Photo Via treycopeland.com

The internet is freaking out over the new Gap logo (a hater created this new logo for them) and we get it. It looks like Gap is schilling for Lipitor. The thing is, the logo change wasn’t actually that sudden.

Gap started using the same helvetica font in advertisements for 1969 jeans over a year ago and it’s also been used in stores and on tags. This can be seen as one of many strategies the company has employed in an attempt to improve business, which hasn’t been doing so well over the past few years, a downfall many have attributed to the company’s lack of direction.

Gap’s creative director since 2007, Patrick Robinson, revealed his interest in keeping Gap modern and fresh as part of his plan to “elevate the brand.” However, some are criticizing Gap for taking this too far by getting rid of the “iconic” logo of the “heritage” brand. But is Gap really a heritage brand? 1969 was not that long ago. Maybe a step forward, visually or otherwise, is what the brand needs.

Honestly, we’re not huge fans of the new logo, but what was really so great about the original? I have mixed feelings about it. Sure, there’s some positive nostalgia associated with it, but at the same time, it reminds me of the logo-obsessed ‘90s when you couldn’t walk down the street without seeing someone with GAP sprawled across a t-shirt or sweatshirt. That was great marketing for the company back then, but it doesn’t work now.

As you may have heard, following an outpouring of hatred for the new logo, Gap has responded by saying they’re open to other ideas and are planning a crowd sourcing project on Facebook to see if the public can come up with something better.

So while the final logo might not be the one you’re seeing now, it’s unlikely Gap will backpedal so far as to return to the original. However, it will live on in The Social Network, in which a college-aged Mark Zuckerberg sports an oversized sweatshirt with the logo prominently featured (inspired by a photo of the real Zuckerberg wearing the same sweatshirt at Harvard in the early aughts).

Perhaps this is the image Gap is trying to escape. It’s been a while since Gap has been seen as the hip, must-have brand it was back in the day, and because the logo was such a huge part of the brand, Gap, understandably, saw changing the logo as an important step in changing the brand.

However, brands like J. Crew have managed to successfully elevate their brand without changing their logo, proving there are other, perhaps more effective methods of doing this. Do you think the logo change was necessary? And can Gap reclaim success?