NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New. All posts have been closed to comments. Please visit underconsideration.com/brandnew for the latest version. If you would like to see this specific post, simply delete _v1 from the URL.
Apologies for the late start this morning, major server issues. Photo by Flickr user justinlai.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Ben’s comment is:
First!
I had too...
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:03 PM
Nate’s comment is:
Chalk this one up under the "Why fix it if it ain't broke?" category.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:06 PM
Jeff’s comment is:
Yeah, it's pretty bad when you go to buy a product and end up saying "Where the hell is it? Why don't they have Tropicana anymore?" Really bad (un)design. Totally generic.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:07 PM
rickyaustin’s comment is:
YAY!!!!
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:09 PM
Scott Lerman’s comment is:
It's hard to believe that in-store testing didn't reveal the obvious problems with the redesign. A couple of weeks ago I asked the guy stocking the juice shelves about the new package. He said, "it's hard to read. People keep asking me where they can find the Tropicana."
Branding 101. If you are the market leader, retain positive equity while you strive to improve the brand.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:13 PM
jinushaun’s comment is:
It was poor graphic design. Period. Sure it was pretty, but if the point of graphic design is to visually convey information, then the redesign missed the mark completely.
1. It was much harder to differentiate between the different flavours. Orange juice drinkers, myself included, are especially particular about their pulp content. We care a lot about buying the right pulpiness.
2. The simple design had the effect of making the product invisible when compared to other products in the juice aisle. Like someone mentioned in the NYT article, it does look somewhat like a generic brand.
That's a design failure.
As much as I dislike the redesign, I also don't think reverting to the old packaging is the right solution.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:14 PM
David’s comment is:
I was just easing myself into the new design, too. While it did feel really "generic orange juice" brand, it wasn't bad per sé. Just misguided, in that it totally threw out previous (and smart) branding.
Still, good to see the old one come back.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:14 PM
jonathan’s comment is:
I've seen these new packages in the store, and I thought it was generic branded Orange Juice. It took me a few seconds to figure out, it was the good stuff.
OJ drinkers unite!
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:15 PM
mm’s comment is:
Did they do anything about the taste? No?
Okay, I guess I'll keep buying those distinctive Simply Orange containers.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:16 PM
Serviceburo’s comment is:
Wow, this is some serious justice. While I'm happy to see that public feedback was able to stop something as wrong as this, it's worrisome that Arnell's commentary just goes to illustrate how out of touch American designers are with both their clients and audience. This proves that the top-level American design world is really just a backpatting society.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:27 PM
JD’s comment is:
I think it's sad to realize that the american consumer is not open to new design aesthetics. I wasn't a big fan of the new packaging but I'm always open for change in such high-profile products. I think we – as consumers – need to grow up and understand that orange juice packaging doesn't need a BIG orange with a straw to understand what the content is – and what we are supposed to be doing with it –. Just a thought.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:31 PM
Scott Lerman’s comment is:
Serviceburo, I can assure you that many American designers are completely in-touch with their clients and audiences. Some even frequent this blog.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:47 PM
PXLated’s comment is:
It may not be the designers fault - You have a big company, many marketers, many focus groups, many opinions, many strong wills. The designers may in fact be laughing their asses of and mouthing "I told you so" under their breath.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:48 PM
James’s comment is:
Too bad... I quite like the new design. It has a similar feel to what Kraft has been rolling out for their ridiculously wide array of salad dressings, or what Coke and Pepsi are up to. Kind of stripped down and informational.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:48 PM
Justin ’s comment is:
Thanks for using my photo!
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:50 PM
Glenn Sakamoto’s comment is:
Common sense and basic principles of branding and marketing win out over silly and ill-conceived package design.
And I am sure weak sales had something to do with it, too...
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:55 PM
Evan’s comment is:
I liked the new typography, but getting rid of the orange with straw was stupid. That was a large part of the Tropicana brand identity.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:58 PM
BJN’s comment is:
Puh-leez. The American consumer is open to new design aesthetics when and where they're called for. And consumers are also quite attuned to visual design. I'm pleased that consumers complained about the reworked packaging as looking like cheap store brands and generics. That doesn't mean that simple, clean package design is bad - but it's a packaging look build on the back of black and white generics to make them more appealing (the Target/Ikea treatment of adding a bit of style to give cheap stuff more acceptability and value). A high profile national brand has to differentiate itself, and I doubt that research on the packaging change was done well and without bias or it would have picked up on this kind of consumer reaction.
On Feb.23.2009 at 02:58 PM
Harris’s comment is:
The main problem with the packaging is that the different varieties and flavors were only marked with a tiny label at the top. It was very difficult to find anything.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:09 PM
David’s comment is:
More people are craving carbs these days. If we can't afford to buy Tropicana, then we should at least be allowed to salivate over the sweaty orange on the box.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:10 PM
David’s comment is:
I didn't mind the new packaging. It might have just been bad timing.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:13 PM
CB’s comment is:
I was one of the vocal consumers who disapproved of the switch. I thought the new design was cool but not suited for Tropicana (unless they were deliberately going for a pale upscale vibe). I thought the elegant bistro style drinking glass image was a huge disconnect from the raw image of sticking a straw into a juicy orange; and since the juice color in the glass is much paler than the skin color of the orange on the previously used image, it left an overall impression of being watered-down.
My friends and I share an affinity for Tropicana so much that we nicknamed it "liquid gold". "Got any gold in the fridge Al?" that sort of thing. This packaging undermined that connection.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:15 PM
damon’s comment is:
tropicana was the best of the worst in that whole rebrand too.
lets see what else falls on its face.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:22 PM
Mat’s comment is:
Surely it was the wrong kind of attention, but I think they were lucky to have the right feedbacks that made them undo the mistake.
I think that every company should hope to have people telling that something is stupid, when the people in the company are not seeing it. It is a very valuable feedback.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:25 PM
matt’s comment is:
Oh good, I always liked the orange-with-a-straw-in-it photo - I remember trying that as a kid and being disappointed that it didn't work very well.
And I like orange juice with plenty of pulp - the 'new' design looked far too designy and sterile to have pulp in it - even if it said that it was included, I'd assume it was someone added artificially, not naturally. It's pretty hard to argue pulp content when there's a big photo of an orange right on the front of the carton, though.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:26 PM
Greg’s comment is:
I saw this coming...well, not in any Amazing Kreskin, just a gut feeling that said: "Where's the freakin' OJ, man?"
But, um, I thought the orange-shaped cap was cute...
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:29 PM
Jeff’s comment is:
That cap was cool, everything else was "eh" but I wouldn't have bothered to e-mail and complain ...
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:34 PM
alexandra’s comment is:
I wasn't a fan of the old packaging...until this rolled out. Like many people, I "couldn't find" the Tropicana in the refrigerated section and was pretty shocked to see that it had been re-invented as a generic brand. Um, what?
I also didn't realise Arnell was behind the Tropicana AND Pepsi redesigns, both of which appear to have been created in Powerpoint. I like spare. elegant design, but this is just so bad. So, so bad.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:37 PM
Greg’s comment is:
Quick: New netroots campaign: "save the orange cap!"
I'll get to twittering, you set up the Facebook page. Ready? Go!!!
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:40 PM
ned’s comment is:
Here's hoping all the work from Arnell falls flat on its face. Awful, awful work.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:45 PM
Johnny Holeva’s comment is:
The anti-American Consumer/Designer/Agency comments on this site are tired.
