NOTE: This is an archived version of the first incarnation of Brand New.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.
At its Spring upfront — basically when networks present their new programming, sell big chunks of advertising and announce any major changes — the 16-year-old Sci Fi Channel announced that on July 7 it will change its name and identity to Syfy. The reported driving reason for the change was the fact that “Sci Fi” was not something that the channel could own or copyright as it describes a genre that anyone else can use as a descriptor. But by changing its name to something that is phonetically identical yet spelled like a 3-year-old text messaging, it can become wholly ownable and mutated (pun intended) across different ventures like Syfy Games, Syfy Films and Syfy Kids.
By changing the name to Syfy, which remains phonetically identical, the new brand broadens perceptions and embraces a wider and more diverse range of imagination-based entertainment including fantasy, paranormal, reality, mystery, action and adventure, as well as science fiction. It also positions the brand for future growth by creating an ownable trademark that can travel easily with consumers across new media and non-linear digital platforms, new international channels and extend into new business ventures.
— Press Release
Here is where things get tricky: Syfy says that they wanted a new name that would broaden the perception of the channel beyond UFOs and Battlestar Galactica and all things Sci Fi (i.e., its intrinsic relation to geeks, dweebs, and spazzes; or Star Trek conventions) but by emphasizing how the new name is exactly like the old name, well, it’s still Sci Fi no matter how you spell it. It’s hard to spin a story both ways: “It’s the same, but different!” The name, apparently, wasn’t easy to come by:
The network worked with the branding consultancy Landor Associates and went through about 300 possibilities before selecting Syfy.
— TV Week article
So, there is the name issue, where I very much understand the reasoning behind the change: When you can’t own your own brand, you don’t own anything. Landor is credited with the naming, but there is no mention if they did the new wordmark, so I am thinking it was developed by Syfy’s in-house team. Pending any amazing on-air applications this is pretty conservative for such a bold channel with such a great theme. The old Saturn logo is still one of my favorite reductive logos and it behaved amazingly on screen. The new, Chalet-ish wordmark is perhaps as generic as the genre descriptor it was trying to avoid and it is too close for comfort with the Science Channel’s update. But more importantly, the new logo and naming seems like an exercise in stripping away elements, leaving Syfy as an empty shell and removing any sense of mystery the original name conjured.
Thanks to Jon Selikoff for first tip (and, man, were there many).
Jump to Most Recent Comment
Jeff’s comment is:
"Fantasy, paranormal, reality, mystery, action and adventure, as well as science fiction."
In other words, just one of many generic catch-all cable channels.
When the Science Fiction and Horror Channel launched in the early 90's, it had a dedicated niche market. It's grown of that to a mishmash or reality shows, low budget creature flicks, Professional Wrestling, and an encore station for movies unrelated to its premise (Braveheart, Cape Fear). The only solid night of science fiction programming it has had for years is Friday nights, which is still considered the night where Shows Go to Die.
Branding isn't this network's problem. Not having a sense of self is.
Also, when I showed my wife the new name, she sayed "As in 'syphillus'?".
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:07 AM
Tomasz Ronda’s comment is:
I cant say that I like it. I don't like type, it does not have any character. And word itself, well... in Polish language its plural of 'syf' which means 'shit, syphilis, junk, crap' etc. Not many of my friends will say 'lets go home watch syfy' :)
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:37 AM
honkhonk’s comment is:
errrr.. so after all the ambient occlusion overkill in motion graphics over the last year now we get physical sun+sky default settings?
i surely hope this wont be the final look of the logo.
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:38 AM
matt’s comment is:
I realize that I might be a little naive when it comes to trademark laws - but as far as I know, there is only one 'The SciFi Channel' that anyone refers to by that name, and the generic nature of that name doesn't extend to the (now old) logo - they can still claim that as their own.
So they take all the recognition and character of the old one, and trade it for... a weird up-down-up-down-shaped four-letter nonsense word? Why go through the trouble of teaching their existing audience to recognize the new identity? And will the new logo and name pull in potential viewers, when it barely even hints at the subject matter?
As I see it, they're both communicative, and they both have character - but the old one says 'sci-fi', and the new one says 'syfy'. Which of those two would you guess is the logo for 'The SciFi Channel'?
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:44 AM
Eric’s comment is:
I may be over-reacting slightly, but this rebrand left me feeling nauseous. I understand the need for a name-change when copyrighting is impossible, but for the love of all things geeky, why this push to get away from the geeks?? As I tweeted to Landor, geeks are very loyal customers, until they are offended by a name like SyFy.
Syfy, to me, means that you want us to be friends, but you don't want anyone to see us hanging out. It's like you changed your name because you were embarrassed of being associated with the likes of me and my kind.
Why are geeks so shun-worthy? They're loyal, have plenty of spare time, and many of them are really freaking rich.
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:47 AM
Michael Wincott’s comment is:
Inspired by the name of Simon Cowell's company - Syco?
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:49 AM
matt’s comment is:
I wanted to second Eric’s comment, by the way - I was going to mention the move away from the geekiness of 'sci-fi' and how it might alienate those who have found comfort and community in their status as a 'sci-fi nerd', but I wasn't sure if I was being overly analytical.
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:52 AM
MadamePlaid’s comment is:
Jeff's comments are spot on. The SciFi channel has lost itself and by changing its name to SyFy they've made it official. In addition, SciFi channel now joins that pantheon of distinguished brands (usually on the downscale side of things, like Quik Mart, Rite Aid) that feels it must resort to "creative" misspelling to (dubiously) stand out. And the execution of the mark isn't helping things either.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:08 AM
MadamePlaid’s comment is:
I'd also like to second Eric's comments. As a proud SciFi geek myself, I'm offended.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:11 AM
Joe’s comment is:
'By changing the name to Syfy, which remains phonetically identical'
I'm sorry but I think they will find that this is not phonetically the same.
