The last couple of years have been a wild ride for rebrands. With companies keen to stay relevant in a rapidly changing world, we’ve seen some truly brilliant makeovers, alongside a few eyebrow raising ones. In an era where brand identity is everything, a well-executed rebrand can breathe new life into a company, while a misstep can leave audiences scratching their heads. Let’s take a look at some of the most talked about brand overhauls of the year; the good, the bad, and the downright ugly.
The good: RSPCA’s vibrant new look
To celebrate 200 years of improving the lives of animals, the RSPCA decided it was about time for a new look, and it’s safe to say they have a brand identity to be proud of. Working with design agency Jones Knowles Ritchie (JKR), the charity ditched its dated look in favour of a bright, modern, and friendly identity. Think bold colours, adorable animal icons, and a typeface inspired by historical protest signs – because, after all, advocating for animal welfare is a cause worth shouting about. The RSPCA hasn’t had a makeover since the 1970’s, so it was important to get the right message across. One thing they have highlighted is the importance of the new look reflecting the modern and forward-facing nature of the organisation, which was beginning to get lost with their previous one-dimensional branding. The rebrand was met with heaps of praise, proving that a fresh new look can seriously pay off when it stays true to what is at the heart of the organisation.
The bad: PrettyLittleThing’s controversial rebrand
Fast-fashion giant PrettyLittleThing played a wild card with its new rebrand this year – which quite frankly, is completely off brand, and let’s just say it didn’t exactly land. Gone were the glitzy, vibrant, party ready vibes that PLT was known for, replaced with a beige, “old money” aesthetic that felt more “quiet luxury” than “fun night out.” When launching the new brand, promises were made to distance themselves from fast fashion, while the garments may look more luxury, with an increased price tag to match, the quality of the garments doesn’t actually seem to have improved, nor has the way in which they were made. Actions speak louder than words; PLT’s attempt to move away from fast fashion isn’t being backed up, and savvy consumers are seeing right through it.
The ugly: Jaguar’s makeover missed the mark
Heritage car brand Jaguar rolled out a sleek new look this year… which went down like a lead balloon. It was a risky rebrand and left customers feeling alienated from the company. The campaign seemed so far removed from the Jaguar people were used to – it looked more like a makeup ad than a car ad, this wasn’t helped by the fact there was no actual car in sight. It left people feeling bewildered and received a lot of negative reactions online. Is this rebrand proof that people don’t like change? Or has Jaguar simply missed the mark this time? One thing that you can’t deny though is that it got people talking about it, and once they revealed the new car, you can begin to see the reasoning behind the modern aesthetic of the logo. The backlash from the rebrand shows that while modernising is great, completely losing sight of your roots can leave your audience feeling confused, maybe best to ease the audience in next time.
Conclusion
If these rebrands have taught us anything, it’s that striking the right balance between innovation and brand heritage is key. The RSPCA nailed it by staying true to its mission while giving its image a fresh update, while PrettyLittleThing and Jaguar showed what can happen when a rebrand doesn’t quite align with brand values. That being said, even a controversial rebrand keeps a company in the conversation, so maybe bad press isn’t always that bad?