Yawn.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:46 PM
Leland Witter’s comment is:
The golden rule of OJ:
If the brand don't fit, you should just quit
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:50 PM
Andy’s comment is:
Was the new look perfect? No. But it was much more interesting to look at. I started buying Tropicana for the first time because of it. I always hated how static and uninspired the old packaging was, and I never bought Tropicana because of that.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:50 PM
Dale Campbell’s comment is:
I wonder if this is why Arnell is slow to actually put examples of their work on their STILL under construction website...
Perhaps they're afraid that they scare prospective clients away!
And even worse, scare current active clients into thinking they've made some pretty awful decisions.
In my very honest opinion, they have put out nothing but design turds lately.
Keep well,
Dale
Gavan’s comment is:
What a huge and hilarious slap in the face.
Personally I found this to be the most mundane of all the pepsi re-jig. The rest its hard for me to get passionate about one way or the other, as they're just whimsical redraftings of marks that get redrafted every couple of years anyway. But Tropicana seemed severely pointless and... expensive and futile too, as it turns out.
On Feb.23.2009 at 03:57 PM
Calvin Buchanan’s comment is:
How long before they bring the old Pepsi back?
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:00 PM
marko savic’s comment is:
For everyone hoping for the orange cap - it is on the new (old) cartons! At least, it is in Canada. I had assumed we received a regionalized design where the only new element was the lid, and not the horrifying carton.
No netroots campaign required: the orange cap lives!
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:03 PM
JV’s comment is:
Participated in many art school dorm arguments over the PepsiCo rebrands. In fact, raised my voice probably a bit too much one time. Haha. Let's just say, +1 for Team Me. I think this rebrand was one of their worst; strategy was alright if they were trying to appear to be a cheaper juice in this economy; but the concept was way off in that it made the juice unattractive; bland, generic, too difficult to distinguish different kinds, bad shelf readability due to labels and text high on the cartons. Glad to see it go.
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:06 PM
Lee Dale’s comment is:
Well, there you have it, the one person who wasn't buying Tropicana already, Mr Andy Harrington, found the new packaging inspired. Score one for Arnell!
The comments from the Creative Officer of Arnell are disturbing to say the least. Typical ad industry spin, lacking in all humility.
Every once in a while an Officer puts their foot deeply in their mouth and I assume they'll be ushered out forthwith. (Case in point, Creative's CEO, who just does not get it, time and time again coming up with gems like these: http://tinyurl.com/creativejoke) For some reason, they never seem to get fired. I don't expect this will be any different.
I'm also quite surprised that Pepsi Co trusted one agency with so many of their brands. That's not typical in the industry and I'd say this is a testament as to why, but Arnell doesn't seem to be doing anything positive with any of the Pepsi properties, so it looks like it just falls back on Arnell for ultimately not getting the job done, despite multiple millions on each project. Process flaw? Clearly.
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:06 PM
William’s comment is:
perhaps arnell simply forgot to apply their patented 'gravitational pull' to the process?
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:17 PM
Josh’s comment is:
It's an interesting story, but is this really such a travesty? It sounds like a lot of people are whining a whole lot about a botched marketing experiment. I'm not sure where this is surprising, new or so outlandish that it demands an outcry from the rafters and people calling for the downfall of Arnell.
To put a new light to Arnell's comment, this really is positive feedback for Tropicana even if it was a bad situation. It establishes just how strong their previous brand was, it demonstrates the brand loyalty they established and it gives them a chance to make their customers feel like the brand cares about them in a democratic way saying "we hear you". That, and Tropicana is getting a crap-load of media attention for something that harmless, which is a huge difference from our peanut/spinach/anyfoodsprettymuch crises. This is less a time where Arnell dropped the ball than a chance for Pepsi to improve upon the Tropicana brand.
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:19 PM
Josh’s comment is:
For the record, that's not dismissing that the ball was dropped somewhere in the marketing of the new brand, Arnell's fault or not.
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:22 PM
Joseph S’s comment is:
Has anyone noticed that they show a round orange-ish cap with a little leaf on the package below it, which I actually liked, but in the store it's just a regular cap with no leaf.
The only redeeming concept only seems to have made it into press photos but not into actual product.
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:38 PM
Hibryd’s comment is:
The new packaging looked so generic in part because the biggest, most prominent text was "100% orange". 100% orange? Come on, that's exactly what the store brand does to reassure customers that it's not artificially flavored "fruit beverage" al la Sunny Delight. You're freakin' Tropicana. Everyone already KNOWS you're real orange juice. The first words anyone should see on that package is "Tropicana", but instead you crammed the brand sideways off to the right, as if it's an afterthought.
Oh, and dude, I don't know what AD at your firm decided that sideways brand names look good, but drop it already. Grocery stores are chaotic design battlefields, with ever brand duking it out over precious half-seconds of customer reading time. Having the brand in a less-readable sideways position does not help you.
On Feb.23.2009 at 04:56 PM
Neil Bradley’s comment is:
Design juicetice?
On Feb.23.2009 at 05:09 PM
Andrew Klein’s comment is:
I didn't think the new packaging was that bad... but if their dedicated orange juice consumers had that bad of a reaction, should that have been something you could catch in a consumer focus group? - I'm not a fan of focus groups at all, as they tend to turn into design-by-committee...but it's a good gut check before taking product to market.
Of course... Paul Rand said you can convince pretty much anyone of anything in marketing if you have a good sales presentation.
On Feb.23.2009 at 05:09 PM
TheMaster’s comment is:
People, it's just orange juice!! R.E.L.A.X.
On Feb.23.2009 at 05:22 PM
D Royal’s comment is:
I think it goes quite well with the branding that they did for the Pepsi brand. Which also comes across as a bunch of hot air with no substance. This tends to be the problem in our industry.
It makes you wonder in these economic times if the companies will be looking at this and discounting our whole industry asa fraud.
And yes they must have had an amazing presentation.
On Feb.23.2009 at 05:29 PM
millie rossman kidd’s comment is:
Yeah, my husband accidentally bought the store brand a few weeks ago. We discovered we liked it and haven't gone back. And I definitely was not looking to skimp on my family's favorite OJ after growing up on that horrible Minute Maid concentrate stuff.
Where's Debbie Millman? She and Sterling Brands must be thrilled!
On Feb.23.2009 at 06:46 PM
lucid’s comment is:
Arnell can't even defend his groups own work!
I'm willing to bet that Pepsi will soon follow...
On Feb.23.2009 at 07:05 PM
Trevor Woods’s comment is:
All I can say is that even after i'm reading through all the comments and posting this, I'm still laughing... tear em' a new one Armin
On Feb.23.2009 at 07:07 PM
Noah’s comment is:
In my opinion, the new (now deleted) design did to the OJ section what Truvia did to the sweetener section. I personally loved the new design, but can't bring myself to pay more than $2.99 for orange juice since becoming addicted to the Trader Joe's house brand. One less pretty thing to look at while at the grocery... oh well.
On Feb.23.2009 at 07:18 PM
Lancaster’s comment is:
The funniest thing about the redesign was that the blurb on the back was also vertically-written, killing motivation to read it - and even if you wanted to, you had to orient the carton with the cap on the bottom. What could possibly go wrong?
On Feb.23.2009 at 07:55 PM
Design’s comment is:
http://gawker.com/news/evil-bosses/new-yorks-worst-bosses-peter-arnell-244608.php
On Feb.23.2009 at 08:05 PM
Von Glitschka’s comment is:
Looks like Pepsi might not roll out new logo in China?
