NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
In general I have no shortage of connections to make to any of the given brands discussed here. With Days Inn, I have nothing. And it’s not because I scoff at budget hotels; I have stayed at my share of low-priced hotels and I may have even stayed at a Days Inn for all I know, but I would never know, since their branding seems so low-key… and it has been so, at least, for the past 37 years, when Days Inn was founded in 1970 and was granted its first (and, until now, only) identity. This past February, Days Inn unveiled its new logo to 1,800 of its managers and owners. The new identity helps support the chain’s “A Promise as Sure as the Sun” brand promise and, to boot, because the shape is nearly identical, it won’t break the bank: “We kept what was good and powerful in our logo — the unique and familiar shape and the warm yellow sun — but freshened up the look,” says Chris Trick, VP of marketing, “By preserving the shape of the logo we were able to keep signage replacement costs at a minimum since there is no need for franchisees to replace the physical signage container if still in good condition.” The old logo clearly needed a refresh, the dark frame made it feel like one of those motels where you could be murdered in your sleep or in the shower; the typography was uninviting and stodgy; and the sun looked more like a 50% off! starburst than an actual sun. Now it feels fresher — maybe too fresh? — and more inviting. But, funny, I still feel no connection.
Thanks to DesignMaven for the tip.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Josh P’s comment is:
I like it a lot...especially that typeface. It'll be interesting to see if they also update the interiors of their hotels to fit the new, brighter look.
On Mar.01.2007 at 02:43 PM
Jaypiddy’s comment is:
Vast improvement! The blue sky is a nice and logical choice for the colour that surrounds the sun. The logo feels alive and more inviting.
On Mar.01.2007 at 02:50 PM
Jacob’s comment is:
I agree - a vast improvement and very refreshing. Simply arching the line above the text worked wonders in conveying a horizon.
On another note, it's the first time I've spent more than 10 seconds looking at their old logo. That certainly says a lot.
On Mar.01.2007 at 02:53 PM
Nick Fruhling’s comment is:
Maybe too fresh? More like too rype...
Nick Fruhling’s comment is:
Or is that just a Canadian response?
On Mar.01.2007 at 02:55 PM
Bone’s comment is:
Nice.
But like you say... maybe too fresh?
Feels like a great ID for a dairy.
-Bone
On Mar.01.2007 at 03:01 PM
Splashman’s comment is:
Definitely a huge step forward, but that's not saying much. It's almost unthinkable that they stayed with the old one for so long.
Overall, I'm okay with the new logo. Not thrilled, but given the constraint of sticking with the old "container" shape, this is pretty good, and they could have done a lot worse. Since the container is, in fact, a bit different (top of rect is curved), I wonder how they're going to handle that with their signage. Bolt on two pieces? Wouldn't that be problematic with backlighting?
Not sure about the typeface; it's not bad, but I would have kept looking. I might have tried tighter kerning, but perhaps all the verticals in "Inn" would prevent it. I'd at least add a wee bit more space between the words.
The gratuitous reflection grates on me, but perhaps they were looking for a way to soften the reversed-out type a bit.
Compared to some of the other examples on this site, this one feels okay overall. No obvious WTFs. From me, that's high praise.
(To all the other commenters: Please, skip the predictable whining about it not being faxable. I'm sure they can crank out a faxable version.)
On Mar.01.2007 at 03:03 PM
Splashman’s comment is:
Nick, I could show you a hundred (or a thousand) other examples of a sun in a logo, some of which I've made myself. Give it a rest, eh?
On Mar.01.2007 at 03:06 PM
Nick Fruhling’s comment is:
Splashman, I'm aware of the sun logos out there, that was just my first reaction as a guy who grew up with and maybe drinks too much apple juice...
It just has more of a food packaging look to me than a hospitality feel.
On Mar.01.2007 at 03:23 PM
Paul Riehle’s comment is:
I do think it has moved forward in a better direction. Not as boring and impersonal. Aethetically the only thing that bugs me is the sensitivity to size for the "Days Inn" within the blue rectangle, I think a bit smaller on the name would help.
On Mar.01.2007 at 03:25 PM
pk’s comment is:
meh. styleless lateral move. like a plain person in a new pink shirt -- still plain, just decorated.
On Mar.01.2007 at 03:31 PM
Dale the Somewhat Merciless’s comment is:
Feels like a margarine brand to me..