How do you pronounce 'symbol', 'symmetry' and 'syphilis' as Jeff's wife correctly, but unfortunately spotted.
It's perhaps a good idea to do some market research on how a new name be interpreted before jumping to assumptions and launching it.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:15 AM
Joe’s comment is:
'By changing the name to Syfy, which remains phonetically identical'
I'm sorry but I think they will find that this is not phonetically the same.
How do you pronounce 'symbol', 'symmetry' and 'syphilis' as Jeff's wife correctly, but unfortunately spotted.
It's perhaps a good idea to do some market research on how a new name be interpreted before jumping to assumptions and launching it.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:15 AM
Josh’s comment is:
No comment on the name change, but I like the execution on the word mark, it's tight and even with a really nice space under the yfy connection. I do wish they had kept the saturn image with it, but maybe it will get reattached somewhere along the line.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:21 AM
tim’s comment is:
They've gone and thrown away every bit of brand equity they've built up over the years. In my mind, I don't hear this word as sounding like 'Sci Fi,' it sounds like 'Siffy.' If I had seen the new logo design on its own without being told what business it is for, I would have thought it was for some nondescript company in some suburban office park anywhere in America. Jeff's "not having a sense of self" comment is spot on.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:23 AM
SeeingI’s comment is:
"Imagine Greater"? "Imagine Grammar," more like.
In the "Times" there was a quote saying that one comment card read "If I were texting, this is how I would spell it." I'd bet cash money that's the comment that sealed the deal on this new name.
The Sci Fi Channel has suffered from a lack of identity for years, shunning actual science fiction programming for wrestling (!?) and films about low-res CGI monsters terrorizing buff babes. At every turn they denigrate the science fiction genre and fanbase, which makes one wonder why they even exist, if they are so desperate to distance themselves from their supposed core audience.
Once the excellent "Battlestar Galactica" is done, with no new episodes of "Stargate" forthcoming and "Doctor Who" on hiatus until 2010, they'll have no tent-pole to hang their identity on, and it's surely no coincidence that they roll out this new ident the very week BSG airs its final episode.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:30 AM
Kyle’s comment is:
I know the Sci-Fi fans are up in arms, but I like it. Sci-Fi hasn't been "science fiction" for many years and trying to explain a branding change to those fans is extremely difficult. (Insert argument about whether Batman could be Superman, Star Wars versus Lord of the Rings, etc;.)
It's a case study in changing the relationship with your customers. Science fiction fans typically are very loyal to a specific genre or niche of science fiction. Anything that challenges that loyalty will almost always get you trouble - regardless of the media or format.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:34 AM
Meryl Friedman’s comment is:
This seems to have the same level of meaning and brand speak behind it as the Animal Planet logo. I am mystified how these things make sense to the people approving these changes. Corporate Kool-Aid? The Animal Planet logo has never grown on me (it looks like the Ransom Letter channel) and I find this logo just as weird (tho not quite as ugly, just boring.)
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:34 AM
Erik’s comment is:
I appreciate the simplicity SyFy vs. SciFy. The repetition of the y works well from a visual standpoint.
However, I haven't come to any final conclusion as to whether the rebrand was a good idea for the audience. I'm just not making the connection with the new look and the audience.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:39 AM
Philip Pietri’s comment is:
Syfy brings you a wide variety of graphic shows and made for television movies stuffed with poor quality cgi and soap opera grade acting. Syfy is also a wide distributor of generic food items, clothes, toys, electronics and sports paraphernalia.
Identity = lost. I agree at least keeping the little planet would help retain some of the equity built in the previous logo. I hate bulky fat letters. Does nothing for me outside of recalling font use in the late 80's.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:42 AM
Jacob’s comment is:
I don't have any deep thoughts on the name change or the new design, but I question the need for the tagline. "Imagine Greater." It just doesn't work for me. More broadly, why do so many brands now feel that they need to plaster on a short tagline? It's getting tiresome.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:45 AM
Anonymous’s comment is:
Ugh, why do brands keep abandoning their instantly recognizable logos?! That Saturn logo was just great in practice, and now it's just boring and generic like dozens of other networks. I don't really care about the name change though, they could have renamed themselves "SKiffy" for all I care.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:45 AM
L.Vazquez’s comment is:
Other than airing the new Doctor Who seasons, the Sci-Fi channel is pretty useless, and it has been for a very long time.
Kyle... I am a science fiction fan, and I want a channel that's dedicated to science fiction to take me away from my world for a while and, frighten me, mystify me (and MST3K ME), and most of all inspire me. This branding change doesn't do that.
I'll accept a branding change if it was made for the BETTER. Clearly the Scifi Channel (or SyFy or what ever the hell) is not headed in that direction (ECW Wrestling, anyone?)
I know this turned into a rant about how bad the SciyFiy Channel is, so I'll just say that I agree with Armin.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:48 AM
Filipe’s comment is:
The new logo lacks the good things the old logo had: character and connection to the subject. The old logo was great, with some touches of retro look, and of course was related to the subject. They traded that to a weird name, a ordinary font and a really cheap 3D render. Bad move, IMO
On Mar.17.2009 at 09:04 AM
Dale Campbell’s comment is:
Strictly speaking of identity, I think it's actually pretty awesome. Those "y"s are pretty cool!
And I don't think the SyFy channel is a bad channel -as a matter of fact I don't even like that genre. I think it's a matter of personal tastes. I don't particularly like racing, cars and trucks, but you don't hear me saying that the Speed Channel blows.
