NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
Jockey, the folks that invented men’s briefs in the 1930s have undergone a rebranding. What has traditionally been seen as a men’s underwear company (they didn’t start selling women’s undergarments until 1982) is now going gender-neutral. Their old logo was an actual horse jockey complete with cap although the name jockey was a reference to jock-strap which was the inspiration for their breakthrough underwear design.
The new logo is an attempt to be a bit more of a fashion brand and before reading about it, it seemed to me that the mark had a free and stretchy motion to it, almost like seeing someone twirl around from overhead. It also has a woolmark-like feel to it which is good and may have been a selling point when looking at competitors and analogous brands. The logotype also seems to have been rounded on the ends.
Jockey did try too hard to explain the logo. Instead of keeping it simple, they laundry-listed meanings which confused me more than provided clarity. Sometimes a nice mark just needs to be a nice mark. Here are a few meanings they attached to it:
1. symbolic representation of the science and math that we are applying in our product development to raise the bar on our 130-year-old commitment to comfort
2. symbolizes the brand’s global reach and pursuit of unity and harmony
3. The ring in the centre is a universal symbol for unity
4. The seeds of life, which emanate from the ring, are the universal symbol for fertility and were chosen to represent renewal
5. heritage of innovation, and we are carrying ourselves forward in the spirit of renewal
6. a spiral or barrel vault, a design that illustrates the universal ratios found throughout nature that Jockey designers are using as inspiration for prints and patterns
7. People from all cultures associate the number three with the triads
a. spirit-mind-body
b. art-science-religion
c. past-present-future
8. swirl icon embraces both the brand’s heritage of comfort and its growth into the future
Did you get all that? Read it again if you like. Ok, so this over the top but they meant well. Sometimes over-explaining design is necessary to sell everyone in the room but once they settled on a design, they should have burned this document. Once a brand launches, press releases don’t matter.
The home page of the website, as of now, focuses on women which makes it easier to connect to fashion and change brand perceptions. Men in briefs generally talks more about utility and athletics.
Jockey’s in-home direct sales company, Jockey Person to Person, and their post-adoption family support organization, Jockey Being Family, have also adopted versions of the new identity.
As with many consumer brands, the rebranding here focuses on many aspects of communication. The logo is just one part. More important is the way they talk about themselves as a brand and company, what their packaging looks like, what their website looks like and how their products perform.
Lesson (I find myself repeating many times a week):
While no single touchpoint of a brand (logo, website, print literature, the way you answer the phone, etc. ) needs to overtly represent a brand idea, when you add them all up they should lead you to the idea. Meaning, if you want a brand to appear fun, the logo doesn’t necessarily need to look fun, nor do the company uniforms. However when a consumer experiences that brand, they better feel like its a fun brand or else you didn’t communicate the right things.
So, while the logo isn’t overly communicative, it does signal change and when I go to the website and, I imagine, one of their retail stores, I get it. Good job.
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Jeff Stevens’s comment is:
The Seeds of Life?
On Feb.08.2007 at 09:41 AM
richard’s comment is:
WOW! That sure is a whole lot of technical mumbo jumbo. Me thinks they may be trying to hard to convince themselves. "the science and math" of underwear? the three triads? like the father, son and holy spirit? really? that is a bit of a "stretch," pun intended!
On Feb.08.2007 at 09:56 AM
jenn.suz.hoy’s comment is:
Maybe it's because it is such a drastic change, but I find the over-abstraction of ideas in place of a symbolic logo, at this point, a bit jarring. I do appreciate the similarities in the wordmark, I think it will help the change go over more smoothly than trying something completely brand new.
I suppose what I see most jarring about the overall presentation of materials displayed here, is that it is not just a cross-over to a genderless brand, but they appear to be trying to make up for years of not providing the world with women's products. The logo, representing seeds of fertility (among other things) has a flower-esque shape to it. The photos of women on the website, and the Person to Person site. The soft approach to Jockey Being Family. It all appears to try to appeal to women more than a genderless audience.
On Feb.08.2007 at 10:18 AM
Josh B’s comment is:
I have to admit, I don't get it. It's a fine little mark, but I don't see what it has to do with underwear. It looks more like a weather map icon for a hurricane.
And speaking strictly about the execution, compared to the word JOCKEY, the mark feels too small, too close to it, and the line weights feel wimpy. When I look at that lockup, all I see is the type, and then i notice there's a pesky little gnat floating above it.
They should have just eliminated the jockey icon and stuck with the wordmark alone. As neutral as it is, it has plenty of equity and recognizability, and I say that as someone who's never even bought their wares.
On Feb.08.2007 at 11:05 AM
Bubba’s comment is:
Where's the idea?????????????????
