28 responded to this post

 Freddy said on March 6th, 2007

I do like it better than the original, but I can’t help but think of a banana sticker. 🙂

 Jeremy said on March 6th, 2007

Looks pretty awful. The type reminds me of Dannon yougert…maybe a lil bananaish too…or maybe trailmix…or a granola bar. Really works great for some kind of food i think 🙂

I’m completely turned off.

 Corwin said on March 6th, 2007

A nice touch but they failed miserable with the font.

 MeDeA_ said on March 7th, 2007

the new one is so awful….too much elements for a logo! too much colors, the sun, the shadow…the font….!!!!

i don’t think that change was a good idea….

 DiveAbout said on March 7th, 2007

Reminds me of Nestlé’s re-brand. Too close. And it looks like a logo for a dairy product.

Too much, perhaps?

 Justin said on March 7th, 2007

nice direction, but they overshot it a bit i think. unecessary gradient behind the sun, too many colors, overall too busy.

 Jake said on March 7th, 2007

Why are logos moving away from flatness? I don’t understand.

 KeyLime said on March 7th, 2007

Looks like Web 2.0

 James Rothenburg said on March 7th, 2007

I like it. It’s a very refreshing direction to take the logo. The old one is dark, tired and too corporate. The typeface (please don’t call it a font) is nice. It has a little bit organicness to it with rounded corners but it still legible at long distances, which is important in signage. It’s a nice touch to use the old shape to take advantage of exisiting infrastructure. It’s an important consideration when rebranding a large chain.

 lukeMV said on March 7th, 2007

Raisins anyone?

 The Ad Mad! said on March 7th, 2007

Too shiny maybe?
I like the fresh look though

 Blaze said on March 7th, 2007

Looks definately food-ey.

 Bob said on March 7th, 2007

Most Days Inns ARE places were you can be murdered in your sleep.

 David Airey said on March 7th, 2007

Not for me. I think they tried too hard to save money on the new signage.

 Jerome Dahdah said on March 7th, 2007


…because printing in 4C is much cheaper than 2C. Right. 😉 But if that were in fact the case, this would be a nice sample of karma. 🙂

I’m not sure if I like this. It does look much more inviting than the old logo, but legibility at long distance (which would make sense for a hotel) is suffering from all that noise. Does have a Web2.0-ish touch to it.

 Andy B said on March 7th, 2007

For a brand so iconic on American freeways, it would have been nice if they did something much better.

 MeDeA_ said on March 7th, 2007

oh yeah…it looks like a web2.0! KeyLime…you’re right!

 Peter Marquardt said on March 7th, 2007

Taking all the other comments into account I think the best way would have been to stay in two colors, but change black to blue and use the new sun shape, but don’t incorporate all those gradients and noise. I’m not happy with either typeface.

 Von K said on March 8th, 2007

This takes the scary, generic-looking black and yellow and brightens it way up.

Yes, the type sits awkwardly in its space. Yes, the gradients are a bit over the top. Yes, it does feel like it’s selling comfort food (are comfort or food bad things for a budget motel?)

Its design isn’t going to satisfy designers’ standards, but I think it gets the job done despite its drawbacks.

A budget logo for a budget brand–what’s wrong with that?

 Leilah said on March 8th, 2007

Not bananas. Raisins were closer.
Anybody think of…this?


 Marc said on March 11th, 2007

Over art directed.

The typeface has been skewed–that or it’s a free download.

It reminds of a space program logo from the 70s.

Sign-age costs should not be a consideration when re-branding. Most box signs require a new piece of plexi or vinyl.

Colors look like gradients so costs will be added to collateral pieces.

I especially love the yellow as it grips the edge of the border of the stamp itself. That will be fun when its put on multi-colored background.

Hmm, and so on.

Overall, it looks like a lot of opinions went into it.

The name remains the strong. I’ve always liked that. 🙂

 MayaAndMarketability.com said on March 22nd, 2007

I agree with Jake. Why are logos moving toward Web 2.0 look & feels. Many of the logos I like for their simplicity and crispness are flat and uses solid colors.

 Nile River said on April 8th, 2007

i think the change is huge and can imagine it acually making a big difference in overall business because while many say this logo is “too busy” it displays exactly the right amount of everything, the text is great and the sun is welcoming.

 christoph said on May 9th, 2007

umm…where do you start

lowercase in that face looks terrible.
blend for a corporate id – terrible
bad colours palette
the new points of the sun look less friendly than the original
looks cheap


 Runner said on June 15th, 2007

It’s a smart refresh. Seems more alive and vibrant, more appropriate for the 21st Century than the typical flat, 2 dimensional, logos. Trade rags say it was done by a new branding company, Verse Group.

 Cam said on November 6th, 2007

Way too much going on here….

 Ray said on March 7th, 2008

I’m a GM for Days Inn in Atlanta and the NEW logo is GREAT! Guests LOVE it and people that have not stayed with Days in the past are now comming in. The Logo is FRESH just like the NEW aminities that come along with it. New Breakfast, New Shower experance, New bedding and so on…
It’s wonderful when a company after 38 so odd years can freshen up and come out TOP of the game still..

 Martin said on April 15th, 2009

The old one is much better. Simple but effective

Leave A Reply

Go Back To Home |

 Name (*required)

 Email Address (*private)

 Website (*optional)

Please Note: Comment Moderation Maybe Active So There is No Need To Resubmit Your Comments