On Feb.23.2009 at 08:23 PM
Rodrigo Müller’s comment is:
fail.
On Feb.23.2009 at 08:44 PM
Jeff’s comment is:
Hibryd hit the nail on the head. The FIRST thing you see on the carton is "100% orange." It's bigger than the freaking logo! Cheap, generic trick, which is why my eye passed right over it for a full minute in the store. That's brand suicide. They're right to change it back.
On Feb.23.2009 at 09:06 PM
Ether’s comment is:
THANK GOODNESS!
On Feb.23.2009 at 09:49 PM
Peter Hoagland’s comment is:
In addition to the boring, hard-to-read package, the new Arnell design has two other significant issues.
One, is the new snap cap on the larger containers. It is not secure and can come open with a good shake. Tropicana is replacing many cartons via coupons. Really dumb design. And what was wrong with the screw top?
Tropicana is using the new design to sneak by a downsizing. The 96 ounce carton is now 89 ounces and customers are pissed.
Could they have screwed this up any more if they tried???
On Feb.23.2009 at 09:55 PM
carol’s comment is:
I suppose its just orange juice packaging but I think it was the fact that Arnell was given a chance with so much work and then didn't do anything really amazing with ANY of it that has so many people with their knives out. Especially when there are so many excellent design shops to do the work. Giving an ad agency real design work is often a question at the best of times, giving a single ad agency multiple plum brand identity projects just doesn't make any sense. . . unless of course someone is buddies with someone and makes a senseless act of consolidation (no idea, just guessing here). No offense to the ad agencies, of course, but most aren't wired that way. Personally, I can't wait for the straw in the citrus to come back and replace the pale and wan "improvement". Kudos to the client for listening to the roar of consumer disapproval, if a bit late. And now there will be another 'new coke' like tale to be whispered around client meetings that will help to ensure that design by people who don't seem to like the product very much doesn't happen again.
On Feb.23.2009 at 10:47 PM
birdman’s comment is:
Perhaps we can set up a hotline for marketing VPs to call and repent: 1-888-OOPS-LOGO. :)
On Feb.23.2009 at 11:05 PM
Donald’s comment is:
Hey Arnell,
DG3’s comment is:
They should've left well enough alone. It didn't NEED a revision, but they did it anyway.
On Feb.24.2009 at 12:54 AM
Phillip’s comment is:
Advice to Pepsico: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The new design is not bad, but not right for this product.
On Feb.24.2009 at 03:00 AM
Andrew E. Clark’s comment is:
Sweeeeeeeet!
PEPSI, you're next...Right after I♥NY, XEROX, Blimpie, YRC, Sprite and Super 8.
I have always LOVED the straw in the orange concept. It's perfect.
BRAVO!
soully’s comment is:
What does 'Squeeze it's a natural' mean?
On Feb.24.2009 at 04:14 AM
Michael Bierut’s comment is:
Enjoy the schadenfreude while you can. Then watch as every other client in the world — already scared by the recession — uses this case as an excuse to error on the side of caution whenever faced with a challenging design option. Sigh.
On Feb.24.2009 at 07:32 AM
Paula Scher’s comment is:
This episode will make the design punishment of stupid focus groups look like nothing. It doesn't matter whether or not you thought Tropicana design was bad or functioned improperly. That's not the point.
For clients "FEAR OF TWITTER" will become standard operating procedure. It will become impossible to try anything new on anything that has any form of consumer recognizability. Anyone who has ever redesigned a magazine knows that all initial letters to the editor after the redesign is initiated are always negative, regardless of how well the magazine has been redesigned. Then a year later the public can never remember the old design.
Consumer reaction to anything new is usually just that REACTIONARY. Quality is seldom the point, and even if it may be, this one time, that will not be the ultimate lesson of this episode, I promise you.
So continue to celebrate while Rome is burning...
On Feb.24.2009 at 08:18 AM
Swifty’s comment is:
I'm thinking there is face being saved by discussing how the "long-term loyal customers were upset."
I'm thinking the aspect of the story we're not hearing is how sales plummeted because the people who normally bought Tropicana out of brand loyalty could no longer find it.
On Feb.24.2009 at 08:23 AM
Jonny’s comment is:
@Andrew E. Clark: To arms, comrades...designers' revolt!
On Feb.24.2009 at 08:56 AM
Matt’s comment is:
yes, this sucks. i agree with some that this will scare some companies into trying new logos/designs out of fear they will backfire. of course that is an issue always, but have faith in the design team to do the job and to execute it well.
unfortunately, that is not the case with tropicana+arnell. and to say at least they are getting publicity, so is Arod, is that good? that is an unbelievable statement to say, as if Tropicana had no publicity before? no, it wasn't the best OJ around? It needed more BAD PUBLICITY? UNREAL.
and to say pepsico china may not reveal the new logo in china due to unhappiness and bad response in the us? What does that say Arnell? Your redesign on pepsi sucked so bad they can't evolve it in different countries? I guess that is good also cuz pepsi is getting more publicity also? Right Arnell? freaking Chumps
On Feb.24.2009 at 09:43 AM
Todd Simmons’s comment is:
This is good brand behavior
on the part of Tropicana —
brand being not only logo, packaging, marketing.
This is the most progressive or "REFRESHING"
decision we've seen them make thusfar.
Todd Simmons
Wolff Olins
Todd Simmons’s comment is:
This is good brand behavior
on the part of Tropicana —
brand being not only logo, packaging, marketing.
This is the most progressive or "REFRESHING"
decision we've seen them make thusfar.
Todd Simmons
Wolff Olins
Scott Lerman’s comment is:
Michael, Paula, I get it. Every time a highly visible brand change is panned, we all suffer. But it does matter if the design was bad or didn't function properly. I think most clients can understand technical failure (Houston we have a problem...)
What worries me more is building an understanding of how important it is to define and communicate the ideas and character of a brand consistently in every communication and action. For Tropicana, the disconnect between the warmth of the ads (man cradling baby) and the cold logic of the packaging should have rung alarm bells. The problem here was as much about being true as it was about being competent.
On Feb.24.2009 at 10:17 AM
Frank’s comment is:
The thing is, the redesign wasn't "a challenging design option".It was simply a bad design decision in terms of brand recognition and brand strategy.It's not like Arnell tried a risky, radical but new and exciting way of identity&packaging.Their design is rather the "tried&tested/generic/yawn" way of packaging.So i think this will not result in scaring clients away from trying something new - those consumer complaints are just a natural and deserved result of truely bad design decisions.Looks like someone didn't give the "strategy" and "research" aspects in brand design enough attention.You just shouldn't throw out your brand recognition just like that, for no apparent reason at all and just for the sake of "new".
Maybe it's just a prime example for the fact that "new"(design) doesn't always automatically equal "good" (design).
On Feb.24.2009 at 10:29 AM
Darrel’s comment is:
I think PepsiCo deserves the blame here. They gave the design firm a silly task "We have a well placed, established, successful, good looking visual brand and packaging system...but we want you to just go ahead and change it anyways."
When the only business decision for a visual redesign is 'change' then it's hard to really pull anything off that's going to be well supported.
On Feb.24.2009 at 10:54 AM
Mark Nead’s comment is:
This is the same group who did the Progressive spots with E.T. years ago.
Now Pepsi.
And Tropicana.
Say no more.
