Comcast Rebranding
I wouldn’t really call it a rebrand, its more like a facelift for them. The type has been slightly updated, which makes it cleaner looking than before. Your toughts?
Read more here.
Posted in Branding 
Add to del.ici.us 
Digg It
Blogs that link to this post 
Permanent Link
November 29th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
very subtle work, but it does make a difference - looks indeed cleaner and more modern!
November 29th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
nobody will ever notice or care.
November 29th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
i agree. as a design the only thing i see that’s really a major change is the new tail of the t…but i dont think the slight changes overall really makes it any clearer to read…
November 29th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
i agree with pete…and i don’t think a rebranding will make anyone hate comcast any less.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
I wonder how much it cost.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Exactly my thought, Joseph.
The type is good.
The price of updating every letterhead, business card, website and truck logo is going to be a nightmare. They should have made it something that was actually worth it.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
To me it feels like they are switching from an Internet Boom style logo to a more modern/conservitive style logo. As if to say “we’re here for the long haul”.
Its funny how a change in an “s” and the tail of the “t” is all it took.
I have to agree with Bejamin, I wonder the cost? But with such a minor change there wouldn’t be too much of a rush to update everything. So that may save in the over all cost.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
Hm. And I thought there were no lazier designers in the world than the designers at Porsche. - I guess I was wrong.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
Fu….
November 29th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
cleaner. ok. next.
November 29th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Jess-I see significant changes on the c,s,t but you are right the noticeable one is the t, partially because we tend to focus on the beginning and end of a word/title versus the individual letters themselves.
I agree as someone else stated that I would like to know how much that slight redesign in type cost them. Surely a lot but part of changing a logo is to still remain recognizable regardless of how much you are disliked. A good example is the redesign that UPS and FedEx did of their logos not that long ago. Some people surely never noticed the gradual change. I found some history on logos at this site: logoblog.org
November 29th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
Much better. I probably wouldn’t have noticed it, but with the side-by-side I really sense the modernization.
Thanks. It’s the little things that count.
November 29th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
No impact… I think it took me at least 30 seconds to realize the only change is with the “s” and “t”. They did not even change the red semi-circle / graphic… The only other comment I would like to add is - why did they not ask me to come up with that? I could have spent 5 minutes picking out a new font and charge them - how much??
My loss…
November 30th, 2007 at 2:31 am
The type has been enlarged, as there is less white space in the red circle. Other than the ’s’ and ‘t’ now looking more boring than ever, it seems they haven’t done much…
At least the older ‘t’ had some character.
November 30th, 2007 at 12:13 pm
I think this would be a good thing to show young designers who might not have seen the problems with the old logo. It’s definitely a massive improvement even if it’s not obvious at first. No matter how small a change it made a huge difference.
November 30th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
The new S is awkward - it looks uncomfortable and in between. Big improvement overall, but not worth a rebrand.
November 30th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
Whow… Reading some of the comments here gives me a major headache. “Big improvement”? “Huge difference” and “massive improvement”? Guys, give me a break!
I am a freelance 3D Artist and in my branch we call people like those responsible for such a release (Please pardon my language) “Pixel Fuckers”. I can almost hear the statements made to sell the new “design” to the executives at comcast: “The three pixels we’ve changed makes everyone who sees the new logo LOVE you! It’s true! They all will start to throw their money at you! - This is the pure art of higher psychology! We have done hundreds of studies and tested out dozens of versions of that logo on rats and dolphins, known to be much more intelligent than mankind.” (…as it seems to turn out.)
No offense, guys. I really do NOT want to hurt the feelings of those who think that to be good work. I guess you have no choice since you got kind of brainwashed during your study of design and advertising. And hey, who would say “No!” to such a job, getting a lot of money out of almost nothing. I would have taken it!
But please - just take a minute and think about what that change will cost. And now please think a moment about what good things you could do with that money - pay a 3rd world teacher or doctor, for example.
And now, please compare those good things to the result the three changed pixels will have on the brand and how it is experienced by it’s customers and the public at large.
I can only hope that you see what I try to say and that you may re-think some of your views and thoughts about such cases. That would make a REAL difference in our world.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Is this a joke?
December 3rd, 2007 at 10:27 am
That is insane. Even with all explanations I still find it hard to see the “huge improvement”.
If that costs what I think it cost.. I see a bunch of marketing execs at Comcast searching for a new job in the not so distant future.
I am amazed at some of the bullshit being said about the delicate “amazing” nature of the “rebrand”. I am even more amazed that anyone would call it a rebrand! How in the world does any of those changes change comcasts positioning?
Am I taking crazy pills? What are you guys talking about?
December 3rd, 2007 at 2:06 pm
It’s funny that “whimsical” says: “And now please think a moment about what good things you could do with that money - pay a 3rd world teacher or doctor, for example.” Doesn’t seem to whimsical… Not that I totally disagree with the statements…just made me giggle…
December 3rd, 2007 at 9:58 pm
As my college hockey crowd used to chant:
“You still suck.”
December 5th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
one of the following happened:
1) maybe the brainstorm session went full circle and they found they had a good thing. cleaned it up a bit. tighter fit.
2) they just didn’t have any idea where to go with it and thought of clever jargon to b.s. the client who was stupid enough to believe it.
3) the client is boring and afraid of change, dismissing epic designs left and right.
eh?
December 10th, 2007 at 10:45 am
By saying no one will notice, I mean the general public.
We, as designers can look at the two side by side and see the slight typographic improvements. But other than us, who cares?
That;s the life we lead I guess, noticing things no one else does.
December 15th, 2007 at 4:10 pm
After carefully staring at both images for a long time. The “after” image subliminally suggested that I buy all of comcast’s cable offerings with no regard for price. Is that the “sell” the ad agency used?
December 21st, 2007 at 6:44 am
It took me 5 minutes to see any difference. That’s not a rebrand. They only had to much money
February 25th, 2008 at 2:17 am
Incredible…you certainly have to look hard to see the slight changes to the font pixels. Is this really classed as rebrand or a facelift?