On Mar.01.2007 at 05:04 PM
stock_illustration’s comment is:
I like it...much friendlier and approachable. It's amazing what can result from a number of relatively small changes to each of the elements within an existing (albeit slightly curved) framework. Not a fantastic logo, but miles ahead of the original.
On Mar.01.2007 at 05:48 PM
Andrew Dupont’s comment is:
Eesh. I hate it.
The original logo had grown outdated, yes, but it took 30 years for that to happen. This one will look outdated in five years.
All the subtleties of shading in the sun and the surrounding corona just dilute the logo's versatility. How does that logo look in grayscale? (Not as pressing of a concern these days, I know, but a hotel would need to print its logo in grayscale all the time.)
The lettering is horribly awkward. I keep squinting at it trying to figure out if the vertical scaling is off.
And the color palette is depressingly similar to those of La Quinta and Holiday Inn Express (two of its major competitors). At least the old logo was instantly recognizable and helped to differentiate the chain.
On Mar.01.2007 at 06:35 PM
Joe M’s comment is:
A disasterous explosion, viewed from a safe distance several kilometers offshore.
D-Days Inn.
On Mar.01.2007 at 07:33 PM
Andrew’s comment is:
Yeah, the redesign does feel very fresh, dairy fresh to be exact. Like a conglomerate of all the logos you see in the dairy case at your local grocer. It's good.
It calls to mind warm mornings with the aroma of waffles, scrabbled eggs, bacon, toast - what have you - wafting through the bedroom.
Is it too gradiated? Probably. But I like it. It can always be scaled-back when the gradients go out of style.
This logo makes me happy and it keeps my interest. I'm not leaving this site with the usual icky feeling in my gut as is the custom.
This is a great example of a simple, successful update. A logo that was practically invisible before is now modestly attractive.
Funny stuff Joe M.
On Mar.01.2007 at 09:05 PM
Munchausen’s comment is:
Am I the only one partial to the old one? It is simple, and the colors are instantly recognizable as Days Inn. All that was really necessary here was to maybe introduce a little curvature to the top of the rectangle and further type exploration. Do we really need to use gradients all the time? Does the descender on the y have to be so dangerously close to the edge? Forget about the fax issue, this mark is sure to reproduce very poorly at small sizes, you know, like on pillow mint wrappers.
On Mar.02.2007 at 12:48 AM
Seth Aldridge’s comment is:
I really like this design. It looks like a sports drink more than a hotel chain, but I still like how clean it looks and feels. Makes me feel more comfortable about having clean sheets when I check in.
On Mar.02.2007 at 01:45 AM
Christian Palino’s comment is:
What was a weak visual brand has gotten even weaker.
Avoinding a lengthy discussion of the poor qualities of its predecessor (boxed in graphic/type, starburst-sticker quality sun, bland typography), the new brand falls victim to the current trend of utilizing gradients and photoshop techniques to create a kind of mock-realism.
There is no lasting impression to this mark (in fact, I have to keep scrolling up the page to review it as I cant remember it or its details 30 seconds later!) that could be gotten by perhaps staying inside a one-color, or even two-color, parameter. Not to mention what will happen to this mark when it is utilized in a black and white newsprint advertisement for instance.
And in regards to the actual illustrative qualities, the strange eye-like appearance is angered by these peculiar, extremely long and sharp sun rays – to me, not friendly or inviting at all.
As for the rationale of keeping the overall shape to avoid overhead costs in implementation – I dont buy it. If they really feel that there is importance in updating and having a powerful brand, then applying a restraint like that is counter productive.
I would mark this one up as a step in the wrong direction and squandered resources.
On Mar.02.2007 at 05:08 AM
Joe M’s comment is:
Forget all the negativity and designy shop-talk. Let's think of the people that go to Days Inn.
When you are a middle-class business person traveling around the country selling insurance, or perhaps making speeches at AIGA Toledo, you must sleep at a discount hotelier. It's often either Days Inn or a creepy mom and pop with stains on every surface.
When you choose Days Inn you choose quick, easy, and cheap. And you bring certain expectations to the experience.
What you expect:
- no fancy die-cut menus
- no Kiehl's lavendar hand goo
- no ligatures or hanging punctuation
- no service with fancy hairdos and perfect teeth and pomegranate drink-offerings
- no signs of a corporate identity
What you hope for:
- a gentile smile and a dog-eared Bible
- a good nights sleep
- no high school beer parties
- ample insulation in the wall to squander the sounds of courtship
- a well-rationed, hearty continental breakfast
Have you ever woken up in the middle of Bloomington, Indiana at a at 6:15 am on a crisp clear morning? Your concerns are two-fold. Get breakfast, and get back on the road, keep moving.