On Feb.08.2007 at 11:07 AM
Paully D.’s comment is:
It reminds me of the bottom of toilet where the water is making a swirly after you've taken a poop.
On Feb.08.2007 at 11:17 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
I think they went a little too abstract here, the only thing I can vaguely make out of the new symbol is that maybe its a windmill of horse whips. The feeling and look does seem like its "supposed" to resemble something. But once I stop trying to figure out what I am looking at all I can see is that the symbol is just plain ugly.
On Feb.08.2007 at 11:24 AM
Paul Riehle’s comment is:
whoooppps, forgot to put in my info, anonymous is me.
On Feb.08.2007 at 11:35 AM
Maria’s comment is:
What a weird "solution". The abstarction looks like a flower when the name is TOTALLY masculine. I think it contradicts the brand but maybe they are trying to keep the name and reach other audiences.
On Feb.08.2007 at 11:45 AM
pnk’s comment is:
Why redesign the symbol at all? If becoming a more gender-neutral brand was the main driver, why not just use the recognizable wordmark as your main asset? (Or is it, as Maria suggests, simply too masculine a word? And if so, does the spiral flower really do enough to address that?)
On Feb.08.2007 at 12:41 PM
stock_illustration’s comment is:
I think they've now gone the other way...from a masculine to a feminine look. If they are targeting women and needed to soften their image, this is a good move, I suppose, but the new mark does nothing for me. Technically, it appears very weak when paired with the name. The old mark held its own visually, but this looks tacked on and thin, IMO.
On Feb.08.2007 at 12:46 PM
Maria’s comment is:
In my opinion they don't have to look soft to appeal to women, that is if they are about being a utilitarian brand they just have to make sense. I would use the hat or other "jockey" signifier that can be used by both males and females. But an abstraction just dilutes the utilitarian weight of the brand. Think in the polo logo...it works fine for all people.
On Feb.08.2007 at 01:37 PM
Gene Cowan’s comment is:
Hmm. I think I would just have dumped the logo mark altogether and stuck with a logotype instead -- the Jockey text is, in my opinion, far more recognizable than the symbol; and I think this new design has swung too far into the feminine market. With this one change, Jockey has positioned itself as a women's apparel manufacturer and I can't imagine that men will be purchasing underwear with that swirly, feminine mark on it.
On Feb.08.2007 at 01:53 PM
5000!’s comment is:
I'll second the very first post from Jeff...the seeds of life?! That's the last thing I think a brand traditionally associated with men's undergarmets should be talking about in their branding.
On the other hand, maybe it's so crazy it's genius.
On Feb.08.2007 at 01:56 PM
Anna’s comment is:
The logo looks threatening to me, it reminds me too much of the hazardous waste symbol...even if you stick a heart on top of it.
On Feb.08.2007 at 01:56 PM
R. Reeves’s comment is:
I see a flower crossed with a biohazard warning.
On Feb.08.2007 at 02:04 PM
ManxStef’s comment is:
It's very triskelion, isn't it?
The last brand that I remember using a similar mark is Razer, who make peripherals for PC gamers.
On Feb.08.2007 at 03:16 PM
felix’s comment is:
whew.
i can understand the rebrand... maybe this will grow on me... but the type/ logo lockup isn'nt fitted properly. too feminine. needs to be spun to a relaxed position to actually feel comfortable. my pal Tom Vasquez used to handle Jockey @ Cyclops. Maybe he'll chime in with some knowledge...
On Feb.08.2007 at 04:45 PM
Mary’s comment is:
I think they could have just stuck with a wordmark only approach to the rebranding. I think it is an visually appealing mark, but I don't think it accomplishes what they wanted it to. The mark and the brand name go in two different directions. But, to their credit, it is a very hard task to take something as strongly masculine as JOCKY and make it neutral.
On Feb.08.2007 at 05:14 PM
thomas vasquez’s comment is:
this logo is awful... i told them so back when they provided it for us ( i was the creative director over some of their print advertising at the time - 2003). they hired some outside 'harmony' consultant to review their image and he sold them on some elementary BS pt. of view (circles convey 'wholeness', the color blue represents opportunity like - the color of the sky', blah, blah, blah) anyway, their s.minded head of mktg at the time ate it up. (remember, they're based out of Kenosha, Wisconsin! - once after a presentation they offered to take us out to the 'best chinese restaurant in Kenosha!' i don't have to tell you THAT tasted). I remember meeting the consultant for the first time and he had a mullet, was wearing kahki shorts and a silk hawaiin shirt! (with flip flops - no joke). This was his design.
They actually commissioned from him an entire set of new-age inspired icons. who knows, but i think that they might be rolling out a few of those down the road at some point. ouch.