On Feb.24.2009 at 11:02 AM
Scott Lerman’s comment is:
Darrel, Refreshing a brand isn't necessarily a "silly task". Brands that don't evolve often die. If Tropicana can associate itself with a real-life "trigger" like a hug (squeeze) that's great. I just think they failed to reinforce the idea on the shelf.
On Feb.24.2009 at 11:04 AM
Paula Scher’s comment is:
Its hard to get clients to accept new ideas and make change. The bigger the corporation, the harder it is. If we persuade a largescale client to make change and we fail, our whole industry fails. The failure will not be blamed on the specific design, or the specific design firm. It will be blamed on the graphic design profession and the graphic design community. And it will cause all clients to be fearful of change.
They will not be looking at your posts here, or looking at your website and saying "These guys wouldn't do what Arnell did". They will assume you are the same.
On Feb.24.2009 at 11:12 AM
Frank’s comment is:
When the only business decision for a visual redesign is 'change' then it's hard to really pull anything off that's going to be well supported.
Absolutely.But i think it's the agency's fault as well because it should be their responsibility to tell the client when they actually do NOT need a redesign or at least find out where a change in design could REALLY improve something.
The sad thing is, most agencies would not send a client away but take on the job, no matter if it actually serves the client or not.I have more than once sent a client away in cases where i felt (and research showed) their brand didn't need an update or change in design; simply because i think it's part of my professional responsibility to serve the clients needs which includes telling them when a change is NOT needed.Even if it means less income in that particular situation but in the long run these clients have been thankful for my honesty which more than once has resulted in other jobs from the same clients where "change" or a makeover was really appropriate.
On Feb.24.2009 at 11:15 AM
Frank’s comment is:
@Paula:
One could argue that Arnell by profession and standard procedure should have actually known and foreseen the potential (negative) consumer reactions ?
But, decided to give it a go anwyway for the sake of not losing the gig/client/income ?
If an agency doesn't have the guts to tell the client their idea of "change" might be a not so good idea afterall, they're to blame as well.
On Feb.24.2009 at 11:24 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
So what's the answer? Large organizations are risk adverse and rewards driven. Low risk strategies that add predictable value are beloved, but so are high risk strategies, like mergers, that hold the promise of outsized rewards.
How do we create a similar desire for superb design and brand programs? Our industry tends to honor work as objects--on an aesthetic basis. Few industry awards are based on the effect they have on an organization's success, incremental or great. Perhaps if we valued that more, potential clients would too.
Scott Lerman’s comment is:
Sorry, the previous post was mine--no longer anonymous...
On Feb.24.2009 at 11:32 AM
felix sockwell’s comment is:
Arnell is a great salesman and decent designer (I illustrated his stories for years in Ad Age, he's nuts). But after reading the Times summary I have to smile, welcoming back Sterling's design. The new design was generic and not well-conceived for middle America... I Hope Pepsico follows suit too. Graphic design profession be damned..
On Feb.24.2009 at 12:29 PM
Jeff L’s comment is:
Thankfully!!!!
The new packaging was horrible. Not the overall look and feel, but the fact that Tropicana has 15 different 'flavors' of OJ (and others) in the 64oz carton, that now all looked EXACTLY the same, except some silly little ribbon at the top.
http://www.tropicana.com/juice_finder/detail/64oz/index.html
Chuck Spidell’s comment is:
Out of curiosity, I bought one of the new cartons last week. While the minimalist style is cool, what the new brand lacks is an emotional connection. People must be used to seeing the orange with the striped straw - it's iconic. So it's not a surprise that consumers have gotten crazy about the change. That's some serious brand loyalty.
I remember emailing MailChimp when they redesigned the website with the corporate style. Now look where where the brand is today. Chimpy is back and bigger than ever.
On Feb.24.2009 at 12:46 PM
Emily Charette’s comment is:
I think the crux of the issue is Pepsi's complete overhaul of all brands in order to "refresh everything." It seems like some brands could benefit, and some brands couldn't. The smart thing to do would be to evaluate each one individually, rather than roll out 5 or more completely new brands -- all at once, and in a recession. This has all the earmarks of a sweeping decision from some new CEO type who has to come in and change things to justify his/her existence. Out with the old, in with the new ... loosing equity and trust that's been built for years. I think it's the result of companies making decisions based on money or politics, rather than an understanding of their brand's value to consumers.
Hooray for brands that believe in design, and perhaps more importantly, believe in themselves.
On Feb.24.2009 at 12:47 PM
monica’s comment is:
At least it helped the economy by providing jobs for a while. As a consumer (ex-branding person) - A change like that makes me think Trop is cutting corners on the premiumness of the OJ.
On Feb.24.2009 at 01:47 PM
son of ali’s comment is:
I punched a hole in an orange when I was a child and drank out of it, talk about an effective brand. However the glass of OJ on the redesign makes me very thirsty which I imagine is the desired effect, but the execution was poor. Maybe someday they'll find a happy medium.
On Feb.24.2009 at 01:54 PM
Wally Gator’s comment is:
This isn't the first time Pepsico has had to undo a failed Arnell redesign. The original Mountain Dew Redo, with it's rolling hills and pine tree motif was quickly scrapped, but not before it briefly hit the shelves. The rush job Arnell squirted out with it's clashing acute angles and floating mountains, is at least on the same planet (to use Arnell's cosmological metaphors) as the previous Dew. It's still a thoughtless downgrade, imho.
Wally Gator’s comment is:
Here is a link to the Dew Two-step.
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?af51d30cd5.jpg
Tushar’s comment is:
I think people would have welcomed a redesign had it been better than the previous one. i.e. it communicated what it was supposed to in a way that is visually interesting, while being effective at the same time.
On Feb.24.2009 at 03:21 PM
Jennifer’s comment is:
I drink Tropicana OJ every single morning. The kind with "lots of pulp" and "calcium" and "vitamin D."
This may sound like overreacting, but I have been FURIOUS with Tropicana ever since they introduced this new carton design! I am SO GLAD they are changing it back. They almost lost a customer.
Let me explain. Nobody wants to spend longer than necessary in a supermarket. So if you're quickly trying to find your specific brand & style of OJ in the refrigerated shelves, you want to find it QUICKLY. You don't want to be scanning a myriad of identical cartons, with a smattering of teeny-tiny little print, differentiating the "original without pulp" from the "grovestand with pulp and calcium" carton.
This change confused me so much, that the first time I went food shopping after the new cartons came out, I literally walked right past them and thought that my supermarket had stopped selling Tropicana. I looked for it for a minute or so, and though it was staring me right in the face, I was so used to the old carton that I didn't even see it! And I'm a 30 year old, literate woman! Imagine how many illiterate or elderly people simply changed brands because they thought Tropicana went out of business.
Anyway, congrats to Tropicana for coming to their senses and correcting their own stupidity. Sometimes marketing genius is as simple as NOT CHANGING YOUR PACKAGING AND CONFUSING YOUR LOYAL CUSTOMERS!!!
Ok, I'm done. Thanks for indulging my little rant.
OJ anyone?
Tushar’s comment is:
or maybe not.
On Feb.24.2009 at 04:57 PM
Arnell Sucks’s comment is:
Peter Arnell is a hack, this recent spate of work from his company is ludicrously bad, and I predict that each and every one of these designs that he did for the Pepsi Group will be reversed within 1-2 years.
ALL of them totally destroy the rich history of their brands in favor of newly genericized packaging concepts that utterly crush the current consumer's attachment to the products while simultaneously failing to attract new ones.
