The better question to have asked at the beginning is "When you view this logo, what does it communicate to you?"

If the majority answers turn out to be of a nature that Michaels wants their customer base to see them as, then fine. If they were to get a majority of negative answers, or a different message than they had intended to communicate, that tells them they need to re-work it.

Whether other designers, including myself, "like" or "don't like" this new logo has nothing to do with it. The logo has to get across the intended message to it's target audience, and if it achieves that, then great. The point is-- is that THAT cannot be determined by the question "What do you think of the new logo?"

Karen Dippel

They say bad press is better than no press. Look how many of us have Michaels imbedded in our minds now just because of a design change. We'll all rush out to our local store to see what other changes they have made.
I also agree that the old logo is tired and could use tweaking, but the new look totally misses the mark, especially the tag line. I actually missed that there was a tag line last week, it was so far away from the name. I work with so many clients that like to be cute with tag lines that don't communicate the purpose of their business. Keep it to the point and say what you do.

not a very good solution.

The old logo recently caught my eye from the Interstate in a new retail complext in Wisconsin. I never expected that there would be a Michaels there...just minutes from my home. When I got home, I called another Michaels to find out when the new one was opening. Had they used the new logo - I would not have been able to see it from the interstate, it's way too fine. (and beleive me, being an art teacher, if I see a Michaels in the distance...if I have time, I usually stop in, ) I agree with just about all of the comments above that are on the 'con' side of this issue.

Wondering if they will see this.
mcarini

Yes, it has an old look, but I prefer it. I love "The Arts and Crafts Store" under it, clarifying it, and making it feel organized. I see it as "retro."

Granted, it's an improvement from the previous logo, but the new one lacks cohesiveness, color, and style. All the previous comments about kerning, lack of color, the tagline just hanging there are all on the mark. Amazing that a company as large as Michaels, that professes to sell creativity, would fall so short of the mark.

Sherry Stinson
---
Tyler Creative
Award-winning Design & Photography
http://www.tylercreative.com

it is utterly old fashioned ,dull and uninteresting hard to believe just as outdated as the original in this century

A long-time Michael's shopper, I love the new font. I agree that a color would be nice--like turquoise or teal, which signifies "creativity." I like the wording of the tagline, but something about the appearance does not appeal to me. It does seem to be just an afterthought.

I agree with many that the old logo always seemed a little outdated. There is nothing wrong with changing the logo - great idea, but creativity did not "happen" here. A store fostering and promoting creativity needs something clever with a touch of color. One of my first thoughts was that it did look feminine too. I don't know if that is really a bad thing but it does fight the fact that it is a male name predominately. The original tag line tucks right in and looks neat and clean yet the second looks detached. Either tag line is pleasing although the first, while sounding a little old fashioned, lets a consumer know exactly what they sell.

I like the fact that the new logo is shooting for a much more open and fresh look, but its execution is more that of a concept sketch rather then a finished logo. For this reason I prefer the old and somewhat dated logo over the new one. There is much more thought and effort put into making the old logo look and act like a logo, which represents a professional business with a respected identity.

I thought jcmcreative made some very good points about problems with the new logo…
“1: It's hard to read. Logos have to be quick and easy. This one is not.”
”2: It's very thin. This will not play well with outdoor signage.”
“3: Black? Okay, I love black, but people recognize logos first by shape, then by color. And while, in the design world, black is a color, logos done in black run the risk of getting lost in print materials that contain a lot of black text. Sometimes black logos almost look like a mistake. Of course, there are plenty of exceptions. (Consider Nike.)’
“4. Why the change in the first place? Unless you can demonstrate that your current logo is doing damage, keep it. Update it, yes, but don't change it. All too often, a change in logo signals a change in ownership, operating policies, foreign acquisition, or trouble.”

Points 1 through 3 above are particularly brought home when you look at the new logo on the michaels.com website. The new logo looks weak, neutered, and voiceless on the website and will look the same when used with content and graphic elements in other marketing materials. It doesn’t translate well for different uses and loses any punch or personality it might otherwise have had.

Another good point was brought up by J. Auclair…
“I like the logo and the tag line, but I don't like the way the tag line looks underneath the logo--traps awkward white space.”

This poor use of white space is part of what I mean when I say the logo looks more like a concept sketch rather then a finished logo. More thought and effort should have been put into making the store name and tag line work visually with each other… modifying the fonts, letter forms, spacing, etc. to make a more cohesive logo.

With regard to the logo being feminine or masculine… Without knowing who specifically the store is trying to target as customers my feeling is the logo should be somewhat gender neutral and focus in on the fact that it represents an “arts and crafts store”. At the moment the new logo looks more befitting of a greeting card or clothes store in my opinion, and I know not everyone will agree with that observation because not everyone has the same visual experiences or associations. Oddly enough, the old logo makes me think of ice cream parlors. *wink* My point is, though, that in addition to being weak, the new logo doesn’t really say “arts and crafts” clearly enough for as many potential new customers as it should.

Too feminine -- will date quickly -- not something a great long lasting company like Michaels should move to. . .and certainly not so gender specific. Michaels needs something uplifting/fun that also states they have been around a while and plan to be here in the future.