Feldhouse’s comment is:
Wow, click on the press release and you'll see the logo distorted: smushed. Not a great way to start out your press release about the new logo. [0/1]
I don't even know where to start, but the typography is abominable. The baseline is all messed up because of the beveling of the letters. [0/2]
The iconic mark doesn't even clarify the brand. It doesn't represent Jockey in any sort of way. In fact, I'm more confused looking at the mark than I am looking at the new at&t mark. I'm not saying they had to take an obvious route here, but I think the talk about science and seeds of life are all BS. It sounds like a designer came up with this sketch, thought it was a great thing, and then made a story around it to lure Jockey to believing it. Couple that with Jockey's desire to swing their auidence, they ate it up. [0/3]
Do we know which firm (if a firm) or art directors/designers created this? I'm half tempted to say Futurebrand, but that would just be mean.
On Feb.08.2007 at 05:26 PM
Splashman’s comment is:
Feldhouse, I don't think you can blame the squished logo on Jockey -- "Inside Retailing Online" is the culprit here.
A few comments:
1) The concept: Jockey wants to have their cake and eat it too. They want to keep the Jockey name (pretty darn masculine), but soften it visually. The result? Cognitive dissonance. Like a pink hammer.
2) The softened letterforms: As already mentioned, it screwed up the baseline. It's like they knocked off the edges of the letterforms and said "Good!" I can see the intern doing this, but didn't anybody in the approval chain know typography?
3) The symbol: From distinctive to generic. Good job.
4) The rationalization: Boy, you just can't make this stuff up. "Seeds of life" made my eyes roll so far back I can see my own optic nerve.
On Feb.08.2007 at 07:11 PM
Darrel’s comment is:
"I remember meeting the consultant for the first time and he had a mullet, was wearing kahki shorts and a silk hawaiin shirt!"
Good for him. ;o)
On Feb.09.2007 at 09:46 AM
C-lo’s comment is:
So basically I should keep the "seeds of life" around my groin?
It's very disconnected from the letters. Looks like the peas and mashed potatoes got together. I see three little whips not a flower or a seed growing. Maybe an automatic whipping machine to replace a jockey in the next derby. But if it's to be a flower or wahtever, then it would be more suitable for just the ladies section of unmentionables.
On Feb.09.2007 at 01:40 PM
Von Glitschka’s comment is:
Bryan Wootan’s comment is:
It appears to me that they have deviated so far from the masculine logo to cater to women, that it has diffused it's power. Rounding off the corners ever so slightly and adding in the spinning flower of love makes me uncomfortable to say the least.
The science behind it all was probably the most confusing explanation I have ever had the priviledge of reading. "Seeds of life" floored me. Exactly whose seeds are we talking about here, and that is much too much information to be putting on underwear. Please keep your seeds to yourself if you happen to be wearing this brand.
I think that leaving the type by itself would have been a superior choice. I personally would have issues with buying anything with this mark on it. It is a little too "sensitive" for a man like myself to want to wear, even if it is only seen by a very select group of people.
On Feb.09.2007 at 05:01 PM
stock_illustration’s comment is:
LOL Von...Look out, the forecast shows the SEEDS OF LIFE destined to make landfall! Everyone put on their underwear and take cover!
On Feb.09.2007 at 07:25 PM
hyun’s comment is:
Are those curves supposed to be J's?
On Feb.09.2007 at 10:20 PM
deelaina’s comment is:
Yep, reminded me of the hazardous waste symbol and tornadoes.
And when are companies going to realize that line extension of their brand name to sub-brands JUST DOESN'T WORK? They would have been better off giving their in-home direct sales company (Jockey Person to Person) its own unique name. Line extension - in most cases - just wears the parent brand too thin.
On Feb.09.2007 at 10:41 PM
Munchausen’s comment is:
I'm pretty sure aliens designed this logo, since after all it is clearly a crop circle. In seriousness, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the weight of the mark in stark contrast to the typography. Sheer atrocity. Speaking of inconsistency, if you are going to ill-advisedly round off the corners in your type - at least have the decency to use the same radii throughout (just look at that E)! I need a shower.
On Feb.10.2007 at 12:14 AM
Mark.S.’s comment is:
What the…?
Another logo has gone under the knife to look like a bad version of a celebrity.
Go on! Google Mickey Rourke-images and see what I mean!
For f**k's sake!
Bubba-Where's the idea? Indeed!
Von Glitschka-Right on!
I've shed a tear!
On Feb.10.2007 at 08:10 AM
ToddTodd’s comment is:
I dont like the new symbol but the font is okay, overall though I still like the previous logo better.
On Feb.13.2007 at 03:28 PM
DesignMaven----The Hostile Takeover of Corporate Identity’s comment is:
David:
I know you're talking about the MOTION in the Woolmark Identity Developed and Designed by Franceso Seraglio.