You'll see the overwhelming glorious light and sky that is the logo when you pull on to the interstate, and hopefully put on some sunglasses.
The new Days Inn logo references a beautiful, morning culminating in a no-nonsense heartland breakfast.
On Mar.02.2007 at 09:46 AM
Josh B’s comment is:
I'll have to agree with Joe on this one. Designers can talk all they want about kerning and gradients, but the audience for this brand is the average guy or gal looking for a quiet, clean place to crash for the night... and maybe HBO too. And in the morning they want a cheese danish and some stong coffee before getting back on the road. For those folks, this new, web2.0ish logo will communicate that alot better.
Still, I can't help but think the old logo had a certain well-worn charm and simplicity that stood out among the long lines of illuminated, towering hotel signs by major highway exits. Even if it does have a sharky quality.
Or is that a bear trap?
On Mar.02.2007 at 11:01 AM
fatknuckle’s comment is:
On the whole it works quite well. Personally Id lose the light blue accents, they are a bit of a distraction, but do enhance the sunshine vibe. A little too much corner grocery, but nowadays we tend to go over the top because we feel that simplicity is just, well, too simple.
I think its great that they took into consideration the franchisees economic concerns of signage replacement, they could easily straighten that curvature or let the negative space be without losing equity in the mark.
Should travel well and overall a very good enhancement.
On Mar.02.2007 at 11:17 AM
Keith’s comment is:
It's funny, but I feel a bit sad to see this logo change, as ugly as it is. I have a personal connection from my early childhood to Days Inn, as one of my aunts once worked for a Days Inn in the early 70s, and we kids used to go swim in their pool. I have an emotional brand connection to the logo for that reason. Not sure if I've ever actually stayed in one of their hotels, but I think this shows how our minds can form bonds to brands for the most abstract reasons
On Mar.02.2007 at 11:28 AM
Darrel’s comment is:
Joe M nailed it. And pitched it well, too!
On Mar.02.2007 at 11:33 AM
Iris’s comment is:
Feels like a margarine brand to me..
The first thing I thought when I saw it was "butter".
It's definitely an improvement though.
On Mar.02.2007 at 11:34 AM
felix’s comment is:
great refresh.
do we know who is responsible?
I have Gettys Groupd for interiors. Alas, I harken for transparency.
On Mar.02.2007 at 12:04 PM
Von k’s comment is:
Compared with the old logo, this is a breath of fresh air.
Overall effect made me think of Country-Style foodstuffs--pancakes, OJ, milk, toast...
It says "simple, inexpensive comfort." The mark defies it's technical shortcomings by hitting the tone spot-on, IMO.
On Mar.02.2007 at 12:45 PM
Sketchee’s comment is:
I like the typeface, but the sun doesn't do much for me.. I kind of like the blue rays below the sun however
On Mar.02.2007 at 03:24 PM
Joe M’s comment is:
The majesty, promise and glory of the great west.
Von Glitschka’s comment is:
I've always thought the old mark was too dark and dreary. This new one is indeed fresh, clean and inviting. Nice work.
One area I wish they would have resolved better though is the space between the top of the 'D' in 'Days' and the edge of the motif. It's causing some tension where the negative space starts to pinch that area. But that's just creative nit picking on my part.
On Mar.02.2007 at 05:00 PM
Christian Palino’s comment is:
I am not buying this kind of simple people only appreciate simple things idea that seems to be being pitched by Joe M and Josh B.
Because I am a middle class business man or woman, or an average guy or gal looking for a quiet and clean place, I can't be affected by good design or perhaps appreciate it? My visual awareness and aesthetic sensabilities only run as high as web 2.0 gradients? …I don't think so.
Imagining that designers somehow are the only people capable of appreciating good design and responding to its affectiveness is a very limited perspective.
On Mar.02.2007 at 05:30 PM
Joe M’s comment is:
Christian,
It doesn't matter what theory or aesthetic preferences you as a literate designer "buy or don't buy."
Nobody goes to a hotel looking for a quiet clean piece,
they need quiet, clean rest. Not black and yellow explosive sound rest.
The logo either serves to communicate or remind us of that aspiration, or it diminishes it. The old logo was the latter.
Problem, solved.