Overall, I think that there is a huge amount of potential with the new identity. I very much look forward to how it plays out.
Keep well,
Dale
Jonathan’s comment is:
The brand was actually in double trouble. The name was a genre, and the logo was a car manufacturer. So even though I don't exactly like seeing the work "SyFy" I guess it was a step in the right direction as far as establishing brand.
On Mar.17.2009 at 09:10 AM
Michael’s comment is:
I personally don't mind the change; I read sci-fi when I saw it (like syfer). On it's own it might be kind of dull, but broadcast logos rarely are seen without some sort of animation going on with them or around them I have faith they will be able to pull it off.
I think it was necessary for them to present a somewhat ambiguous logo if they do plan or broadening their range.
I'm hoping they pull off a change in quality along the lines of the USA network. Right now other than BSG, Eureka, Dr. Who (not theirs) and old Star Trek TNG (reruns) their programming is pretty bad.
On Mar.17.2009 at 09:14 AM
Maya’s comment is:
I am curious to know what the 299 rejected names were. Perhaps I could understand this one better if I knew that "Spooky Channel" had been in the running.
The word mark itself seems more suited to a pharmaceutical company than a creative Sci-fi network.
On Mar.17.2009 at 09:35 AM
Greg’s comment is:
Sigh Fy
On Mar.17.2009 at 09:41 AM
Gene’s comment is:
Landor forgot to capitalize the darn "f" in Syfy!
Even MSNBC (the same network that owns SciFi) made the mistake of capitalizing the "f".
On Mar.17.2009 at 10:01 AM
Antonio’s comment is:
I personally love the name change and the new visual identity. It's fresh and modern and doesn't feel geeky at all, one of the main reasons why I never switch to that channel. I'm too afraid that I'll catch an episode of Battlestar Galactic. Hopefully this means some awesome new programming. Well done.
On Mar.17.2009 at 10:38 AM
Mike’s comment is:
The word itself just doesn't convey sci-fi to me, maybe because visually it's so different. Or paranormal or fantasy or mystery or action-adventure. I agree with Maya about knowing what the rejected options were.
Maybe it might make more sense when you see the new logo (and tag line) when they show little scenes where strange things happen (woman pricks her finger on a thorn and bursts, guy grows wings and flies over a crowd of people). But as far as the word itself it's just not the same.
Erik’s comment is:
I am not averse to rebranding and I wasn't crazy about the previous logo (the stylized Saturn looked a bit too much like any random internet start=up logo), but I think this was a mistake nonetheless.
I would NEVER think that Syfy is pronounced Sci-Fi. Siffy, perhaps, but not Sci-fi. When people are scanning their channel guides, I really don't think they're going to make the Syfy=SciFi connection. If they had done something to separate Sy and fy and create the pause between the two syllables, like Sy-fy or Sy.fy, it would have worked better.
On Mar.17.2009 at 10:53 AM
alexandra’s comment is:
Hmm. It took me a moment to put together what I was looking at; I'm not familiar with the old logo, and the new one looks like maybe an office supply or copy center marque. Or maybe a pharmaceutical company (there is something pill-like about it, no?)
And "imagine greater" sounds to me like a rehash of "think different."
Nothing about it reads as really awful, but for the genre, it misses every opportunity to be surprising, fantastic, imaginative or even a tiny bit clever.
As others have pointed out, maybe there will be some awesome motion graphics to make this a little more "wow." It can certainly be done; let's see it!
On Mar.17.2009 at 10:53 AM
Carlo’s comment is:
WHAT?
If they needed to strip their name of its geekness ("sci" immediately identified the importance of "science" to their target audience); then the LAST THING they should be thinking is to also strip the visual mark of its geekness (the slickified Saturn logo). The Saturn mark was perfect, it oozed the concept of "imagine greater" without having to say it.
Joseph Maguire’s comment is:
I am saddened by this identity change. I get it. Change the brand to something younger reach a younger audience but what happened to my scifi channel. The work done by dixon baxi was stellar I loved it. It was a cross between twilight zone and star trek. This new mark Syfy is feminine looking, are they trying to capture a larger female audience what are their real goals of this rebranding. I am disapointed, and I think their explanation of them not being able to protect their brand is a lousey one. They've grown to this point that anything that uses their identity as it is would have to be approved by them but no one expects the word to lower the value if anything the word being used to describe a genre would put a light on in your brain that your talking about the scifi channel. Oh well. Dixon Baxi rocked the prior mark, change is always on the horizon.
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:00 AM
Josh’s comment is:
While I understand the reasoning and truly believe the old identity was in major need of a redesign, this feels like a good idea that is not yet resolved.
I like the new typeface, but there is no logo to anchor your brand to. With so much great imagery associated with the brand, imagine the possible great logos. Think of how important and well used network logos are: NBC peacock, CBS eye, Canadian CBC...etc. With this rebrand, there is little left to hang your hat on.
The word change seems also unfinished somehow. I'm picturing an unfortunate pitch relating 'kids' and 'texting'. Maybe there was a better word to attach to this, a better phonetic mixup?
Overall: some good design choices, with an unfinished strategy, which feels bare at this point. Hopefully some fancy execution can fix it? Maybe a really great logo?
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:01 AM
Samantha Armacost’s comment is:
I received notice of this via Twitter yesterday, and actually checked the date to make sure it wasn't April 1st.
It seems that they are trying to be a channel for everyone, and in the end will just alienate their fans.
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:13 AM
Amanda B’s comment is:
By making their new identity completely bland and unremarkable the "Syfy" channel is limiting their reach to new viewers while isolating their core audience at the same time. This logo does not represent Science Fiction to me... or reality, fantasy, action or adventure for that matter.
