So in my daily perusal of the Guardian website (because I am a white, middle-class intellectual and also not willing to actually buy a newspaper/leave the house) I spotted an article concerning Starbucks changing their logo;
While the section itself seems somewhat odd; as noted in the comments section, money is quite obviously not one of the company's main concerns, the remodelling itself is interesting. Starbucks already monopolises the 'second-wave' coffee sector but is it trying to make itself look less corporate by removing the name from its logo?
Anyone with an ounce of sense or more than a single tastebud knows that the company's self-proclaimed embrace of fair trade, organic and global coffee is an exercise in manipulation and really, who gives a fuck because the drinks suck and the franchise pushes out so many smaller businesses. Many of the coffee shops I frequent use plain take-out cups, or stamp their logo/name on the side which I find pretty cool but looking at the Starbucks simplified, anonymous logo makes me wonder if they are trying to rip this style off.
Starbucks is so under my give-a-fuck radar that this doesn't bother me as much as intrigues; I'd be interested to know their motivations behind this.