But since there is no justice in the world of graphic design, Arnell will only continue to get more successful.
On Feb.24.2009 at 06:07 PM
Eddie’s comment is:
You know whats really pathetic? This already happened with tropicana like 2 years ago with the "Tropicana Twister" juice drinks, they changed it to a black label with a tornado on it, within a year they would go back to the older tropicana twister label, lol They never learn!
On Feb.24.2009 at 07:37 PM
Paul Cooley’s comment is:
Well i can't say attacking a fellow designer, and claiming that he destroyed the history of the brands is a necessary statement.
Pepsi needed a rebranding badly, and although Arnell's work isn't super i think the consolidation of a pretty scattered brand identity was a good move.
As for the reversion to the old Tropicana packaging...fantastic, the new packaging was illegible and generic. I was a fan of the typography but overall it was no good.
Maybe next time Tropicana will look a little closer to how effective a package is and not let shiny newness get in the way.
In short the design distracted from the purpose of packaging, a error we designers tend to make. So brush off your shoulders and revise where revision is needed.
Hurray for lessons!
On Feb.24.2009 at 07:38 PM
Fonto’s comment is:
If the public at large had such a distaste for this package, how on Earth did it EVER get through a focus group? Tropicana had to insist on getting this in front of a group of 'regular' consumers, both brand users and non-users and asking some fair and unbiased questions, right? I can't imagine that (what I envision as being a billion dollar brand) Tropicana would trust their future to someone without some sort of validation of the consumer up front. I'm certain that Mr. Arnell is a very persuasive fellow, but hopefully someone had enough sense to test the packaging prior to releasing it. Seems like a red flag would have been waving fairly furiously had that been the case.
Ultimately, I have to agree with Paula. Clients hardly need any additional reason to postpone another project.
On Feb.24.2009 at 09:54 PM
You can fool some people some of the time.’s comment is:
All you folks saying that big companies will now be skiddish and trigger-shy to try anything NEW are missing the point.
The fact is this: ARNELL DID BAD RESEARCH, BAD CONSULTING AND PRODUCED SEVERELY INEFFECTIVE (BAD) DESIGN.
NEW and BAD are not the same thing.
Everyone here on this blog called it months ago when we first saw the Tropicana package redesign. Not to mention all the Pepsi stuff.
I personally didn't ever think the Tropicana stuff would actually hit store shelves because to me it was an obvious FAILURE. Many people rightly mentioned that it looked like student work.
This is a case of BAD DESIGN pure and simple.
Arnell sold their snake oil to PepsiCo and fooled some of the people some of the time.
b.r.o.o.d.y.’s comment is:
The orange-shaped bottle cap will be the only thing that will be missed from this design. Bad news for all the people who wanted to feel the thrill of twisting a nipple every time they'd be about to gobble up their OJ.
On Feb.25.2009 at 12:58 AM
Ruben T.’s comment is:
I actually liked the new design. There is a fresh feel to it. They should have place the actual "Tropicana" letters/logo in the middle and not sideways. Other then that I like it. The other design looks too old and outdated.
On Feb.25.2009 at 02:28 AM
Arnell-Olins Snakeoil Sales’s comment is:
Good stuff here.
http://www.mediabistro.com/agencyspy/arnell/arnells_latest_design_debacle_tropicana_returns_to_orange_with_protruding_straw_109365.asp
On Feb.25.2009 at 02:50 AM
hrhkat’s comment is:
I personally loved the round orange cap!!
But I HATTTTTTEDDDDDD the bland container...This whole pepsi rebrand was a bad idea...someone was trying to justify their job. The redesign looked like something some 23 year out of college designer did at 3 in the morning on the day it was due.
Keep the cute round orange cap...but instead of a leaf on the side..have a little red and white straw printed next to it! very Tropicana
On Feb.25.2009 at 05:17 AM
John House’s comment is:
I was one of the graphic designers to complain to them after I read the story here on your site and then saw the product on the shelves. I laid out my case from a graphic design perspective, but I then also laid out my case from a consumer's POV. I explained the value of the iconic red and white striped straw AND I also explained that time would tell re: what would sell, BUT that I had been to the grocery store and that on our own shelves the "new" Tropicana was stocked full while the otehr brands were practically flying off the shelves in comparison.
I ended up with a form-letter-like postcard and a coupon for $5 for a Tropicana product. :\
I even wrote to other juice brands, telling them of my preference of their products over the new "Tropicana", and requesting that they keep doing what they're doing and don't mess with a product packaging design that works. Florida's Natural sent me a handful of coupons and a long letter, LOL.
Now that they're changing back, I have to call this one a victory for myself and others who are committed AGAINST terrible design. ^_^
On Feb.25.2009 at 06:02 AM
Goffredo Puccetti’s comment is:
Is this episode going to bring blame to the profession?
I think we do not need to worry here.
This is a case of bad ideas, founded on bad research, which resulted in bad design. It has not much to do with being reactionary or progressive (BTW: if they bin the new Pepsi as well it will be, I think, a victory for common sense, not a loss for progressive revolutionary design!)
I personally do not think that this failure will bring blame on the graphic design profession and the graphic design community. Quite the contrary. It exposes how people practice it differently. Some sell mumbo jumbo, fancy-named exclusive methodologies and blah blah, while some others simply try to produce effective, memorable design. And do so only when it is needed: when faced a perfectly working design, a good designer simply suggest to keep it.
On Feb.25.2009 at 06:33 AM
Erik’s comment is:
Interesting that tropicana has chosen to revert the design. I have mixed feelings about it really. Part of me liked the direction of the redesign because of its deliberate move away from the other brands thus helping it stand out from the competition. However, I feel the branding was much stronger in the old design. The redesign was easily identifiable but was lacking a strong brand presence and thus feeling somewhat generic.
Well anyway, I would love to hear from the designers involved in the project for their opinion on the whole thing, but that's probably unlikely.
On Feb.25.2009 at 09:10 AM
Backatchababy’s comment is:
The redesign might have had a chance of been fresh ten or fifteen years ago, but I think at this point many people are tired of seeing things that are stripped down and minimalist unless it's on a product were that kind of simplicity still stands out, such as on a wine bottle. It's too easy, especially when every other person has design software on their computer, for "simple" to come across as "cheap".
I hope that brands take a lesson from this, and the equally unfortunate Pepsi rebranding, and look for design work that has better craftsmanship, and dare I say detail, in the future.
Personally: I was at a store I don't usually shop at on Sunday night looking for orange juice and wasn't expecting them to have much of a selection. I completely mistook the new/rejected Tropicana packaging for a generic, even thinking that maybe Tropicana had put out a cheaper version of itself. I believe my gut reaction was "Ugh." I spent extra time looking at the case only to decide on a different brand. So, I did not buy Tropicana specically because of the packaging.
On Feb.25.2009 at 11:35 AM
Abe’s comment is:
Forgive me if someone already touched on this, there are a ton of posts!
Do we even know if Arnell had room to breathe on this one? Could it have been a "make my logo bigger" thing? What if the client was dead set and moving away from their previous branding?
I'm not discounting the design fail but haven't we all had that one client that just wouldn't give? But when money is on the line sometimes standards take the back seat.
I may be totally off track here so pardon my naivety.
On Feb.25.2009 at 12:14 PM
Fi’s comment is:
The contract with the orange must of been up and they didn't want to keep paying it the royalties. Why else would they change a dynamic visual design to a text-based one?
