With the events that transpired as a result of Tropicana's re-brading, it's become quite clear that people do care about what packaging looks like. When I first heard that Tropicana is going back to their old packaging because they had so many complaints about their new packaging, I was kind of disappointed that the public didn't appreciate the new simple design. Instead, most people thought that it looked too "generic". According to the New York Times, one customer complained, “Do any of these package-design people actually shop for orange juice? Because I do, and the new cartons stink.” This particular instance shows the importance of designing for your audience and not for designs' sake.
Though Tropicana's attempt to improve their brand didn't go too well with the public, I appreciate the risk they took to advance their brand in a new direction. UnderConsideration's Brand New is a great site that blogs about redesigned brands. For example, Chipotle recently updated their look.
Before
after
What are your thoughts on re-branding?
4 comments:
great post, monina.
i looked at the brand new site --- pretty cool. reminds me of our adventures in redos in pauls class. some of them are much better, while others could still use a little work :o)
as far as rebranding: i actually took some time a while ago in the grocery store looking at the tropicana packaging and was quite pleased. it does what it needs to be doing. informing. in an instance such as food or cleaning supplies, what not, i like to know the practical information. i don't need an orange on the carton to tell me its orange juice.
what i want to know is:
pulp or no pulp?
how much is actual juice?
what kind of juice. . . come on, shoppers can read.
the new tropicana packaging, while, yes, may not be crazed with visuals and this and that, but typographically, it gives you all you need to know, and clearly.
and in response to the new york times article and people referring to this packaging as, "'ugly' or 'stupid,' and resembling 'a generic bargain brand' or a 'store brand,'" i think that it saying tropicana should clear things up pretty quickly. also, perhaps this new design would say to other customers, "hey- its fresh, but perhaps not so overly priced." whatever. i like to buy generic anyway. its cheaper.
i guess i can play devil's advocate at the same time, however. while, as monina, i applaud the simplistic approach, the orange with the straw is very iconic for tropicana, and perhaps they shouldn't have dropped it completely. it certainly does say fresh. and, furthermore, how many of us as some point in our life tried sticking a straw into an orange? i know i did. sadly, it did not produce the result that i had hoped at that age, so what was the next best thing? --- "mom! i want the one with the orange and the straw..." marketing at its best. right?
so, my conclusion on the tropicana rebrand is a successful merger of the simplistic typographic approach, while still managing to show off that juicy visual appeal of the straw in orange tactic. >>> maybe that will ignite their next refinement. -- bringing juicy back.
hrm.
food for thought. :o)
how is this post related to visual advocacy specifically?
In response to Tyler-
Specifically, this post relates to the design/commerce relationship in visual advocacy.
I think the Tropicana situation really questions the role of designers in today's culture and is an example of what happens when creative people merge with business. As designers we are responsible for the satisfaction of our clients as well as meeting our own expectations of ourselves. But what happens when your client is happy with your product, but the customers of that client aren't? The fact that the customers of Tropicana complained so much that the company had to revert back to their old packaging says a lot about the power of the people and the audience. It shows that the things that we design really do matter and people do care.
The NYT article mentions that technology really played a large role in notifying Tropicana of what their customers thought of the new packaging. With email, twitter and blogs, it is more accessible for people to voice out their opinions. A company really has to determine where they're loyalties are. Do they listen to their customers? Or do they listen to their designers?
I think re-branding is quite necessary in many cases, but sometimes its not for the better. Take pepsi for example, no one I talked to recieved the rebrand particularly well. I think if a brand is being represented poorly by their brand they should reform it, but with some companies I think consumers for a little bit of a bond with the existing brand and then get a little turned off when their good friend gets a face lift, so to say.
Post a Comment