 pm
Stinks. Someone’s nephew did this. Too busy. Too late eighties.
April 13th, 2006 at 2:47 am
Does it read “BASKINBRROBBINS”?
April 13th, 2006 at 7:18 am
There is far too much visual tension in the basic design. The “31″ integration doesn’t flow nor is it easily discernable as a number that part of the name. In addition, the font and colors are hideously problematic. This pitiful design looks like it was designed by the CEO’s 8 year old niece. I’m consistently disappointed by what companies pay their agencies to create.
April 13th, 2006 at 10:51 am
“But I also think that it might turn off existing Baskin Robbins fans, who are used to the older one.”
I like the new logo. I also don’t think a Baskin Robbins fan would now switch to another brand of ice cream based on logo redesign.Silly.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:13 am
I used to be a hard-core Baskin Robbins fan. But I have to say that it’s not the same that it used to be. The whole “experience” just isn’t the same anymore. I would have to agree with Freddy on this that I am pretty much turned off by the company in general.
I am not a fan of the new logo either. At least before the old logo reminded me of the “good experiences” I used to have there.
April 13th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
In a word: Eeew!!
Jon’s (4/12) idea works a lot better. How’s the scoop look in the BR pink?
April 14th, 2006 at 2:26 am
But HOW MANY flavors are there?! I just don’t know!
April 14th, 2006 at 12:41 pm
It looks more suited to a company that makes toys for toddlers.
April 14th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
i love the new logo but do agree that the stores need a rebranding as well. but for most people, it really comes down to the taste of their ice cream.. not their logo…
April 15th, 2006 at 9:53 pm
The new logo really bugs me, I don’t know why but I just can’t handle it.
April 16th, 2006 at 7:48 pm
baskin robbins logo doesn’t need a change right now, that’s my two cents
April 17th, 2006 at 3:33 am
Ahh!!! You can’t change this logo! Its far too recognisableas Baskin Robbins. Its newCoke all over again.
April 19th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
yes too much going on as it has been mentioned earlier, and looks too artificial and definately not appetizing for icecream…i liked the more curvy and smooth feeling on the old logo, representative of luscious round scoops of ice cream! but if hitting a new target market is what they’re aiming for, i m guessing the kids are gonna like the new one better
April 19th, 2006 at 8:40 pm
I didn’t get it. Until reading the comments I didn’t even see the 31. I assumed they had dropped this significant component of their brand. I wonder how many others wouldn’t see the “cute” type treatment.
June 27th, 2006 at 10:23 am
In an era where logos are designed to be simpler and “more together” I think this rebrand fails.
The font is too harsh all over the place. Such a wacky font might work with shorter and more recognizable names like Kraft or Starbucks. But with words that struggle off the palette you must consolidate and simplify as much as possible. It might also help not to split the two words.
I did get the “31″ after a couple of seconds. But initially, I thought, “What is wrong with that BR?”
I shutter to imagine a design world that indiscriminantly caters to the young.
July 16th, 2006 at 3:02 am
I don’t like it at all. It just has too much going on. I didn’t notice the 31 until I read the comments. Like some have suggested it probaby would have been best to seperate the “BR” initials from the rest by perhaps putting it on top. Although the concept of including the 31 with the BR is creative, they should make it more noticeable and make the BR work with the Baskins Robbins and not have it competing with it.
July 20th, 2006 at 8:35 am
Anybody notice that that typography is similar than “Calvin & Hobbes” one?
May 16th, 2008 at 10:09 am
So, what font do you think was used for the new logo?