On Feb.25.2009 at 01:22 PM
susan’s comment is:
I was happy that Tropicana freshened up the old look, but I echo what others have said about mistaking the new look for a generic brand of OJ. The other thing I missed was the color coding of the different kinds of OJ -- with the new brand, you had to actually read the label. Maybe I'm a lazy consumer, but I appreciated the color coding for improving shopping efficiency.
On Feb.25.2009 at 02:14 PM
Courtney D’s comment is:
I am glad that they went back to the old packaging. Regarding the new design, sure I don't like it. But you have to wonder what round 1 looked like, before the client had (probably) made a thousand revisions and destroyed it.
On Feb.25.2009 at 10:45 PM
Danno Warner’s comment is:
Scher and Beirut are dead-on here. We know nothing about the situation and process and internal objectives of the re-design. But we do know that consumer reaction is always at first boringly, predictably, yawningly reactionary. And great design dies all the time for leadership fear of change.
On a SEPARATE note, I thought the new design was beautiful in its simplicity and detail — I'm holding one of the cartons in my hand now — to my eye, this leaps off the shelves a hundred times better than normal afterthought crap generic design.
On Feb.25.2009 at 11:07 PM
a consumer’s comment is:
Danno Warner: From what I have heard, Pepsico did not do any research on any of the new designs, so the new design was not "boringly, predictably, yawningly reactionary." It went to market exactly as the design firm intended.
On Feb.25.2009 at 11:28 PM
dan’s comment is:
I hated it since day one. I think it was their sad attempt to appear 'Organic'.
On Feb.26.2009 at 12:24 AM
birdman’s comment is:
Who cares if the consumer is reactionary? Are we selling fine art, or orange juice? As many have pointed out -- and I wholeheartedly agree -- it was very difficult to tell apart the numerous Tropicana varieties on the store shelves. Personally, I enjoyed Tropicana's "low acid" OJ, which apparently our largest regional grocery store chain has stopped selling. Yet I spent a good two minutes scouring the shelves and reading every label to make sure I wasn't just missing it. All of Tropicana's varieties blended together.
The redesign actually made it more difficult to buy the product. Sorry, but to me that's an epic fail. Whether this is the fault of Pepsico execs or Arnell, I can't say.
(And for what it's worth, I actually didn't mind the redesign that much until I saw it on store shelves and found myself frustrated trying to find what I wanted.)
On Feb.26.2009 at 10:16 AM
Kevin Kabat’s comment is:
It sucks. How's that for succinct and simplified?
On Feb.26.2009 at 11:35 AM
Mister_eaves’s comment is:
Took this picture in my local Minneapolis grocery store the other day. No joke; they're resorting to shelf talkers to teach consumers how to find their orange juice.
No’s comment is:
I'm very startled at Paula Scher's comments on this entry. The few times I met her she seemed very intelligent and insightful, but her statements on this issue make her seem remarkably stuffy and out of touch.
This old Tropicana design is cluttered, stale, and ugly. Few designers would deny that.
People don't hate the new design because it's "different," they hate it because it is a FAILURE at the two main things it should do: distinguishing the brand, and alerting consumers to the contents of the containers.
While I appreciate the elegance of the new packages, they relegate the brand's logo to an afterthought by ripping it out of the center of the package and then slapping it up in a corner - SIDEWAYS no less.
No longer is this TROPICANA orange juice, it's ORANGE JUICE that happens to be made by Tropicana. Doing this sends the consumer the message that the product (orange juice) is more important than the brand (Tropicana) which is great if you're simply trying to move orange juice, but not so great if you're a specific brand trying to promote your product over other alternatives.
And then there's the fact that the new design makes it significantly more difficult to distinguish between the different varieties of Tropicana juice. Good design should make information EASIER to understand, not make everything look the same.
This redesign was a multi-million dollar flop, and Arnell's poor handling of this project will ultimately serve as an example for CEOs to throw around when they want to save money by not rebranding their product. Arnell's bungling has hurt Pepsico, and the Design industry at large.
--
And Ms. Scher, you should really stop commenting on this blog. I like and respect you, but your words here do you a tremendous disservice.
Danno Warner’s comment is:
Dr. No;
1. Don't tell people not to comment when they are sharing their passionate thoughts in a civil way.
2. Don't tell designers with decades of experience not to comment here.
3. Don't tell one of the most successful and insightful designers, ever, in our profession to stop commenting.
4. Don't frame such comments directly at individuals, if you're going to hide behind some fake anonymous BS.
Thanks,
-Danno
On Feb.26.2009 at 07:59 PM
Andrew E. Clark’s comment is:
Here's a video where Arnell does some explaining.
He says that he wanted to show the actual JUICE instead of the outside of an orange.
Then he goes into the concept behind the new orange cap which I think we all agree was great.
Watch it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ4yF4F74vc
On Feb.27.2009 at 03:05 PM
mister_eaves’s comment is:
The new "orange" squeeze caps aren't even being implemented. In my picture above, it's clear that packages are currently using standard screw caps with an orange color.
On Feb.27.2009 at 05:13 PM
manixpc’s comment is:
Before I knew about the redesign, I actually thought it was a new line of orange juice from Tropicana. As confusing as it was, IMHO the new design emphasized "Premium" more so than the dated design (even though it did say Pure Premium).
On Feb.27.2009 at 11:49 PM
Yves’s comment is:
After seeing the video where Arnell explains the move to show juice rather than skin, I must admit that I like the idea to show the *inside* of the orange for a change. But they could have kept the fruit and the straw and the basic circular shape but simply cut the orange in half to expose the juicy pulp in it. Then, they keep the logotype too, and everybody would have been happy.
On Feb.28.2009 at 04:50 AM
Andrew Sabatier’s comment is:
Conceptually the redesign is stronger than the original. The orange squeeze cap is clever, and as Arnell says, the actual juice is shown. Unfortunately the resulting design is too cerebral and not as visually rich as the original.
The combination of the original and the new squeeze cap will probably lack the strengths of either. Too many ideas.
The original looks dated, it’s got that typical over-design of traditional FMCG packaging. And the barber’s poll of the straw looks old fashioned. I say give Arnell another go to make the squeeze cap idea really work.
A.
On Feb.28.2009 at 11:26 AM
paula scher’s comment is:
To "No" whoever you are, and others... I've never stated my opinions about the Tropicana redesign. For the record here it is: The old design is hackneyed, and the new design isn't crafted well enough in its modernity, nor does it modernize aspects of the old that may be recognizable to the consumer. However, my opinion about the redesign, and yours, is irrelevant to what happened.
What happened was that Tropicana recalled the design in a move that made Pepsico look responsive to a consumer revolt on Twitter. They could do this because they had the old packaging available. It was a relatively cheap recall and it was a win-win situation for them. They showed themselves off to be consumer-conscious much faster than Coke did when they recalled New Coke. They doubled the promotion they would have ordinarily gotten. They even made people with pseudo-names on Brand New happy. And probably, they made every potential client with lesser sums than Pepsico to invest in design, quake in their boots about a negative Twitter reaction to a redesign.
The loser here is design. Not the Tropicana redesign, but the act of uncynically trying to elevate the expectation what design can be, which should be all of our goals.
If that is not the goal, then No is right, and I should not be contributing here, or anywhere else.
On Feb.28.2009 at 02:24 PM
J.B. Chaykowsky’s comment is:
Paula,
First I am going to say everything about the design both good and bad has been said. I will not comment on the design.