On Mar.02.2007 at 05:44 PM
Armin’s comment is:
You can all talk the talk... But what you should really do is vote. The great blog, Strategic Name Development, is tallying the votes.
On Mar.02.2007 at 06:05 PM
Josh B’s comment is:
I am not buying this kind of simple people only appreciate simple things idea that seems to be being pitched by Joe M and Josh B.
I'm not buying the idea that simple = bad that Christian Palino is pitching. WTF is wrong with simple? Nevermind the fact that neither Joe M or I said that. If anything this new logo is less simple than the old one.
What we said was it communicated better what guests of the Days Inn want. Conceptually, it's sound. Any opinions about how well it's executed are just that... opinions.
On Mar.02.2007 at 06:41 PM
Kevin M. Scarbrough’s comment is:
I'm glad they kept the old shape and the sun symbol -- with such a radical change to the logo, it will likely help show the audience that this is the same hotel they used to stop at on road trips, et cetera.
On Mar.02.2007 at 08:06 PM
John Colucci’s comment is:
This is a amazing logo, it matches the brand perfectly and is a severely drastic update from it's old, tired, bored logo. Great job!
On Mar.02.2007 at 08:50 PM
Mary’s comment is:
I think that this is a huge improvement over their very drab black and yellow logo. My favorite improvement is certainly the use of blue! I do, however, agree with everyone's comments about it being reminiscent of butter or fruit.
I think that a company like this has to look at their options when it comes to redesign. On one hand, they saddled themselves with the sunshine a long, long time ago and to just drop that all-together and go with something new would be a hard road to re-pave. This business is also one that needs quicky & easy identification, even keeping that general shape can be important in a quick roadside ID. Not many people make reservations at the Days Inn -- you see in as you pass an interstate exit and say "Hey, I am tired and that'll work".
The other option is to build on what they started and try to improve their mark and branding in hopes that this fresh appearance will help them attract more customers. This way they can hold their heads up high knowing that they were never ashamed of their sunshine logo, but willing to take the steps needed to awaken their identity again.
On Mar.02.2007 at 08:54 PM
Mark’s comment is:
From far away it looks great but up close it looks okay but not as great.
It sorta works though, now I'm regretting my Days Inn has turned into a Quality Inn which means I won't be able to see the new signs anywhere close to me.
One things for sure I can't stop looking at this logo it almost fascinating to me, is this a good thing?
The SUN actually looks like a sun! and you get a good sense of high contrast from far away (look at the new logo from a distance from your computer).
I actually think this logo may work well on the signs!
I can imagined some interested motorists in awe of the new logos on the signs.
they'd be a bit curious at least.
On Mar.02.2007 at 10:28 PM
Joe Moran’s comment is:
Doesn't seem like they seriously explored their verbal/visual options. ( Or were asked not to. )
The gradients, colors and type are (yawn) tired.
The "Inn" is empty. Unfortunately.
VR/
On Mar.02.2007 at 10:38 PM
ToddTodd’s comment is:
Wow! A very nice update. I hope this new logo is around for a while.
On Mar.03.2007 at 03:01 AM
Christian Palino’s comment is:
What we said was it communicated better what guests of the Days Inn want. Conceptually, it's sound. Any opinions about how well it's executed are just that... opinions.
Yes, these are *opinions* about the brand – thus the purpose for this blog.
If the aspirations for Days Inn are "quick, easy and cheap" than the old brand was indeed that. If the new brand communicates those same principles, it does it in a tired way of adding trendy gradients to an already weak base.
The logo either serves to communicate or remind us of that aspiration, or it diminishes it. The old logo was the latter.
In fact, I agree that the old brand did not work well and that both its syntax and conceptual semantics were flawed. That being said, this new brand for me fails in the same places, the only difference being the use of trendy graphic elements that will fade quickly with time – thus rendering the brand anything but timeless (which I think is a descent aspiration for a brand like this). In which case, if the rebranding will fail quickly over time, the old brand had more equity in recognition.
On Mar.03.2007 at 05:50 AM
Armin’s comment is:
By now, you would think I would now how to create a link a not mess it up. Vote link from previous comment.
On Mar.03.2007 at 08:18 AM
kristen’s comment is:
This logo redesign reminds me of the Comfort Inn redesign.
While each of these redesigns helped to make the logo feel more current (less 70's-ish), I'm sure the logos will need to be revised/refreshed again in another decade or two. In the meantime, the logos work fine and were worthwhile changes. Neither the Days Inn or Comfort Inn logo would win a design award, but they do invigorate the overall brand identities enough, so each one looks like an affordable hotel instead of a cheap motel.