I also read it as "siffy" on first glance. Definitely not phonetically identical.
Overall a disappointing and confusing rebranding.
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:22 AM
Alex Jones’s comment is:
This is an odd change. I don't see the point in it to be honest. I've been a fan of SciFi for years. I've loved watching Scare Tactics, Ghost Hunters, Twilight Zone reruns, etc. The one thing I always loved about the channel was its name and logo, it is a great design, and made itself unique. This change isn't going to grow on me for a while...
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:22 AM
fakar’s comment is:
A good move for branding folks, like it or not... A good brand can be licensed on goods and they concluded that they could not protect or own the brand that they were building... so rather than support a failing concept they revised it so something that they could control. Everyone will move past the initial dislike and will come to terms with it.
Look for licensed SyFy® items galore at the next Comicon!
Not that I am a fan of the new type style... I also wish that they would have kept the saturn icon so that the new brand would have been a better continuation. Looks like they decided to just press the reset button.
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:31 AM
Jason R’s comment is:
Yeah, based on this treatment, I would've suggest SighFie.
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:34 AM
Mongoose’s comment is:
Now that this has had a day to percolate since the news broke, I'm getting a bit more comfortable with it. Being able to trademark 'Syfy' and not 'Sci Fi' is a pretty solid reason to make this change; it's kind of a goofy change still. Syfy.
Now, the old logo will be missed; A simple reduced Saturn that was excellent shorthand for, well, Sci-Fi. The new one.. I do like the letterforms and how they interplay, and the f is interestingly ambiguous as to being capital or lowercase, which is going to result in some "SyFy or Syfy?" confusion. Overall, it seems a bit bland, as does 'Imagine Greater'. It needs sometime.
Tough to give this one a letter grade. A silly new name for good reasons, good letterforms but more than that needed. I'm giving it a C in the end.
--Mongoose
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:36 AM
Daniel Diggle’s comment is:
Name is fairly neutral; will be interesting how it's adoption / recognition develops amongst viewers and whether some will become detached from 'owning' and being part of the brand.
Visually... it sucks; it look's like some generic boutique treatment that really is characterless. It looks infact, specifically 'shoreditch boutique' 2 years back.
I'd go as far as to say, visually, this is as bad a re-brand/re-jig as channel 'Five's'.
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:43 AM
Tim’s comment is:
I think this whole rebrand is one big missed chance. They could've done so much more to incorporate different feels depending on the kind of show that is going to get on... Or maybe that will happen when they implement it. For now it just feels completely bland, generic and drained of any feeling.
As for the name, it's just plain silly. I can understand the trademark reason, but why this phonetical spelling, reminding of a STD?
I guess they just couldn't imagine greater...
On Mar.17.2009 at 11:57 AM
2fs’s comment is:
If they're lucky, this will be one of those temporary rebrandings that no one remembers - at least, I think it's pretty unlikely that people will say or write "Syfy" with anything but ironic contempt. The logo itself is forgettable...but along with the inane misspelling, there's the quasi-nongrammatical new catchphrase. "Imagine greater"? This goes along with attempts to make "office" and "morning" into verbs in recent ad campaigns...and even though one can take the phrase as simply incomplete ("imagine greater [blanks]") on the page it just adds to the effect of verbal ineptitude: can't spell, can't write.
In sum: ick.
On Mar.17.2009 at 12:07 PM
Anonymous’s comment is:
"Pending any amazing on-air applications this is pretty conservative for such a bold channel with such a great theme."
I am sure there on-air presence will be great if they turn to Prologue again to make their catchy presence. Video of the previous application here: Video. The music from Scissor Sisters definitely helps to enhance the manic feeling of the clip.
On Mar.17.2009 at 12:10 PM
ckaufman’s comment is:
"Pending any amazing on-air applications this is pretty conservative for such a bold channel with such a great theme."
I am sure there on-air presence will be great if they turn to Prologue again to make their catchy presence. Video of the previous application here: Video. The music from Scissor Sisters definitely helps to enhance the manic feeling of the clip.
On Mar.17.2009 at 12:12 PM
adam’s comment is:
there is a weird shadow effect on the new tagline "Imagine Greater". the shadow from the SyFy overlays most of the tag, so that part of the tag obviously would not create its own drop shadow, but the extra drop shadow on "eater" really calls that little phrase out and makes it look 3D while the rest of the tag looks flat.
all i see now is "eater"
On Mar.17.2009 at 12:29 PM
BJN’s comment is:
This logo is visual and cute-phonetic confirmation that the SciFi Channel is no more. The curved plumbing of "SyFy" suggests more mindless reality shows, roller derby in addition to wrestling, and the end of projects like Battlestar Galactica.
On Mar.17.2009 at 12:47 PM
Kirk’s comment is:
Sigh Fy...
they need to get rid of all the BS shows.
wrestling? really?
I like a lot of their shows but its like 4 shows in a sea of crap. the names of their Sci Fi original movies are funny tho.. "Mansquito" lol
On Mar.17.2009 at 12:52 PM
drbear’s comment is:
Just typical:
Music Television is MTV with no music
American Movie Classics is AMC with original half-hour shows
ABC Family runs "Whose Line"
Video Hits 1 is now VH1, your has-been reality show channel
And don't get me started on Fox "News"
Now it's SyFy, so watch for it to drop all science fiction/fantasy and start showing the same garbage as every other channel?
On Mar.17.2009 at 12:59 PM
Simon’s comment is:
For any of you questioning the sanity/talent/rationality of those responsible for this change in branding, I would like to remind you: this is the network that canceled Farscape.