Several posts have mentioned that the new logo is overly feminine. Well YEAH! Look at who shops there (mostly women). If it is just a new face on the same old "Arts & Crap" store (woops, Freudian slip), then it doesn't work any better than their highly recognizable tired old logo. If they are trying to freshen the whole brand with a total store experience makeover, then the new mark is spot on. The feminine feel of the new logo will work for their current older female customer, and could well attract a younger female demographic who might well relate to the new look. Certainly the new look might entice a few new customers to stop in and see if this really is an new more trendy shopping experience. It will work if the brand makeover is more than skin deep. Their customers will ultimately determine if this is truly "new and improved" if the new mark matches their in store experience. Otherwise, they will just perceive it as "Just lipstick on a pig." It is up to Michael's to make sure the new branding is more than skin deep.

As expressed in many comments before mine... The font is a bit difficult to read, it is too feminine and florist shop-ish. Where's the identity of a craft store? And, in support of that thought — the tagline looks as if it were an after thought; there is no cohesiveness or unity with the tagline and logo. That's my two cents.

I'm all for updating a look when it's high time, but this is rather predictable even considering the market. And the tagline, while I'm sure they thought it was "creative" doesn't really accomplish the main purpose of a tagline: to quickly and accurately describe what the company does. Even if they thought the old tagline was too folksy, it did accomplish that goal quite well. As far as the visual appeal, there's a weird white space between the logo and the tagline. Quite frankly, as much as they were in love with the font they chose for the logo, they probably should have kept looking for something that worked a little better all around.

I would agree that the logo needed an update - but this isn't the way to go. It already looks dated. the "Michaels" font is hard to read and the tagline is poorly placed. The tagline looks like it was just thrown on as an afterthought without any consideration to contrast or effective alignment with the name of the store. I'm guessing this thing was designed by a committee.

For being a place where creativity happens, this new logo is anything but. While I am not a fan of the old logo, I'm not a fan of the new one either. I think instead of finding a handwritten font and using it as the logo, there should have been more design and forward thinking going into the concept instead of this "new" run of the mill, cookie cutter idea.

While their largest customer base may be women, I don't necessarily think they are drawn to a store with a logo that looks like it was scribbed by a seventh grade girl. In business, a logo is your identity. Since this forum isn't about the tagline, the only thing I will say is that they could have come up with something more clear as to what they do. While I'm sure their regular customers will know what the store is about, there is the untapped market who will only give you 3 seconds and either stop to shop or not.

I think more thought should have gone into their new identity, and should reflect a change in their business strategy. In these tough times, companies don't have the luxury to flounder. Hopefully the new logo will work out.

The new logo loses all brand recognition (as dated as it was), and the new tagline does not have the benefit of saying what they do. If revenue from classes were at a point where fiscal significance indicated a new business line, they should have created a division focused on that, rather than blurring the actual sale of arts and crafts materials. The old tagline said what they did. The old logo had significant brand value and they just chucked all that equity at great expense (signage, stationary, ads). Glad someone's making a buck!

Wendy Flanagan
Vice President
http://www.murraymedia.com
Chairperson
http://www.njmarcom.org

Having been a logo designer for more years than I care to count, I'm afraid this one is missing the mark is some respects:
1: It's hard to read. Logos have to be quick and easy. This one is not.
2: It's very thin. This will not play well with outdoor signage.
3: Black? Okay, I love black, but people recognize logos first by shape, then by color.
And while, in the design world, black is a color, logos done in black run the risk of getting lost in print materials that contain a lot of black text. Sometimes black logos almost look like a mistake. Of course, there are plenty of exceptions. (Consider Nike.)
4. Why the change in the first place? Unless you can demonstrate that your current logo is doing damage, keep it. Update it, yes, but don't change it.
All too often, a change in logo signals a change in ownership, operating policies, foreign acquisition, or trouble.

While the overall style and energy is good, and the tagline is great, a few minor tweaks would have made this decent logo a great logo.

I'm a Michales' Shopper, so is my daugther, the new one doesn't have anymore that
image of old style, boring and 50's craft store, now it looks like an artist store. I like it because I'm always buying things for my art (I'm a paint artist too), so the new one engulf the creativity anyone of us is willing to do with the right tools at the right price, I hope they don't rise the prices because of this.
:)

Gustavo Duenas
Creative Director
Left and Right Solutions
Jacksonville - FLorida

I find the script no more feminine than the curly swashes of the old. I like it. The tagline, however, follows a trend to sing-songy fluff that I see everywhere now. Sounds nice but says little. I prefer the original or similar as descriptive.

I like the logo and the tag line, but I don't like the way the tag line looks underneath the logo--traps awkward white space.

Nice evolution, moving Michaels into more current graphic look and feel. Let's hope the new look extends into the store and into the merchandise they stock.

The previous identity did give the impression of Michaels being a dowdy "arts and crafts" store. The light, playful and inviting new image is much more appropriate for the target market - and current product offerings - of the business.

Jeff Fisher | Engineer of Creative Identity | Jeff Fisher LogoMotives

It's better than the old one, but not as readable as the old logo.
If it were more readable it might be a much better upgrade.
I also agree with The Monicker that it is far to feminine, from a male viewpoint I wonder if it has anything for male crafts people.

I've been going to Michaels for more years than I would like to admit and I like the new logo with the tag line.