I understand your point. Design can be many things but I believe your thinking that the "twitter reaction" is founded in your own belief system. I believe to use this as an educational tool for designers.
You believe we should elevate the expectations of what design can be. A lot of designers want this. I want this. But your reaction to PepsiCo's pull back is exactly the opposite I had. While most of the comments on this page are based inwards, looking at the effect of what might occur to the design field, I would like to take a look outward.
The public won and I am glad. I have heard you speak many times. You are very vocal about you oppositions. That you were very influenced by vietnam and are very socially active. I do not pretend to "know" you but I would think that this time of public involvement into design would be greeted as welcomed empowerment. The past couple weeks we have been told of the publics reaction to Facebook, the new pepsi rebranding, and Tropicana. To a new president and congress' stimulus bill (that they promised to let us look at and then didnt). The public wants to be involved!
Too often designers (of all kinds) look inwards instead of looking outwards. Design is for the public. The public did not like the packaging and they made it known - possibly with their pocket books. I highly doubt no matter what the reports are suggesting that the twitter reaction was only part of the negative reaction from the public. I believe there is more to the decision than meets the eye and most likely something we will never be privy to.
Not only this but we are emerging into a new economy. (I am not talking about the recession). With the advent of connective technology such as twitter, facebook, and our cell phones that keeps us connected as long as we are awake we communicate more openly and directly. Not only that but our very design tools and design process has quickened with technology. Trends and fads face a quicker demise. Maybe this does not allow us time to reflect or think about reaction... but this is something all of us will have to deal with.
So we have a new challenge - we must design something that will both satiate the publics needs and wants in an era where they have more of a collective voice than ever.
I look forward to your comments.
-JB
On Feb.28.2009 at 04:06 PM
J.B. Chaykowsky’s comment is:
I would like to apologize for my hurried response and lack of proper punctuation. Maybe the grammar police will be nicer to me... ha!
Thanks y'all!
-JB
On Feb.28.2009 at 04:30 PM
a consumer’s comment is:
There is only one reason that Pepsi brought the old Tropicana package back: a giant fall in sales. Tropicana's sales dropped over 20% in the first month since the redesign, and some estimates have it at 40% now. While this might seem a reaction to consumers Twittering, you need to peel back another layer to fully grasp this turnaround. Twitter is only representative of behavior, and that is on the best of days. If people communicated how much they hated the package on Twitter but still bought the brand, Pepsi never would have backpedaled. But the Twittering was in accordance with the behavior--that of droves of orange juice drinkers buying something other than Tropicana.
Again. Pepsi did no testing on the new design. So much for considering what the Tropicana customer thought in the first place. That they would take a gamble with such high stakes is what company's with brands this big should be careful of, and rightly so.
On Feb.28.2009 at 05:37 PM
adam’s comment is:
i have read a bunch of comments about how pepsico did not do any consumer testing or focus groups with the new packaging . . .
while i think a limited, controlled release of the new packaging most likely would have caught the issue of being unable to find the brand itself on the shelf, and then also finding "your" particular flavor/style of the juice.
(if everyone is referring to that, then i agree.)
i do have to disagree, though, about the lack of focus group testing bashing that is being mentioned. while focus groups can be beneficial in some instances, i do not believe that focus groups would have necessarily caught many of the failures, like where the juice style indication is located, for instance.
sorry, this was more of a in-the-office-on-a-saturday-night-personal-opinion on focus groups, so it may be irrelevant, but it may also spark some more opinions (which would be good to hear). you lock some people in a room and tell them to look at a package, and i am not sure if they could visualize in context and provide better feedback than "i like the clean white" or "i like the old orange with the straw better."
On Feb.28.2009 at 09:10 PM
Taylor Burkum’s comment is:
Nothing says "Don't look at me" like a weak design. Very generic. Very fad-driven. I'm pretty sure that 70% of these newly branded companies will change their brand yet AGAIN within 3-5 years...and that's pretty sad. What good is a brand if it's always changing? It's not.
On Mar.01.2009 at 01:54 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
To JB,
The American supermarket is the most focus tested environment on earth. Take a look at the radiants, squiggles, starbursts and bad product photography on every package , all a result of giving the public what it wants.
The best design is usually a result of a visionary client and an informed designer taking a risk on something that can change the zeitgeist in a category and raise the expectation of what the design can be.
A fearless client does this in defiance of focus testing, because focus testing only tells you what an audience wants now, not a year from now. It takes time for something new to find its audience.
Twitter kills that time. it's a loud focus group played out in public. It's a reaction, it does not have foresight. It's just as possible that it could be a design supporter, but not necessarily. Most likely, it will become another reason to
promote fear of change in clients.
This little consumer revolt we just witnessed threw out a faux-modern package for an "authentic" illustration of an orange with a straw stuck in it. It didn't exactly raising the expectations of what design can be from any angle. It did preserve the familiar and recognizable. That's my point.
On Mar.01.2009 at 10:07 AM
paula scher’s comment is:
Sorry JB, I forgot to post my name.
On Mar.01.2009 at 10:08 AM
Connie’s comment is:
The best design is usually a result of a visionary client and an informed designer taking a risk on something that can change the zeitgeist in a category and raise the expectation of what the design can be.
Isn't that what Arnell was trying to do? Peter Arnell said as much in the videos and documents that have been presented online.
That doesn't seem to have worked for Tropicana, and for Mountain Dew as well, which also reverted back to a more similar design after Arnell "revolutionized" it.
How do you prevent that from happening over and over again? Arnell is a great firm and they do great work. What went wrong here?
Market research does not mean focus group testing. Most focus group testing is crap, Paula is right. But there are other ways of accessing the consumer mindset that does not have to happen in a ridiculous, sterile research facility. Cultural Anthropologists using enthnography to analyze and understand the behavior of customers is one way to do this.
On Mar.01.2009 at 12:36 PM
J.B. Chaykowsky’s comment is:
Paula,
I understand your points, but I just wonder if the design community itself is over-reacting to Pepsico's over-reacting of the twitter over-reacting. I can understand why you see negativity in Pepsico's reaction... and how that could affect other businesses seeking to elevate their design.
If we take a look at what was done with the packaging and the brands that Pepsico had updated with new designs we can see only one was given the benefit of continuing years of brand equity. Both Pepsi and Tropicana were given new "looks". Neither of which the consumers recognize. This isn't a new product - I think the larger mistake was not leveraging the already intimate relationship some consumers had with brands they grew up with. I agree sometimes consumers do not know what is good for them. But it is up to us as designers to take what people know and use that information to create a solution for them. The design process for Pepsico should of recognized these powerful symbols and leveraged them in some fashion. I believe you could of made a great piece of contemporary packaging featuring an "orange with a straw stuck in it."
My belief is that there is a time and place for change of the degree we saw Pepsico take. Maybe it was bad timing? A recession has proven a place where people stick to the familiar and safe.
In regards to your comment about visionary clients...Design savvy and visionary clients will always take risks... and when designers are given the opportunity.. they will too. Those companies most likely will not buckle under the pressure which is why I think there was more at play than just a twitter/facebook revolt. I think it had more to do that the public couldn't determine what type of orange juice they were buying... and so they didn't buy it.
If that is the case would you agree the design failed and Tropicana did what it had to?
I look forward to your comments.
(Does anyone know who first reported that the packaging changed due to Twitter/facebook? I can't seem to find it. In the NYT's article the "twitter" reference was to a Motrin ad.)