That is all.
On Mar.17.2009 at 01:14 PM
Jeff’s comment is:
What is lost on most people is the dance that niche networks have to do between their core, loyal viewers and ad sales. It doesn't matter if you have a loyal fan base that watches your network religiously, or even that your ratings are good with them if advertisers don't want your audience (or don't think they want them.)
You have to have a sellable audience AND sellable brand AND loyal and consistant viewership. Perhaps that is part of their reasoning.
On Mar.17.2009 at 01:16 PM
Bruce’s comment is:
Worse than the new name and logo is the idea of getting away from what made them popular. It'll go down in flames because they're diluting their market.
On Mar.17.2009 at 01:29 PM
Anonymous’s comment is:
I saw Sci-Fi Channel for some days when I had satellite TV, and it was great... IMO renaming it SyFy goes out of context... BTW, from all the Sci-Fi logos, this one is my favorite...
Kyle’s comment is:
Jeff's comments above are spot on. It's a difficult situation Sci-Fi (or SyFy) is in. The loyal, core audience is going to be upset with almost anything the network does unfortunately; whether it's changing their branding, canceling a show, showing wrestling, etc;.
On Mar.17.2009 at 01:54 PM
Katelynn M’s comment is:
First, I completely agree with all of the previous posters who say that they are alienating their viewer base. As a Sci Fi fan, I have become increasingly disgusted by the programming choices made by the channel.
Syfy, to me, means that you want us to be friends, but you don't want anyone to see us hanging out.
ditto.
On a completely different note, Syfy is the name of a (now rebranded) radio show. Hmm.
Jack’s comment is:
This is so awful. "Siffy" is what you would call someone with syphilis. Seriously.... google it. :|
On Mar.17.2009 at 02:37 PM
Chuck Spidell’s comment is:
They are in a tricky place with creating an all-encompassing brand. The network is making too many assumptions with the new name. Some of the audience might know how to pronounce Syfy. At first glance, one might say "sigh fee." The new wordmark is devoid of the slick personality of the old brand. The repetitiveness of the Ys are really throwing it off. And I really hope they didn't pick the name because of some hidden smiley faces in the characters.
The Syfy launch page also has some issues with "Imagine Greater to become new tagline." Shouldn't that statement read with more ownership, like: Imagine Greater is our new tagline? The design on this page seems rushed and a bit sloppy for a major brand. I realize it's supposed to read like a newspaper article but please ... details, people.
On Mar.17.2009 at 02:53 PM
Kid B’s comment is:
I like the wordmark -- especially how "Greater" is bursting slightly out of the ground -- but I'm not liking the word itself.
"Syfy" sounds like "siffy" to me. Even without the syphilis evocation, it's very mushy and uncomfortable. And if they do want us to pronounce it "sye-fye," then, as the original posting pointed out, we're not much farther towards encompassing fantasy, paranormal, reality, mystery, action and adventure.
On Mar.17.2009 at 04:21 PM
Shawna S’s comment is:
Ugh. As many have said the new name doesn't automatically sound right. I'd mistake it for "siffy". As a huge sci-fi fan, this is no longer my channel.
The logo design is so boring that the tagline "Imagine Greater" (which doesn't even make any sense) comes off as a joke. Yes, I can imagine a greater logo. *sigh* Wish they had managed to inject the whimsy and class that the old logo had into the new design. A better look *might* have cushioned the horrible name change.
On Mar.17.2009 at 04:35 PM
Susan’s comment is:
Is that pronounced See-fee? My goodness, what a mistake to rename the brand. When we arrive at a station the logo sits in the corner of the screen and burns into our retina. But that only happens after we tune-in. Casual tv surfers who have not yet discovered the joys of Sci-Fi made for T.V. movies, such as Mansquito, may miss that pleasure all together. If I didn't know better and saw Mansquito playing on some channel named Syfy, I'd keep right on scrolling thinking that it must be a cartoon, not a hilariously bad B-grade sci-fi flick.
On Mar.17.2009 at 04:53 PM
tha macho man’s comment is:
how about si-fi. is that copyrighted?
On Mar.17.2009 at 05:19 PM
Paul Ducco’s comment is:
bad spelling is ... just bad.
*sigh*
ah well. on with the next.
On Mar.17.2009 at 05:49 PM
Shane’s comment is:
I agree Macho man, Si Fi seems the obvious way to do, we are already trained to read Hi-Fi after all...
Mr Posen’s comment is:
I don't hate it, I don't love it, though I think it is a baby step forward.
I think the old Saturn logo was pedestrian, bordering on Nike swooshiness meets NASA.
On Mar.17.2009 at 06:41 PM
lucid’s comment is:
So many potential combinations in this opportunity for a re-brand that I can not help but wonder how they got here. I am sure that they did plenty of geek filled focus groups and found that this was the best option... if they are wrong might as well as spelled it SYFKD
The typestyle is OK (is that House Industries Chalet?) but the method they used to show it (drop shadow and highlight) reminds me of signage used at tomorrowland.
C+
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:10 PM
Gene’s comment is:
I suppose NBC should also buy out "Wyfy" so that they can "own" that too.
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:25 PM
Anonymous’s comment is:
ewww nooo whyyyy??? this is so boring i hate it the old one was so much beetter it had moree to do with the netword
On Mar.17.2009 at 07:28 PM
JC’s comment is:
It bothers me that there were groups of people who got paid for doing something so hideous...
What an atrocious attempt to redesign something that's already great.
