Call me crazy. But I’m genuinely confused. I completely and emphatically agree with the basic premise of this post – which talks about the key to branding being a ‘connection’. (I mean, come on, haven't you heard me rant about that before?) However, the piece goes on to state that a logo should also be distinct and recognizable even without the name of the company. And, in the case of this company and this post, recognizable to both men and women. The masterminds behind this re-branding effort believe they have achieved that perfect balance. But I’m not so sure. When I think of fruitful connections and logos that truly do stand on their own, iconic brands such as BMW and Audi come to mind. Think of the circular blue and white logo that supposedly portrays the movement of an airplane propeller - white blades cutting through the blue sky. Or the four interlinked rings, reminiscent of the Olympic Games. They embody successful symbolism. Male or female, you connect with these brands. You recognize the companies behind the symbols.
So what do you think? Do you know what the logo in this post is? (I didn't.)