Anyone know what the business case for this change was? What was wrong with the old logo? I'm having a hard time understanding what the thinking was here.
http://adage.com/article?article_id=146353
I don't think this is going to end well for Gap.
Wouldn't surprise me if a buy out was on the cards.
But the new logo is a mess, and looks like something you'd come up with in Powerpoint in five seconds without changing the defaults. There's nothing wrong ideas-wise with san-serif "gap" over shaded blue square, but it comes out looking bad.