Belk logos from 1967 (left), 2007 (center) and 2010 (right)
The current Belk logo first appeared in October 2010.
This version of the Belk logo first appeared in 2007 and was replaced in October 2010.
This classic Belk logo first appeared in 1967 and was replaced in 2007.
Previously on LiveMalls
The Belk Archive
Thursday, October 07, 2010
The evolving Belk logo
Posted by Livemalls at 8:14:00 PM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I'm left disappointed in the new Belk logo, too much like macy*s and most new corporate logos adopted in the last couple of years.ReplyDelete
I always thought the stylized logo adopted in 1967 had a classiness lacking in today's logos. I do feel that the 1967 logo conveyed stodginess and conservatism, but that's more due to Belk's image as "Grandmas's Department Store" rather that the logo itself.
I gotta wonder if Belk is going to replace ALL the signage for all stores over the next year and a 1/2. I can't, for instance, picture them replacing the logo on the post below (Belk Eden Mall) with the new logo. I wonder if it will be the case where some older smaller stores will have the old logo years from now. I do have to admit however if K-Mart could replace the signage with "BigKmart" on 99% of their stores in the '90s then it is possible the current logo will virtually vanish.ReplyDelete
Ken: I have a lot of love for the original 1967 logo. That was a beautiful design, and it symbolized a company that was willing to dump its stodgy image and compete with the best in retail.ReplyDelete
The 2007 logo does nothing for me, as I think it was change for the sake of change, and it symbolized a really boring, promotional period in the company's history that pretty much killed its image in former Parisian/McRae's markets.
When I placed the logos side by side, the 2010 logo makes a little more sense. The wordmark is derivative, as if the flower, but it's an evolution in style and image for a company that is willing to dump its stodgy image and again compete with the best in retail. I can even see a little of the old 1967 logo here and there on the new one.
Even if this isn't a revolution at Belk, maybe this new logo introduction will be a chance for them to clarify their market position, because there is a baffling amount of misinformation about them out there.
Michael: I think they'll be able to change most of the logos in no time flat, but I can't imagine that stores like Eden Mall will be given top priority. I'm willing to bet there will plenty of Big B left two years from now.
I actually like the new Belk logo though I have never visited a Belk store.ReplyDelete
have you seen the new Gap logo, Steven? It's even worse.
Th belk logo's not actually that bad; just derivative. As for Gap, that's horrible and unispired!ReplyDelete
As an avid Belk shopper, I must say that I do not like the new logo. It looks cheap and bland. I hate the lowercase B. What's wrong with something looking formal?ReplyDelete
Also, I think the new logo is a bit difficult to read. The l and k are too close together.
.............glad to see you back in action!ReplyDelete
Anon: For some reason, there has been an assault on traditional, formal logos of late. I don't understand how all these people in "focus groups" get so insulted and offended by them.ReplyDelete
My main focus is on Belk still being here years from now. If this piece of crap will do it, I'm all for it.
Todd: I wouldn't call it comeback, but I'm going to post a bit more here. I see you've been busy as well :-)
Steve, I was wondering what was up with the Belk logo in recent years! It seemed to be different, like a simplified or more accurately “cheapened” version of the 1967 logo, which just exudes class in my opinion. In the right hands, the logo could have been tweaked subtly in a way that would have updated it yet maintained the upscale feel. Better yet, they could have left it alone.ReplyDelete
I think the 2010 version is a fine logo, but it’s inconsistent with Belk’s heritage and image. It would be much more suited to a boutique operation such as The Wet Seal or Zumiez, cited strictly as examples here.
But as you say, if it helps Belk remain viable and independent, it’s to the good.
Well I never thought "stodginess" when I saw the classic Belk's logo, only "class" and it's probably one of the most distinctive and stylish long time logos of the South. The worst part I think is Belk's trashed it in favor of something so darn common and faddish, what a waste and in a few years it'll probably be a regret. THis plain lower case word processor font, frankly for Belk's to do this it's more than a little off putting. I'm not inclined to care about logo changes but this one has me shocked. I can't help but wonder now am I not their demographic anymore? See I'm older than the hip iPad lower case texting generation but this temporary looking logo seems to be not about me. So I'm confused about who they want to be now, The Gap maybe? Well that's not me, so I'm a long time shopper going all the way back to the 60s and now I'm put off. Maybe after all these decades Belk's is not my store anymore. If nothing else they've thrown away something as classic as the Coca-Cola logo, the 1967 logo was pure gold, and I think these changes are a waste and a terrible mistake.ReplyDelete
Dave: Agree totally. I think they could have freshened the logo without losing the essential nature of it. This one is just...derivative.ReplyDelete
Louise: I feel your pain. I don't think Belk realized how important their logo is to their customers. I think if they knew, things would have turned out differently.
Actually, my mother designed the label (at Parsons school of design along with a partner she was teamed up with). She has the orignal drawings as she went through several different curls on the "B". Maybe the rest was done somewherror else but my mother was the one who designed the Google logo. Her name was Maris Mullis or Maris Efird.ReplyDelete
I feel like she deserves a mention. I can't find a thing about it anywhere; not even mentioning Parsons Schools of Design... but the proof is in her portfolio.
My comment above did not come out how I wrote it at all. She designed the early logo; not a google logo. I proof read the things I write so I find it strange it came out so butchered. Either way, appologies and hope you all can piece together my reply above.ReplyDelete