The Woolmark Identity in and of itself is Breathtaking and should only be compared to Identities of Equal Statue such as Landor's Cotton Identity. Both Identities have endured and are Milestones in Identity Development, Design and History.
--------------------------------------------------
For as long as I can Remember THE JOCKEY Identity was the most OMNIPOTENT of all the Men undergarment Brands.
Only Fruit of the Loom Equaled JOCKEY as an Iconic Brand, referencing the Pictogram.
While Hanes and BVD were perhaps better made Brands; they were Identified by an appropriate Signature and Monogram.
I remember the Hanes Identity update from a Signature enclosed in a square, to a slightly modified square resembling a wavy flag or banner with Signature kept in tact.
If memory serve me correctly Landor is responsible for the current Hanes Identity Revitalization.
If JOCKEY wanted to update or revitalized their Identity.
The Equity is in the Name.
The Original JOCKEY Identity was OMNIPOTENT enough to Identify the Brand without the Signature.
This new Whatcha-Ma-Call-it over the Jockey Signature serve only to Disgrace the Brand Proud Heritage and our Profession as Identity Designers.
Lipstick on a PIG is more Meaningful and AESTHETICALLY Pleasing???!!!
DM
On Feb.14.2007 at 02:50 PM
David E.’s comment is:
I thought this icon might represent something when I first saw it...come to find out that it doesnt. Well at least it looks "gender neutral"...of course, they've accomplished this by being completely "idea neutral" as well. I'm not opposed to completely abstract icons, but this one has no real grace or beauty.
On Feb.15.2007 at 01:20 PM
Jennifer’s comment is:
Hmmmm, do you think maybe Jockey was trying to do something new and think outside the box alittle on this one? Maybe we should give them some credit for taking a risk and not sitting back and doing what everyone else is doing. Sounds like a lot of your complaints are unfounded! Do you have nothing better to do with your time...seriously people!
On Feb.23.2007 at 11:33 AM
Jeff Fisher LogoMotives’s comment is:
That icon looks a little too dangerous to be placed anywhere near my "family jewels."
On Apr.04.2007 at 06:03 PM
Mark’s comment is:
This proves that Jockey doesn't need a silly symbol anymore, the name itself could work fine in that typeface as a wordmark.
On Jun.18.2007 at 05:05 PM
The Logo Represents ......’s comment is:
Challenge the truth!
This may be hard for some to believe but the logo represents an allegiance to satanism. The circle in the middle represents infinity. The other characters are 3 sixes (666) as you know is the mark of the beast. three 6s around the circle represents forever satan.
They confusing description by the company as to the meaning of the new logo is to confuse us so we do not see the obvious satanic symbol.
open your mind and see other company satanic logos and symbolisms all over the world so please google these terms "owl on dollar" "north american union" "amero" "satanic hand signals" (where you will see that world leaders all flash the same sign) "illuminati" "new world order" - it is real and it is happening - we all need to wake up ..
On Dec.25.2007 at 08:49 PM
Katrina’s comment is:
Come out of your metro,fake-oxygen-infested, self-postulating bubbles, oh infinitely cemented souls and seek the simplicity behind what's really going on here...the fact you're all contemplating something as simple as a swirl makes me gag.
Know the product = know the logo. Please get a life!
Whatever a company does to change or rebrand is completely up to it. Do something worth while with your time!
On Mar.12.2008 at 03:57 PM
XPADREX’s comment is:
This must be an advocacy group for disc jockeys, eh? Hence the log eerily reminiscent of a .45 record adapter. (Whoops- dating m'self a wee bit).
On Apr.09.2008 at 12:56 PM
Alison Tyndall’s comment is:
This symbol looks very familiar, THE 666 on the head of the Antichrist in the original movie Omen with Gregory Peck except it did not have a circle in the middle. If I was a Satan worshipper, this symbol would be the classic way to go.
On Dec.17.2008 at 06:29 AM
pablo’s comment is:
well, yes it is three 6's surrounding a circle, also symbol for fire, symbol of the divine feminine spirit in paganism, as well as the world serpent ( ourobouros ) which is the symbol of the universe..... so, just what is Jockey doing with this rebranding, and who within the company are making these choices? anyone know what sigils are? if you are into branding, check out sigils, and ask your self, gee, how can i use sigils to rebrand my own life? make my own reality? challenge those companys which would shit all over the entire landscape with their ode's to satan, saturn, Kronos, the great owl, etc. before we all wind up like one of my customers, she walked into my store wearing a nose piercing. it was the nike swoosh and the word NIKE under it.. on her face... on her nose ( it was big too).
nothing is forbidden. everything is permitted!
JeffT’s comment is:
It seems its not just me who misses the indexical relationship with an actual jockey. Same goes for the Stop and Shop lights.
On May.05.2009 at 11:59 PM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