On Mar.17.2009 at 08:53 PM
Gentleman Agitator’s comment is:
Well, at least they have given up the pretense that they show Science Fiction anymore. Outside of Galactica and Doctor Who first-runs, it is degenerated into the slasher flick and other assorted garbage channel. Over the years the channel was a great disappointment for those of us who appreciated serious science fiction. I do not mean fantasy. I do not mean horror. I mean science fiction. I have always though Sci-fi to be a pop culture nickname anyway. SF is the proper shortening of "science fiction." Let them meld into the other channels programming a mish mash of things with no direction and with their mish mash of a logo and name.
On Mar.17.2009 at 09:00 PM
Simon Robertson’s comment is:
i really like the old logo (not so much the text, but the mark) and feel sad about this change.
On Mar.17.2009 at 10:21 PM
Jeremy Wayne’s comment is:
Why couldn't they just tweak the Saturn graphic? I know it would make some people think it's about planets, but look at vhr... I mean VH1. I think it's just a cry for help and so they too can show more junk like everyone else is.
On Mar.17.2009 at 10:23 PM
Ryan K’s comment is:
Has anyone ventured over to www.syfy.com
There isn't much there, but there's more brand being used there than in the logo alone.
I think "Syfy" is a joke, everyone's going to call it the "siffy" channel. As others have already said, Sifi would have been better. But on the other hand, as much as I don't like the new name or logo, this does given them a clean (or close to clean) slate. I'm a fan of rebrands when they're called for and I think this one is maybe too soon to call as an over all win or fail. Truthfully I was getting tired of the station identifiers, and all the purple maybe they'll tone that down a bit.
Also everyone keeps commenting how it's good that BSG is ending and it won't have to suffer the new brand. But what about Caprica and the new Stargate series? They're hoping to at least keep those fans around.
On Mar.17.2009 at 10:30 PM
Mere’s comment is:
Siffy?
I think the logo is so ugly you wouldn't want to merchandise it on anything anyway.
On Mar.18.2009 at 01:00 AM
Hamish’s comment is:
This was an unfortunate decision. After 16 years of using this name and device, I'm sure most people recognize it. From a legal and technical standpoint I can understand them wanting to have a brand that they can 'own', however what they've failed to realize is that they already 'own' that device in their market - even without the piece of paper. Technically 'Sci Fi' can't be exclusively owned by anyone. The only thing they own now is a trade mark certificate - a shame really.
On Mar.18.2009 at 01:22 AM
Felix’s comment is:
I guess there's is such thing as over-thinking and over-designing....
The older logo really speaks what the channel is all about. The new one... I don't even know what they are trying to say about themselves.
On Mar.18.2009 at 04:25 AM
David Sanchez’s comment is:
Don't get me wrong, I am a big SciFI Ch fan, specially with BSG, but not sure if with the new Caprica series. The BSG finale its been a bit disappointed. Anywya back to subject... I think NBC Universal is killing a genre
On Mar.18.2009 at 10:03 AM
Bill Dawson’s comment is:
I'm a bit disappointed that misspelling something is thought to be creative. Sidebar of truth- until last month I worked for "REELZCHANNEL." To me it's akin to inventing words that sound like the mean something (Accenture) so that something may be "ownable." Real language is infinitely more interesting and engaging than these samples of "creativity." Imagine Greater? Try harder.
On Mar.18.2009 at 12:25 PM
Bill Dawson (XK9)’s comment is:
(never good to include a misspelling in a rant decrying misspellings).
SiFi, HiFi, WiFi. Sounds like a missed opportunity here. "Catch SiFi on Wifi...."
On Mar.18.2009 at 12:30 PM
Mark’s comment is:
I hate it.
Here's why:
It smacks of diluting the brand into something it's not.
It reminds me of way too much of The Nashiville Network changing to The National Network to Spike.
I'm afraid that this will lead to more reality shows and turning into something like Vh1 is now, all unrelated programming that has nothing to do with it';s origins.
The changing of the name to SyFy just smacks of cheapness, I'm not a fan of badly spelled names they just smack of cheapness.
This will also end the brilliant "If" bumpers, I liked those,now it won't make sense with "yf".
I'm hoping they don't end up like other cable channels where the programming isn't related to the name at all, and it's filled with most if not all reality shows.
On Mar.18.2009 at 02:19 PM
N.S.’s comment is:
The guys over at Penny Arcade thought it was pretty interesting, too. They made today's comic about it, which means a couple million nerds will have been notified soon. Let's see how they react!
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/3/18/
On Mar.18.2009 at 03:17 PM
Gregg’s comment is:
I am with Samantha Armacost... I thought it was an early April Fools prank..
The re-brand is a horrible idea. With their awesome 20 second ads there is no need for this.
PS’s comment is:
Ok, ignoring for a moment how a channel can try to both keep it's old viewers and woo new ones by paradoxically changing AND not changing... Ignoring that I generally dislike spelling things incorrectly on purpose...
Just look at the possible application of this logo. First of all, the original had the ability to go over, on, and in almost anything they wanted to brand as theirs. Even just the Saturn would be enough to know what channel you were watching. I am looking at a Jim Butcher book right now, which says "as seen on Sci Fi" with the logo. I know what that means. If it had a sticker with that raised, shadowy type and "as seen on SyFy" I would wonder why I'm supposed to care--because it looks like a logo for a pharmaceutical company or a new kind of bottled water.
How will they put this logo (successfully!) on collateral material or media, not to mention the channel itself?
And finally, not only does the new branding fail to communicate anything about their once-favorite genre, it fails to communicate ANYTHING about the channel at all. It even fails to communicate that it IS a channel.