Panasit’s comment is:
Oh man, I love the "looking for tropicana?" sticker.
The packaging looks to be more fitting for one of those astronaut orange juice.
Panasit’s comment is:
As far as the impact this "Ctrl Z" by Pepsico has on design industry:
I actually think the opposite of what some may fear. I think the industry can benefit from this, and evolve.
I don't claim to know what is going on with this particular project. But the result of the new Tropicana packaging is definitely someone saying: let's play it safe. Lets use designers' usual suspect typeface, minimalistic style, Swiss style.
I often see a problem of designers wanting to try something new and client wants to play safe, rather than the other way around.
Since Pepsi's other brand are suffering from the same symptoms, my bet is the client is the culprit (but again, who knows).
I think if anything, this whole thing may open door for designers to take more risk. The design is playing it safe and it sucks.
There are designers who are trend-setters and designers who are trend followers. This one is a trend follower. It's not even a follower of the new trend, it's a follower of an old trend. There's no loss here.
This is not a design that people can grow into. This is a non-design. It's nothing. It sells juice, it has a picture of a juice, and the most boring font possible.
And don't even worry about design that take risks being rejected by the client. That happens everyday! If you count other parts of the world it's probably happen every minutes.
On Mar.02.2009 at 11:02 AM
adam’s comment is:
why does everyone hate the new pepsi logos and redesign so much? am i missing something? did they spell the name wrong on the new cans or something? it looks and feels really similar to the old branding, except cleaner, more modern and, simply put, like an "evolution" of the brand.
it is easy to recognize the new pepsi look on the shelf . . . in fact, i think the new pepsi brand has a greater shelf presence than the previous versions. go to the store and check out all those stacked boxes of the "fridge-friendly" 12-packs and tell me it doesn't stand out from all of the other bright, over-done crap there.
this tropicana redesign . . . well, i understand the backlash on.
On Mar.02.2009 at 12:57 PM
No’s comment is:
Oh Paula, have you always loathed the public this much, or is your hatred of the very people your work is supposed to reach a result of being treated like a Design God for over a decade?
The public you distain so much didn't tell Pepsico to throw out Arnell's redesign because they loved the old package so much, but because the new package was so bad. Not ugly, but bad at communicating important product information quickly and efficiently.
It seems a bit odd to me that someone who apparently has such a strong dislike of the public and who thinks their tastes are so vile would work in a field where your work, ultimately, is for that group you loathe so much.
On Mar.02.2009 at 06:47 PM
Amanda’s comment is:
My Grandmother bought Tropicana the other day because she thought it was the Generic Brand. :P That's gotta show you something.
Maybe they were targeting seniors. :P
On Mar.02.2009 at 08:52 PM
Fil’s comment is:
as someone who lives in a city and does not plan breakfast ahead, i buy juice at a very vulnerable time in my day. it was a bad morning when the store on my corner got the new juice.
after finally sorting it out, spent an hour thinking "wow, orange juice is pretty yellow" rather than
there was a sort of future-inevitability to the design, though. the second or third time i came across it, i thought that in a year or two, the old design would feel quaint and un-shouty, as most packaging design from the X0's does now.
definitely agree that it looks like a generic brand yelling about it's 100%-ness, not trop just asserting itself, and definitely much harder to tell juice variations apart.
@CB - until i read your comment i didn't know it was a glass. just thought it was the same weak curve shape that's been on everything for 15 years. there is literally one sitting next to me as i write this and i just looked over to see yes, ok, that's a glass. this is probably a problem.
On Mar.03.2009 at 06:55 AM
Davis’s comment is:
I actually thought that the half orange as a cap with the printed leaf was kind of clever.
On Mar.04.2009 at 08:49 PM
Simon Bérubé’s comment is:
Haha, Amanda, that's great!
On Mar.05.2009 at 12:01 AM
underdog makes good’s comment is:
I don't understand the lure of Arnell Group.
Their work is all the most uninspired bland logos around.
When I finally saw their site I thought, oh this is the firm which did all that terrible banal work.
DKNY (ugh), Bank of America? Blind leading the blind, but this comes as no surprise. It's like when people decide they need a redesign and immediately call Pentagram because they don't know any better.
When I saw the Tropicana design I did think, hmmm, step down. It probably cost a fortune too!
Prescott Perez-Fox’s comment is:
In the specific case, I'm glad to see the new Arnell design ousted.
In the larger, more general case, I hope this doesn't set a precedent. It will surely be a strange world where the design of every consumer-facing product/service is put to a public referendum. The tango between clients and designers is complex enough without masses of Joe The Plumber-types chiming in on what we've done wrong.
Onwards and upwards, dear friends.
On Mar.06.2009 at 12:45 AM
Ian’s comment is:
the orange half-cap was a clever idea. I don't think we have to worry about this causing some sort of industry altering backlash as Scher has foretold, if a new direction is truly bad / unclear enough then the end-user will respond en masse and with such force that the issue will be brought to the table, otherwise smaller groups will continue to complain as they always have, but not with enough volume to change anything.
The bottom line was that the design was unexciting and worst of all ineffective in helping the consumer select their intended product. At some point someone should have realized that the varied palette provided by citrus juice (orange - orangish yellow - yellow) probably should not be the main focus of a system where differentiation must occur.
On Mar.10.2009 at 01:08 PM
joha’s comment is:
FANTASTIC packaging re-design! It is clean, clever and differentiates itself from other competitors!
Bravo!
Danno’s comment is:
Not only did Tropicana not buckle under the quick tide of reactionary reactions, they're doubling down on the new identity with Trop50, which I just saw a commercial for:
Adam’s comment is:
Well, I couldn't "find" the tropicana at my local store a few weeks back, so I went with what was on sale, Florida's Natural, and I'm glad I did! Its a much better tasting juice! Thanks Tropicana for screwing up so much and forcing me to try something new! They really messed up with the design changes.
On Mar.24.2009 at 08:57 AM
Jason’s comment is:
It's a nice clean design, but when I was in the store looking for OJ, I noticed how 'busy' the packaging seems.
Retail is a different beast than say, a new billboard.
On Apr.02.2009 at 05:52 PM
Jason’s comment is:
Tropicana Line's Sales Plunge 20% Post-Rebranding
http://adage.com/article?article_id=135735
Kay Hagan’s comment is:
Damage control
Peter Arnell Explains Failed Tropicana Package Design
On Apr.04.2009 at 02:54 PM
Heidi B’s comment is:
While I always think simple is good, when I first walked past this orange juice I thought it was the store brand, it looked so simple, boring, and unimpressive. Not what you want to say about "premium" orange juice.
On May.07.2009 at 04:22 PM
Liberal Larry’s comment is:
After about an hour of reading through various comments, I believe that Paula Scher and joha made the best points.
I will not get into degrading or insulting people, but to put it simply: I had no problem in purchasing the Tropicana orange juice that the household enjoys.
The fact that some people are celebrating over the fact they "complained" and received coupons is pretty embarrassing too! You are passionate about your orange with a straw through it? What do you know about design or redesigning and rebranding? Some people posting comments are probably the same clients in the design world that feel they are the designer, they should only pay someone $150 to execute what they have in mind.
Finally, it's funny that a lot of people shout that the redesign looked like a generic brand when in fact this buzz word (in a Google image search) brings up multiple images of the Tropicana carton. There is not even a point of reference to go by. Might I assume though that a generic brand would come in a generic container as well.
On Jul.02.2009 at 10:52 AM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
