Well, I think we all know where this is going. But in an effort to not bash ANOTHER new logo inthe public eye, I will say this: the type is nice. In fact, the type alone would make an effective mark. Crop that other meaningless garbage atop it.

To be honest with you, there is something poetic about setting Cooper Tires in Cooper Black. Sure it looks bad, but it makes us smile.

Speaking as a someone that worked in the production department at a car magazine, my one thought is that the new logo looks too much like all the other tire company logos out there. To the point of making me think that maybe they are trying to suggest brand unity with a new parent company. I don’t think that is actually the case. It reminds me a little bit too much of Toyo’s brand. And to take an honest to goodness American tire brand and trying to be cool with the Asian street car crowd by aping a Japanese tire brand seems well a little like hearing some frat boy say “yo.”

it is a tire company…

The irony is that the press release reads “The tagline “Don’t Give Up a Thing” will continue to be used throughout the campaign.” Didn’t they just give up their logotype? See the homage to da man: http://www.worksight.com/workhtmls/workposters_cooper.html

So it’s better to take the money and do bad design? If some hack wants to replace me and do that logo, then fine. I’d rather not. I’m with JonSel all the way; designers need to be partners with their clients, not vending machines of design. If they want to dictate a project into oblivion, let them do it with someone who doesn’t care. I’d walk. I’d suggest we all walk from that situation.

Chris, Sorry that you feel that we are full of ourselves. Try to understand that there is a difference between being passionate about what we doing and being arrogant about it. We are designers that care a great deal about what we do and naturally we have some pretty strong opinions. Not to say that your opinion doesn’t matter just as much ours (or even more if you are in fact their target audience). Many of us have a great amount of experience in designing logos and brands (JonSel probably has more than most of us) and that gives us a unique perspective. We also try to base our opinions on more than just a first glance. We think about how it will be produced, the clients goals, how long it will last, how it will appear at a quarter inch, etc.

We also learn and grow by talking about logos such as this. What would have we done? What could have been done better? What is beneficial? These are things we share with each other. And just in case you think we only rip on other people’s work, we have also put some of our work out there for others to critique

One other thing to think about is the subconscious level that this mark will operate on for years to come. While most consumers won’t think about it, this mark will portray the Cooper brand for years to come. Even if the general public doesn’t explicitly realize it, this mark will portray cheap tricks (Photoshop bevel) and 90s trends (swooshes) for years to come. This company needed a new look, but I really don’t believe this was the best possible move.

Like I said, I am sorry if we come across as full of ourselves. I can honestly tell you that when I design I really do want the best designed solution for any client I work for, and good design is directly related to what is appropriate for the client and the end consumer.

I also used the word “we” a lot in this comment. I guess I can’t really talk for the other designers in this thread. Please correct me if I have misrepresented any of the other designers here.

That’s funny, Al, because I thought, “Why are they trying to look like Nike?” when I saw the swooshes.

Actually it was designed by Oswald Bruce Cooper. He said this about Cooper Black …“for far-sighted printers with near-sighted customers”

: ( Good-bye Cooper Tires.

I concur with Bennett - perhaps the original Cooper Tire logo was not a shining example of logo design, but at least it was ORIGINAL.

In my educated opinion, this new logo has the best of intentions at modernizing a classic, well recognized mark, but fails to properly represent Cooper Tires.

Basic visual measures could have been taken to TRANSITION Cooper Tires into a modernized aesthetic while withholding originality, but they were ignored here.