On Mar.18.2009 at 05:02 PM
tez’s comment is:
*YAY* Way to go on wrecking a perfectly GREAT Brand both in name and Identity. I can only hope that both the legal and creative teams in future wake up to themselves and produce some real work for future clients that truly is awe inspiring rather than bastardising a perfectly good brand that has managed to exist in such a competitive and cluttered marketplace for so long without even the closest sniff of being toppled as the epitomy of all things science fiction. wkae up people.
Please tell me that Sci-fi fired the creative team over this mess.
tez’s comment is:
I only hope that the next evolution of "syfy" either reverts to something better in future or moves on to a much better Scifi brand and ID in future.
On Mar.18.2009 at 07:00 PM
tez’s comment is:
I second PS's comment!
On Mar.18.2009 at 08:06 PM
orangetiki’s comment is:
Horrible. First off, I can not stand blatant mis-spellings like this. This isn't a text message you send to someone telling them where you are. It's your logo. It doesn't even go with the theme. How does science fiction tie in with the common banter you see as Youtube comments? Let me guess, computers are the tie in. Brilliant thinking.
Two. 3D letters with a shadow? Honestly this is NOT the 1980's. I am shocked you do not see the cone, sphere, and cube as you normally see on the covers of computer manuals. What happened? did they not fit?
Three. Imagine Greater? What was Think Different already taken?
All in all this logo reeks of poor decision making, antiquated design methods ( which for a television channel that is about science fiction is an even greater slap in the face with a wet salmon ) and a misdirected, feeble attempt to connect with your core audience that leaves you looking like the fourth grade blogger who can not stop yammering about how cool the next Saturday mornign cartoon is or whatever they are into these days.
On Mar.18.2009 at 08:56 PM
David’s comment is:
It doesn't even "feel" or look like Science Fiction. My first thought was "what? You're kidding me".
If the guts tells you "huh?" then you know you're trying toooooo hard to make something cool. Over thought, too strategy-minded.
The old logo was fine.
Problem is: I know a couple guys named "Sy". Gee, it looks more like a grocery store logo. Heck it has more of a retail feel.
On Mar.18.2009 at 10:32 PM
cchs’s comment is:
I don't end up posting to these threads very often — partly because I don't have the time and partly because there is so much context and strategy behind naming, branding and identity that its difficult to provide informed criticism (or praise). Generally our observations are fairly subjective.
So, subjectively, I hate this.
I grew up consuming Sci Fi literature, television and film. Two of my parents are Sci Fi writers and producers. One of the great strengths of the genre is its universality — its themes transcend race, age, gender, politics and time. For the Sci Fi channel to try to "own" the Sci Fi name flies in the face of this tenet of accessibility. Moreover, it appears that they don't actually want to own the term; if they did, why saddle themselves with the homonym? It seems to me that they want to realize some benefit by using a term they can slap an ® onto, but reap the equity inherent in the sound and meaning of the original term — to have their Tranya and drink it to, as it were.
If there are real legal issues at stake here whose depths we don't fully understand I'll concede the need for the change. Regardless, the flaws in this specific syphilitic approach seem many and varied and have been well articulated in this thread.
The fundamental misunderstanding of brands is that they can be owned and controlled by their progenitors. The fact is that brands are ultimately defined by their consumers. In a sense, we all own Sci Fi through our collective associations with the genre. No one will ever own the genre, nor should they. The curated delivery of content from the Sci Fi genre is, however, a brandable experience. You might call if something like, "The Sci Fi Channel."
Want to catch a little Sci Fi? Visit the Sci Fi Channel. Want to catch a little SyFy? Make sure you're not allergic to penicillin.
On Mar.18.2009 at 11:08 PM
Zak Keaton’s comment is:
I can't say this surprises me. When SciFi channel starting showing wrestling things started going down the greed pit. And don't start getting Amanda Tapping doing wrestling when your rating take a dive! Hey, why not get her a decent script instead that shows off her real talents! Start focusing on quality and produce a good sci-fi show. This is a perfect time since there are no sci-fi shows right now, take advantage of that! Let your greed drive you! How about a modern Babylon 5 but with characters having better hair cuts. Even a better Earth Final Conflict! And NO fraking muppets!!! I don't want to be embarrassed if my wife catches me watching a sci-fi show! It's like being caught watching porn. Oh, and no sci-fi soap operas or space cow boy crap! I want some hard core science, characters with depth and a story line like Lost! And stop thinking your audience is so stupid SciFi!
I'm sure "SyFy" isn't their final decision. I mean come on! Lets just pretend this is some bleed over from another dimension or something... Oh and that texting comment, how to sound old! It's like saying: "We want to target those kids that use that internet thing with those pipes! So we called it. Sci.Fi" lol!
hs’s comment is:
New Coke, Edsel, SYFY...
Sometimes common sense works better than anything else.
On Mar.19.2009 at 04:15 AM
Joshua Levi’s comment is:
Anyone see how Steven Colbert lampooned this one last night? Start at 2:05.
On Mar.19.2009 at 07:15 AM
Jerry Kuyper’s comment is:
In space, no one can hear you spell.
(imagined excerpt from the presentation)
On Mar.19.2009 at 08:43 AM
Scott Stowell’s comment is:
I think this is one of the most meaningless, ridiculous, and insulting examples of "channel drift" (or anything else, for that matter) I've ever seen. It's as if the Food Network believed that not enough people watch shows about food, so they decided to bring in new viewers--while trying to keep the ones they have--by renaming the channel "Phood."
Here's a quote from "SyFy" president David Howe:
"When we tested this new name, the thing that we got back from our 18-to-34 techno-savvy crowd, which is quite a lot of our audience, is actually this is how youd text it," Mr. Howe said. "It made us feel much cooler, much more cutting-edge, much more hip, which was kind of bang-on what we wanted to achieve communication-wise."