On Mar.03.2007 at 09:29 AM
Danny Tanner’s comment is:
Reminds me of the feeling I get when I walk into a Bob Evan's...like I want some eggs and sausage or two scoops of raisin bran. That could be a good thing. It most defiantly plays to ingrained kitsch American semantics.
The one thing I'm missing that I loved about the old identity is how it served as a beacon. That yellow sun on a dark color at night (when I usually pull into a roadside motel) was so unique in the myriad of strip mall signage etc. and identifiable from so far away (especially when I was pseudo lost squinting at a mapquest printout) that it would jump out whenever I happened to find it.
I doubt in signage that this new identity will have the same impact.
On Mar.03.2007 at 02:39 PM
Mitch’s comment is:
More Web 2.0 inspired silliness. The old graphic wasn't top notch, but it least it had a strong presence with out the need for gradients. Plus it looked like a Reese's cup, a positive...
I feel like I'm going to eat at some budget pancake house.
On Mar.03.2007 at 08:36 PM
humanot’s comment is:
Not a bad update, all things considered. I think its dependent on the supporting campaigns to make this a success or not (if there are any planned).
I'm thinking they should liscense some 'Mates of State' music and get some shots of happy people saving cash and jumping on beds in slow motion.
On Mar.09.2007 at 09:05 PM
Tselentis’s comment is:
Makes me think of margarine.
On Mar.12.2007 at 10:56 PM
eric strohl’s comment is:
Hmm... a missed opportunity.
I think the best example recently of a similar bungle is that of Burger King. Just when the children of the 70s were at a point to bring their kids to their favorite burger joint of yesteryear- they change the logo. Some might argue that the nostalgic strategy is misguided, yet the return of "the king" to commercials has been a brilliant success.
What does this have to do with Days Inn?
Plenty. I remember stops at Days Inn and Motel 6 in my childhood on long cross country trips with the family. Those simple iconic logos beaming from interstate exits miles away. You can't "fake" the equity and emotional quality that a time tested brand can.
Thats not to say that the old mark was a good one. Its not.
But it was a mistake to toss it.
On Mar.13.2007 at 12:38 PM
Bo’s comment is:
web 2.0... Oh how I loathe that saying. What the hell does it mean anyways?
I like the logo, I think it is appropriate and appealing for the intended audience... and that should be its purpose.
On Mar.14.2007 at 10:02 AM
Chechengirl’s comment is:
The typeface bothers me. If it was all caps it would have been better...either way the typeface really gets on my nerves.
The yellow long rays on top of it, also don't like good. They kill the strength of redesign. But in all true, anything in comparison with the old logo would have been better.
On Apr.02.2007 at 04:28 PM
Bobby Henderson’s comment is:
The new Days Inn logo is definitely more "pretty" than the old one.
I remember that sun element...when Columbia Pictures was using it around 20 years ago.
The type seems strange, like it has been stretched out and distorted. It's not the outright font murder I typically see from amateurs wielding a copy of CorelDRAW. But it still doesn't look natural. The letter stroke widths, particularly in the lowercase "a" and "s" seem out of balance.
If the Days Inn company was looking to "not break the bank" in terms of replacing sign faces, they're going to pay dearly anyway and may need to replace all the existing sign cabinets regardless of their original plans. The curved horizon element isn't going to fit with existing cabinets. Worse, the gradients used in the logo will require sign face graphics to be digitally printed rather than painted. Digitally printed graphics fade a lot faster than sign paints. The faces will have to be replaced more often. On top of that, most sign cabinets featuring digitally printed faces use flex face material rather than the vacuum formed and embossed plastics used by existing Days Inn sign cabinets. The retainer systems for flex face and vacuum formed face cabinets are very different. It can cost a lot to convert an existing cabinet to handle flex faces.
The logo's gradients make things even more tricky for smaller signs, window graphics and other kinds of displays. Vector graphics with solid fills will adapt to far more advertising purposes than any gradient-crazy graphic spat out of Photoshop.
On Apr.05.2007 at 11:55 AM
Daniel Vesma’s comment is:
hang on... THEY HAVE CHANGED THE SHAPE. Look at the shoulders. If I drive past that sign, and the shoulders are squared off with while slices then I shall certainly poke the graphic designer in the tummy (using my finger!) for not listening to the brief.
On Apr.30.2007 at 02:35 AM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