Sadly, that's from a press release, not the Onion.
On Mar.19.2009 at 01:00 PM
Matheus’s comment is:
If they add the word "Channel" to the name, they can brand it. It's the same as History Channel, they can't brand "History", but "History Channel" yes.
Terryble way to go
On Mar.20.2009 at 02:09 AM
Josh’s comment is:
@Jeff - I agree with you 100%. At first, this channel had a purpose, and I thoroughly enjoyed most of their channels. Now, I don't think I watch it anymore - as it's turning into the same crap that's on other channels.
And I understand that PHONETICALLY it's the same, but the spelling is that of a 3 year old. In fact I'm pretty sure a toddler could spell SciFi correctly. I don't see how anyone is going to identify with this brand.
On Mar.21.2009 at 08:12 AM
Quadrafonzie’s comment is:
I like the typeface, hate the new name. Wouldn't "SiFi" have been better? Would've retained at least some cachet with the nerds, people would know how to pronounce it (think wifi), and it would be just as easy to text. Although I don't believe anyone ever actually said that.
On Mar.22.2009 at 01:32 PM
Anonymous’s comment is:
the USA network will have to change their name of the station now from USA to You Ess Ayy.
On Mar.23.2009 at 04:46 PM
Mark’s comment is:
My dad says: Pronounce it Sii-ffee as in sippy cup.
Now it don't mean anything
He says it ranks up there with New Coke.
This rebrand was a big mistake.
On Mar.23.2009 at 09:29 PM
Kent Looft’s comment is:
Sure, the lawyers love it. But what is "Sify" anyway? Don't throw away the baby with the bathwater... Change is not always a good thing, especially when you've built good will and awareness into a brand.
On Mar.24.2009 at 12:50 PM
Basil’s comment is:
Surprised this hasn't shown up here.
The name was done internally before they called anyone in. Landor spent their whole time trying to talk them out of it. No idea why they were included in the press release.
On Mar.26.2009 at 01:47 PM
joe’s comment is:
I actually was focus tested on this and before they said it was potentially a sci fi channel rebrand, my comment was that it sounds like some crappy startup network trying to copy sci fi. its a dumb change and looks horrible. seening that crappy logo and new name on the screen during every show will actually help me turn off the tv.
On Mar.27.2009 at 04:56 PM
pipon’s comment is:
What is the font used in the tagline?
Thanks!!!
Michael Gioia’s comment is:
How would it be executed in B&W?
On Mar.30.2009 at 12:01 AM
Montalvan’s comment is:
As an aside, the previous mark always reminded me of this:
Jeni Mattson’s comment is:
While I don't know what strategy if any went into this re-brand, I must say it fits with what I have seen from the SciFi channel recently. For a while now they've been main-streaming science fiction, and they're good at it. Their target audience isn't the fat guy living in his mom's basement anymore, it's normal people who watch for the stories. Given this trend it feels appropriate to me for them to abstract their name SciFi, an abbreviation for Science Fiction. The name "Syfy" does reflect back on their previous name in a way that let's you know you're in the right place, and it feels more human. Without knowing they had a different target, I'd say they did just fine.
On Mar.31.2009 at 11:53 AM
…’s comment is:
I will watch Syfy less.
On Mar.31.2009 at 01:16 PM
Jonathan Bybee’s comment is:
This is just plain terrible... nough said!
On Apr.01.2009 at 01:49 PM
Allan Bray’s comment is:
Well, I can't say this channel has been anywhere near as good as it used to be in the 90s, this just confirms it will keep going down the path to mediocrity. I miss it and will always miss it, it's the end of an era for me personally. I hate the new logo and idea, just another part of my childhood erased, bulldozed, "remade", "re-imagined", or destroyed in any other fashion.
On Jun.12.2009 at 03:12 PM
Randreader’s comment is:
Another attempt to manipulate viewership and brand loyalty...
Probably to drive viewers away from SciFi and toward sister channels such as Chiller and Sleuth.
I am sure that "The Suits" have arrived at their own arcane and arrogant reasons for changing the SciFi brand name.
I am sure that they are pleased that they are receiving this much feedback --- even (and especially negative) feedback.
But I am sick of being manipulated .
I am just plain sick and tired of it .
Tired of arrogant ass*>? (fools) who think they can manipulate viewership by changing a slogan rather than improving upon the substance of a product that already exists.
Madison Avenue types pretending to be businessmen.
Its enough to make one question capitalism.
On Jun.14.2009 at 02:17 PM
Anonymous’s comment is:
I wish to comment as a seasoned professional designer and design instructor. In art there is always room for improvement...but this is NOT better than what they had. It's very curly, bouncy, goofy, silly, and feminine. It is uninspired and uninspiring. It doesn't begin to reflect the unimaginable, fantastic possibilities the word Sci-Fi brings to mind. It would be acceptable on a diaper package or a little girl's toy baby doll package. It simply doesn't work for this genre. In fact, it's almost the opposite of what was needed... something sizzling hot, fantastic, futuristic and mind-blowing. I certainly hope they pull it and try again.
On Jul.08.2009 at 10:10 PM
Jeff’s comment is:
This thing is just begging for a ligature. That f-y gap is horrible.
jervin’s comment is:
Ah well, I think I would be happy if they'd just picked another name that didn't imply Science Fiction at all. Wrasling or Goast. I would like for some network to just re-invent a channel that focuses on Science Fiction and Fantasy. Oh well.
On Jul.13.2009 at 01:10 AM
Don’s comment is:
Well, at least they didn't go all Greek -- imagine a channe called Psi-Phi
On Jul.18.2009 at 05:55 PM
Comments in Brand New, V1.0 have been closed.
